Sticky for a few days?
In deference to our leader and because so many of us live in Listed Properties, I believe this subject merits a topic of its own. I am not an authority.
My layman's understanding of the situation was; any works to extend a listed domicile or to utilise previously uninhabited parts of a listed domicile would not attract VAT. It seems that the scope is much wider. There is one golden rule; if you are looking to avoid VAT then you must under NO circumstances pay it. As an unregistered person you will not be able to claim it back. You must pass the burden onto your Contractor. He will be given a certificate, usually by the Architect, that allows him to adjust his own VAT return accordingly. In other words they,the contractors, pay VAT on the goods that they purchase, they do not charge you VAT, instead they claim it back from C&E. Getting this over to a first time VAT free contractor can be tiresome.
There is an organisations called the Listed Propert Owners Club you can find them at: http://www.lpoc.co.uk/ They are the oracle but I think they charge for the Info sheets.
If you look at the last paragraph of this article it is what brought the fact to my attention. I would imagine a loft conversion counts as an extension up the way.
Owners of listed buildings are losing out to the tune of £250 million because they are not aware that much of the building work carried out on their home should not b
e charged VAT....
So says the Listed Property Owners Club, who have produced a new information sheet which explains the finer points of the law to those unsure of what they should be paying.
What should and should not carry VAT is rather involved, to say the least. Whilst tax is payable on repairs and maintenance, for example, many approved alterations, such as changing an internal wall, installing central heating for the first time, building an extension, or adding a conservatory should be zero rated. Even the installation of an Aga is tax free provided it is part of an approved alteration to create a kitchen where none existed previously.
So why do so many owners of listed properties lose out? Apparently the onus of deciding whether to charge VAT or not rests with the contractor, who decides at the outset whether it is payable or not. Fearful of getting it wrong and been handed a bill by the taxman, most play safe and charge the tax.
Given this state of affairs, it is well `worth knowing what does and does not carry VAT. According to Peter Anslow, of the Listed Property Owners Club, one homeowner saved £24,000 after discovering that 'underpinning' could be regarded as an extension (downwards) and was therefore exempt form tax.
For more information contact the Listed Property Owners Club: 01795 844939
[/b]
VAT on Listed Buildings
VAT on Listed Buildings
.....ambition makes you look pretty ugly
That's right but we are not talking profiteering here. In the case of listed properties the argument is skewed in favour of "heritage". If preserving older buildings is seen as desirable, which it is, then it is inequitable to charge VAT on upkeep or repairs but not on extensions or alterations. Makes sense don't you think?wangi wrote:I don't think they are! Recently then were bemoaning those "making money" renovating properties and making profit... the shame of it all! They weren't happy with simply VAT there - they're thinking about some sort of Changing Room's Tax!
(! overload)
.....ambition makes you look pretty ugly
There's nothing wrong with making a profit, I think that's my main point. It was the government/councils themself that started the improvent craze with grants.
They get a cut of the pie at lots of stages - VAT, income tax and & stamp duty being just three of the taxes - would they rather Britain was full of falling down houses?
By making a difference they help put houses that should be getting attention now (and may be the listed buildings of tomorrow) at risk in the future.
They get a cut of the pie at lots of stages - VAT, income tax and & stamp duty being just three of the taxes - would they rather Britain was full of falling down houses?
By making a difference they help put houses that should be getting attention now (and may be the listed buildings of tomorrow) at risk in the future.
You can search here to see what's listed in your street.
http://www.historic-scotland.gov.uk/ind ... ldings.htm
http://www.historic-scotland.gov.uk/ind ... ldings.htm
DIY
Do you always have to employ a contractor to get the VAT free?
What if you have approved alterations, but you decide to carry out the works yourself. Can you not claim back the VAT on all the materials you use.
If the contractor can get VAT free materials why can't the DIY'er?
What if you have approved alterations, but you decide to carry out the works yourself. Can you not claim back the VAT on all the materials you use.
If the contractor can get VAT free materials why can't the DIY'er?
I get what you mean. He pays the VAT to the builders merchants and then you pay him the VAT that he has paid. So that, effectively means is not a penny out of pocket, correct?ras wrote:Would it not be possible for me to find a VAT registered builder to go with me to buy my materials and then pay him back?
.....ambition makes you look pretty ugly
Marya
A tradesman might do it if he were a pal, or if I were to use him elsewhere on other bits, or if I were to recommend his services to someone else.
Porty
Exactly - Tradesman pays merchant, I pay tradesman amount minus VAT, tradesman claims back VAT,
or I pay tradesman amount plus VAT, he claims it back and then pays me back
- simple.!
there must be something I'm missing
p.s. I'll have to work out how to do the 'quoting' thing
A tradesman might do it if he were a pal, or if I were to use him elsewhere on other bits, or if I were to recommend his services to someone else.
Porty
Exactly - Tradesman pays merchant, I pay tradesman amount minus VAT, tradesman claims back VAT,
or I pay tradesman amount plus VAT, he claims it back and then pays me back
- simple.!
there must be something I'm missing
p.s. I'll have to work out how to do the 'quoting' thing
That's not the mechanism you inferred, however, in any case any contractor who agreed to this would be mental. He/ they would risk a massive fine and possibly prison if they could not prove that they carried out the VAT free work on a listed building. Either they did do the work and are due Income Tax on their labour or they didn't and are committing a fraudulent offence.ras wrote:Marya
A tradesman might do it if he were a pal, or if I were to use him elsewhere on other bits, or if I were to recommend his services to someone else.
Porty
Exactly - Tradesman pays merchant, I pay tradesman amount minus VAT, tradesman claims back VATor I pay tradesman amount plus VAT, he claims it back and then pays me back
- simple.!
there must be something I'm missing
p.s. I'll have to work out how to do the 'quoting' thing
Ras, i see you espousing righteously over on the Parliament thread, why not just pay the VAT you are due? Where is the money for Schools, Hospitals and other worth services going to come from if we go around defrauding the state?
.....ambition makes you look pretty ugly
It wouldn't, I just wanted to get his methodology clear. It seems that what Ras thought he wrote doesn't quite match with what he thunk.Marya wrote:Porty wrote:....now that doesn't make sense. Why would ras paying the builder the VAT , instead of the supplier , save himself money??I get what you mean. He pays the VAT to the builders merchants and then you pay him the VAT that he has paid
.....ambition makes you look pretty ugly
I seem to have p****d off Porty for which I apologise.
I thought it was a topic worth exploring, but obviously I hit a nerve.
FYI the only reason I was interested is because I have completed the works to my house and paid VAT on everything I did, which added a chunk onto the bill. I am now happy that I know there was no legal way round it.
I thought it was a topic worth exploring, but obviously I hit a nerve.
FYI the only reason I was interested is because I have completed the works to my house and paid VAT on everything I did, which added a chunk onto the bill. I am now happy that I know there was no legal way round it.
Ras, you are not even close to p*****g me off!! Your point was totally worthy. There is no VAT to encourage improvements and yet those who improve their own properies have to pay VAT. Its an unfair anomally but I think it has to be that way due collection/accounting issues.ras wrote:I seem to have p****d off Porty for which I apologise.
.....ambition makes you look pretty ugly
TIP: If you're posting a big URL you can stop it "taking over" the page by using the following bit of code:
<blockquote><code>visit [url=http://some.long.link.here/]this[/url] link.</code></blockquote>
If you put your mouse over the "URL" button when composing a message it'll remind you of the syntax.
L.
<blockquote><code>visit [url=http://some.long.link.here/]this[/url] link.</code></blockquote>
If you put your mouse over the "URL" button when composing a message it'll remind you of the syntax.
L.
[quote="Porty]There is no VAT to encourage improvements and yet those who improve their own properies have to pay VAT. Its an unfair anomally.[/quote]
It is very unfair and not a little ridiculous really! Our house is C listed and was riddled with dry rot and woodworm. We had to pay VAT on the repairs which were essential just to keep the roof up! What's the point in letting us off with VAT to extend/improve the building and not letting us off for keeping the thing standing in the first place?
(and by the way, it was so complicated trying not to pay the VAT on the loft that we ended up paying it). In my humble opinion it should be the people who don't maintain, repair and generally upkeep their listed buildings who should be punished - not the idiots (like us!) who are trying to preserve them!
PS We won't ever be buying another one!
It is very unfair and not a little ridiculous really! Our house is C listed and was riddled with dry rot and woodworm. We had to pay VAT on the repairs which were essential just to keep the roof up! What's the point in letting us off with VAT to extend/improve the building and not letting us off for keeping the thing standing in the first place?
(and by the way, it was so complicated trying not to pay the VAT on the loft that we ended up paying it). In my humble opinion it should be the people who don't maintain, repair and generally upkeep their listed buildings who should be punished - not the idiots (like us!) who are trying to preserve them!PS We won't ever be buying another one!
I wholeheartedly agree there is nowhere near enough help for idiots like you. 
Seriously, your story is a perfect illustratiion of the iniquity of the current VAT legislation. I'm interested to know why it was so difficult to claim it back? Did Mr E do most of it himself?
Seriously, your story is a perfect illustratiion of the iniquity of the current VAT legislation. I'm interested to know why it was so difficult to claim it back? Did Mr E do most of it himself?
.....ambition makes you look pretty ugly
