FYR Macedonia: VAT treatment of related entities

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

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

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

FYR Macedonia: VAT treatment of related entities

kostovska.jpg

Elena Kostovska

According to Article 56 of the Law on VAT in FYR Macedonia, the Public Revenue Office (PRO) is empowered to – at its discretion – register two or more legal entities as VAT-dependent or VAT-related taxpayers. The basis for such a joint VAT registration is the existence of certain ownership, organisation or management relationships between the entities as well as PRO's view of whether such relations may lead to a misuse or breach of the national tax laws. On the other hand, the practice has given us sufficient evidence that related entities voluntarily register as related VAT payers to take advantage of the monthly tax period which is mandatory for such group-payers.

To be considered as VAT-related entities, the companies must fulfill one or more of the following criteria:

  • A direct ownership relation is established when a 25%+ ownership can be determined (that is, company A has a capital participation of at least 25% in company B);

  • An organisational relation is established when the same physical person (or close family members) or legal entity (or related entities) directly or indirectly own two or more companies; and

  • A management relation is established when the general management of each of the companies is controlled by the same person or when the management of the entities is carried out by different persons who are controlled by a single person/entity.

Multiple companies that are deemed to be related for VAT purposes, with the joint registration, constitute a new entity which is an amalgam of the members it is comprised of. This new entity must appoint a legal representative who will be in charge of the joint VAT registration of the related entities and will be signatory of all VAT returns filed in front of the authorities.

In terms of the VAT treatment for turnover realised by the related entities, it is worth noting that:

  • Supply of goods and services between members of the VAT group are not considered subject to VAT; and

  • Supply of goods and services between one of the members of the group and third parties are subject to VAT.

In practical terms, any supply of goods or services between the group members that is regulated with an invoice should not include VAT. However, the PRO is not currently sanctioning the calculation of VAT on such inter-group invoices; rather it is simply considering it as miscalculated VAT.

One problematic aspect of the VAT-related entities' registration is the previous VAT payables/receivables that individual group members had before the joint registration. With the joint registration, all previous balances that the individual group members have (that is, VAT refunds from the PRO or unpaid VAT balances) are now transferred to the group's legal representative. Because the amounts will vary, detailed records of each member's previous balance as well as any future balances are required. A suggested operating mode to ensure efficient record-keeping is for the representative member of the group to claim receivables from PRO or record payables of each of the other members for the amount of VAT balance they have with the PRO before to the joint registration, which will effectively be balanced against future period VAT payable to/receivable from the PRO for each of the members.

Elena Kostovska (elena.kostovska@eurofast.eu)

Eurofast Global, Skopje Office, FYR Macedonia

Tel: +389 2 2400225

Website: www.eurofast.eu

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

The threat of 50% tariffs on Brazilian goods coincides with new Brazilian legal powers to adopt retaliatory economic measures, local experts tell ITR
The country’s chancellor appears to have backtracked from previous pillar two scepticism; in other news, Donald Trump threatened Russia with 100% tariffs
In its latest G20 update, the OECD also revealed tense discussions with the US where the ‘significant threat’ of Section 899 was highlighted
The tax agency has increased compliance yield from wealthy individuals but cannot identify how much tax is paid by UK billionaires, the committee also claimed
Saffery cautioned that documentation requirements in new government proposals must be limited if medium-sized companies are not exempted from TP
The global minimum tax deal is not viable without US participation, Friedrich Merz has argued
Section 899 of the ‘one big beautiful’ bill would have spelled disaster for many international investors into the US, but following its shelving, attention turns to the fate of the OECD’s pillars
DLA Piper’s co-head of tax for the US and Latin America tells ITR about her fervent belief in equal access to the law, loving yoga, and paternal inspirations
Tax expert Craig Hillier agrees with the comparison of pillar two to using a sledgehammer to crack a nut
The amount is reported to be up 57% from the £5.6bn that the UK tax agency believes was underpaid in the previous year
Gift this article