VAT relief to end for Channel Islands

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


VAT relief to end for Channel Islands

ch-is.jpg

The UK has decided to end VAT relief on products from the Channel Islands.

Low value consignment relief was established in the 1980s, aimed at reducing the costs associated with collecting very small revenues from the tax.

“Originally it was an administrative relief,” said Andrew Burman, senior director at Alvarez & Marsal Taxand UK. “There is a cost associated with collecting lots of small amounts of VAT and cost-benefit analysis showed that it was not worth collecting those small amounts.”

The relief permitted companies to export goods below the threshold of £18 ($28) to the UK mainland without incurring a VAT liability. But in March this year the government reached a decision to lower the value threshold from £18 to £15, effective from November 1 2011.

It has since been revealed that the relief will be scrapped altogether on April 1 2012. Some companies took advantage of the relief but a number of abuses have prompted its removal.

“There is perhaps an argument that it should never have been introduced in the first place,” said Burman. “It was meant to cut administrative burdens, but it presented obvious opportunities for planning schemes due to the Channel Islands being so close to the UK mainland, among other reasons.”

Companies were able to undercut their competitors by not paying VAT and this gave rise to an unfair advantage.

Some of the islands’ inhabitants claim that the exemption offset the additional transport costs felt by companies based there, arguing that it should not be abolished. There has also been discussion of whether the Channel Islands have grounds to challenge the abolition on the basis of discrimination.

“I’d be very surprised if the UK would have done this without consulting EU lawyers or officials,” said Burman. “One argument the UK government could use if the decision is contested on the grounds of discrimination is that abuse has been higher in the Channel Islands than anywhere else.”

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

Death, taxes and Deloitte hoovering up trophies at an ITR awards night. Isn’t that the saying?
AI, pillar two and joint audits could define the next era of tax controversy, says Baker McKenzie tax partner Ariane Calloud
Gregor McMillan of Howden explains how insurance-backed financing can help businesses and funds unlock liquidity from tax receivables and other contingent claims
The arrival of Alex Anderson swiftly follows that of funds tax specialist Stuart Alter and suggests the Tier 3-ranked firm has higher ambitions
One of the two appointments is EY’s Gordon McIntosh, who becomes the big four firm’s second senior tax departure in September
Balson's move from a Tier 1 practice to a Tier 3 competitor looks counterintuitive. The market data suggests it is anything but
Awards
It was another banner year for Deloitte, which picked up more awards than any other firm at a gala ceremony held at The Londoner in Leicester Square
The big four firm has been embroiled in a scandal over partners’ misuse of confidential board papers to pitch for and win corporate audits for Westpac and Dexus
Drawing on lessons from the PepsiCo case, tax lawyer Paul McNab explains why the ATO's latest royalty guidance should concern multinationals well beyond the technology sector
As pillar two exposes the limits of fragmented tax processes, organisations are rethinking their operating models to create the trusted data foundations that AI demands
Gift this article