Luxembourg: VAT committee publishes guidelines on VAT treatment of cash pooling

International Tax Review is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Garden, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Luxembourg: VAT committee publishes guidelines on VAT treatment of cash pooling

Sponsored by

Sponsored_Firms_deloitte.png
intl-updates-small.jpg

The EU VAT committee published guidelines (page 228) on April 26 2018 on the VAT treatment of cash pooling arrangements.

The EU VAT committee published guidelines (page 228) on April 26 2018 on the VAT treatment of cash pooling arrangements. The committee, comprising representatives from the VAT authorities of the 28 EU member states, was set up to ensure the uniform application of the EU's VAT Directive, and issues non-binding guidance on VAT matters brought to its attention by a member state. This guidance was issued in response to a question from Poland.

Cash pooling is a commonly used financial product offered by banks that enables several affiliated entities of a group of companies to offset the balances of each of their bank accounts. It allows a negative balance of some entities that are part of the cash pooling group to be offset by the positive balance of other members, effectively concentrating the group's cash in a single place. A cash pooler manages the cash pooling and represents the participants before the bank. The committee was asked to provide guidance on whether the transfer of cash under a cash pooling arrangement could constitute a taxable service and, if so, whether any of the exemptions would apply.

The committee only examined 'zero-balancing' cash pooling, which means an actual transfer of funds between participants, rather than 'notional' cash pooling where no such transfer exists.

The committee first considered quasi-unanimously (with between 24 and 27 member states participating) that the transfers of funds between the participants and the consolidated account constitute credit transactions that are exempt from VAT under Article 135.1.b. of the VAT Directive.

The committee also looked at the treatment of the services provided by the cash pooler. These services include managing the financial liquidity of the cash pooling arrangement, maintaining the consolidated account, representing participants before the bank, and accruing interest and transferring it to other participants or charging them with interest. The committee unanimously decided that these services should be VAT exempt as services concerning deposit and current accounts under Article 135.1.d. of the VAT Directive. However, it would appear necessary to perform a case-by-case analysis of the services actually provided by the cash pooler based on their economic substance and the contractual arrangements to determine the correct VAT treatment of the services.

The committee did not address the VAT deduction right of the participants that was examined by the European Commission in its preparatory working paper released in October 2017 (and not binding on the committee). The provision of financial services does not come with the right to recover input VAT, except where the beneficiaries are not in the EU. In its working document, the commission considered that interest earned by the participants is the result of an incidental activity, so they must not include interest in the computation of the VAT deduction rights. For the cash pooler, the qualification of interest as an incidental activity will depend whether the cash pooler is an 'ad hoc' entity, a mixed holding company intervening in the management of its subsidiaries, or an operational company. A case-by-case analysis is necessary.

Although the committee's guidelines are not binding and do not address notional cash pooling, they provide a useful reference for practitioners.

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

A 120-plus-day delay to refunds would cost taxpayers almost $3bn in additional interest, the Cato Institute warned; plus indirect tax updates from February
The Office for Budget Responsibility’s pessimistic pillar two forecast accompanied the UK chancellor’s muted Spring Statement, dubbed ‘as dull as possible’ by one adviser
Digital tax reform is dissolving the old ‘temporal buffer’, forcing systems, institutions, and professionals to adapt as real-time reporting reshapes governance, capability, and compliance
Our first instalment features analysis of Deloitte’s landmark EMEA merger, Donald Trump’s Supreme Court tariff showdown and Venezuela’s tax evolution
While some believe it could have a positive effect on the wider advisory landscape, others argue that HMRC’s ‘red tape’ exercise won’t deter bad actors
The political optics of the US’s carve-out deal are poor, but as the Fair Tax Foundation’s Paul Monaghan writes, it preserves pillar two’s guiding ethos
The big four firm reportedly sent ‘threatening’ correspondence to Unity Advisory over its hiring of ex-PwC partners; plus tax recruitment news from the week
Tom Goldstein, who was represented by US law firm Munger, Tolles & Olson, denied wilfully cheating on his taxes and blamed errors on his staff
Multinationals face rising TP scrutiny as global rules diverge. As Daniel Moalusi argues, strong, consistent documentation is now essential to minimise audit risk and protect tax positions
The profession is fundamentally restructuring itself around what tax and accounting work should be, a Thomson Reuters leader told ITR
Gift this article