I think in Amsterdam, there were even WhatsApp messages saying they were going to hunt Jews, which rather points away from Israeli fans being the cause. www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2...

(Post Script: this is mostly an issue arising out of the VAT registration threshold. Economists and policy experts agree that the threshold should be far lower. That would be even more palatable if digital tax returns were easy and accessible to lower the admin burden.)

It is far more likely there will be a change in the regulations and some VAT guidance to stop the anomalies in the current system, and make the PHV operators (taxi call centres, or app operator) the person who needs to account for VAT on supplies they arrange.

I assume it is that to which the headlines are now referring. I cannot imagine Labour will be making mini cab drivers charge VAT if they are under the registrations threshold, or make a special lower threshold for PHV drivers. Neither of those are remotely likely / workable.

According to the consultation, this may mean a new bespoke taxi margin scheme, or a lower VAT rate for taxis, or treating mini cabs outside of London in the same way as inside of London: i.e. operators are deemed to provide the supply, not the drivers, so VAT is chargeable.

Because of these differences (agency v cash; London v regions; margin v normal accounting) which cause uncertainty and complexity, the Treasury with HMRC and the Department of Transport are quite properly looking at fixes.

This means operators have to deal with potentially different treatment depending on the type of work, where they are licensed, whether they are tour operators etc.

This is full of complexity about the meaning and purpose of the tour operators scheme as well as the need for drivers not to be employees, and is still subject to live litigation, but makes the effective VAT rate far lower than 20% (probably closer to 5%).

A further complication is a special VAT regime: “TOMS”. Bolt (and Uber) argue they are like a tour operator providing transport. This means, if they are providing the transport, they MUST account for VAT only on their margin (with no input reclaim).

Within London however, the operators are held to be entering the contracts for all work - certainly on the licensing regulations which many are reading as influencing the VAT treatment too (that’s a separate discussion for another day). So, VAT is charged on the whole fare.

For agency work outside London, the PHV operator enters into the contract then sub-contracts drivers to fulfil the supply. Here, unlike above, the registered operator charges VAT on the fare. This doesn’t affect drivers who charge their fee to the operators (no VAT if not reg’d).

So, for cash work outside of London, the operator is like an introductory agent. This means VAT is charged only on the operator’s commission paid by the drivers for the introduction service, and no VAT charged by the drivers on the actual fare to customers.

It concerns: who provides the taxi service you book, the mini cab driver or the mini cab operator company? Most operator companies will be above the VAT threshold so have to charge VAT if they provide the supply, unlike drivers who are less likely to be VAT-registered.

It concerns: who provides the taxi service you book, the mini cab driver or the mini cab operator company? Most operator companies will be above the VAT threshold so have to charge VAT if they provide the supply, unlike drivers who are less likely to be VAT-registered.

This is the Government consultation from last year, which recently concluded. The issue arises from litigation brought by Uber against local councils, then by private mini cab companies which recently went to the Supreme Court. assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/661e7d...

Edition* obviously