Services A-Z     Pricing

Supreme Court clarifies VAT group rules in Prudential v HMRC

15 September 2025

On 11 September 2025, the Supreme Court handed down its judgment in The Prudential Assurance Company Ltd v Commissioners for His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs, a case that delves into the interaction between VAT group rules and the timing of taxable supplies. The decision has significant implications for businesses operating within VAT groups, particularly in relation to deferred consideration and success fees.
 

Background
 

Silverfleet Capital Limited (“Silverfleet”) supplied investment fund management services to the appellant (“Prudential”) when both companies were members of the same VAT group, and thus intra-group supplies were disregarded for VAT purposes under section 43 of the VAT Act 1994 (“VATA 94”).

The dispute focused on whether VAT was payable on success fees invoiced by Silverfleet Capital Limited to Prudential Assurance Company Ltd after Silverfleet had left Prudential’s VAT group. The success fees were only triggered and invoiced some years after Silverfleet had exited the VAT group.

HMRC determined that VAT was chargeable on the success fees. Although the First-tier Tribunal found in Prudential’s favour (that no VAT was payable), this was overturned by the Upper Tribunal who considered that VAT was payable, which was in turn upheld by the Court of Appeal.

In the Supreme Court, Prudential argued that the success fees should be disregarded for VAT purposes because they related to services provided during the period of VAT group membership. HMRC contended that the “time of supply” rules, which determine when a supply is deemed to occur for VAT purposes, meant that the success fees were taxable because they were invoiced and paid after Silverfleet had left the group.

The Supreme Court unanimously dismissed Prudential’s appeal; VAT was payable as the time of the supply was when the success fee invoices were issued (which was after the supplier left the VAT group).

Supreme Court’s Decision


The Court held that:

  • The time of supply rules under both domestic and European legislation were determinative of when VAT became chargeable. The general rule under section 6 VATA 94 is that supply is treated as taking place when services are performed. However, there is an exception under regulation 90 of the 1995 VAT Regulations where services are provided over a period and the payments are made from time to time. When this happens, the “supply” is treated as occurring either when the VAT invoice is issued, or when payment is received.
  • Since the success fees were only invoiced and paid after Silverfleet had left the VAT group, the supply was deemed to occur at that later time. Therefore, the intra-group disregard under section 43 VATA 94 did not apply, and VAT was properly chargeable on the success fees.
  • The Court acknowledged the complexity of the legislative framework and the competing interpretations but ultimately sided with HMRC’s view that the timing of the invoice and payment was decisive.

Implications
 

This judgment provides clarity on the scope of VAT group relief and reinforces the importance of the time of supply rules in determining VAT liability.

Businesses operating within VAT groups should be mindful that:

  • Deferred consideration or performance-based fees may attract VAT if invoiced after group membership ends; and
  • The timing of invoicing and payment can override the historical context of service provision for VAT purposes.

The decision also underscores the need for careful drafting of service agreements and VAT planning in group structures, particularly where long-term or contingent fees are involved.

About the authors

Waqar is a Partner in the Dispute Resolution department, focusing on the resolution of complex tax matters. He acts for high net worth individuals and corporate clients across all sectors in respect of HMRC disputes and investigations across the full range of taxes. This typically includes VAT disputes, employment tax matters (including 'IR35'/off-payroll working), customs/excise duty issues, tax fraud investigations, and more recently, National Minimum Wage enquiries.

Anna has extensive litigation experience, acting for both domestic and international clients on complex, multi-jurisdictional, trust and estate disputes. 

 

 

Latest blogs & news

Victims of Fraud Series Part 4: Tracing issues in crypto assets cases

Claims involving digital assets (including crypto assets) have become relatively common in the English Courts over the last five years and, as a result, the main areas of disagreement between the parties to those disputes are starting to emerge. A major theme is the methodology that should be applied to the tracing and following of digital assets.

It was all a sham

Assets are typically placed in a trust for legitimate purposes, such as safeguarding wealth for future generations. However, arguments that a trust is in fact a “sham” created to hide the true ownership of assets often arise in the context of divorce litigation, bankruptcy/insolvency where a creditor seeks to argue that a trust is a pretence seeking to shield assets from creditors, or in estate disputes, where beneficiaries look to bring assets of the deceased back into an estate.

Victims of Fraud Series Part 3: “What can I do if the fraudster has disappeared?” - Persons Unknown Injunctions

Where the identity of a person or group of people responsible for a fraud is not known, the courts have recognised that it may be appropriate in certain circumstances to allow a claimant to issue proceedings and obtain an injunction (both interim and final) against such individuals. These injunctions are referred to as “persons unknown injunctions” and they have become increasingly prominent in recent years.

Landmark High Court ruling confirms availability of civil remedies for criminally sanctioned Companies Act breaches

Kingsley Napley is pleased to have acted for the successful claimants in proceedings before the High Court. The decision addresses a long-standing uncertainty in company law: if a provision of the Companies Act 2006 (“CA 06”) carries a criminal penalty for breach, does that mean no civil remedy is available? The court’s ruling sheds light on how such provisions should be understood and what consequences companies and directors may face when compliance falls short.

Victims of Fraud Series Part 2: Using information orders to identify a fraudster and trace assets

One of the most alarming aspects of falling victim to fraud is knowing where to start. It is very common for a victim to know almost nothing about what has happened, except for the fact that they have been scammed and the assets have gone. However, there are options available even if you don’t know the identity of the fraudster and the assets have, apparently, disappeared.

Travelex liquidation: Court appoints additional conflict liquidators

In a judgment handed down today, the Court agreed to appoint two additional conflict liquidators from Grant Thornton in the Travelex liquidation following an application made by Kingsley Napley’s client Rawbank S.A. (“Rawbank”).

Rawbank is the largest bank in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (“DRC”) and is an unsecured creditor of Travelex Bank Notes Ltd (“Travelex”) (part of the Travelex group of companies) for over £48m.

Victims of Fraud Series Part 1: Why Acting Fast Matters

In cases of fraud, the first 24 to 48 hours can determine whether stolen assets are recoverable or not. Fraudsters are often sophisticated, moving funds through multiple accounts, jurisdictions, or even converting them into cryptocurrency within hours.  It is important to have a plan so that you understand the immediate steps you would take in the event of fraud, as delay can mean that your assets are dissipated and recovery becomes difficult.

Removal of trustees – factors a court will consider

We are seeing an increase in enquiries from both beneficiaries of trusts seeking the removal of trustees, and from trustees facing allegations that they have not complied with their duties. Sometimes it is clear that a matter has not been dealt with appropriately by a trustee, but on other occasions this stems from a general breakdown of the relationship between the parties.

The International Data Insights Report: Trends in international arbitration

Two recent publications, the Law Society’s International Data Insights Report 2025 and Queen Mary University’s (“QMU”) International Arbitration Survey, analyse statistics concerning international arbitration and reaffirm London’s leading role in global dispute resolution.

Practical tips for trustees dealing with breach of trust allegations

Being a trustee carries significant responsibilities and often involves managing high value assets and making complex decisions in the best interests of all the beneficiaries. While trustees generally strive to act with care and integrity, allegations of breach of trust can arise. Whilst such allegations can be stressful and complex, how trustees manage the trust and how they respond to allegations is crucial to maintaining trust, protecting the trust’s assets, and avoiding potential contentious proceedings.

The tips below should generally be adopted through the life of the trust and may avoid disputes arising in the first place.

Civil Fraud Case Update: Q3 2025

This quarterly civil fraud update provides a summary of reported decisions handed down in the courts of England and Wales in the period of July - September 2025.

UAE agrees to share crypto information with international tax authorities

The United Arab Emirates (“UAE”) has joined in global efforts to improve transparency and compliance in the crypto sector by signing the Multilateral Competent Authority Agreement (MCAA) under the Crypto-Asset Reporting Framework (CARF). The framework is expected to be rolled out in UAE in 2027, with the first automatic exchanges of information with other tax authorities such as HMRC taking place in 2028.

HMRC Covid scheme amnesty: action by 31 December 2025

The COVID pandemic was a difficult time for businesses,  and many legitimately relied on financial support provided through government schemes to help them to survive and retain employees. However, it is estimated by HMRC that circa £10billion was also lost as a result of incorrect applications and outright fraud.

‘No win, no fee’ - are clients being hoodwinked?

At a time when a national broadcaster feels obliged to unpick (for the lawyer in us: alleged) misleading information from the leader of the free world, I almost choked on my breakfast when reading that we should also be concerned that some of us lawyers may be misleading the public too: 'No win, no fee' under fire: SRA vows to stop law firms hoodwinking consumers | Law Gazette Why now is a mystery; the term has been a feature of daytime TV advertising for decades!

Crypto reporting is changing: what this means for you - and HMRC

As the global regulatory landscape continues to evolve, two major frameworks are set to reshape how crypto-assets are reported: the Crypto-Asset Reporting Framework (“CARF”) and the European Union’s Directive on Administration Cooperation in taxation (“DAC8”).

Supreme Court clarifies VAT group rules in Prudential v HMRC

On 11 September 2025, the Supreme Court handed down its judgment in The Prudential Assurance Company Ltd v Commissioners for His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs, a case that delves into the interaction between VAT group rules and the timing of taxable supplies. The decision has significant implications for businesses operating within VAT groups, particularly in relation to deferred consideration and success fees.

Rayner my parade! The importance of specialist advice.

The headlines this week around former Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner are a reminder of the importance of taking the right advice from appropriate professionals and the potential consequences when such advice is called into question.

Civil Fraud case update Q2 2025

This quarterly civil fraud update provides a summary of reported decisions handed down in the courts of England and Wales in the period of April - June 2025.

Oral evidence series Part 6: Is an honest recollection of events truly evidence?

Judicial commentary shows that judges are exceedingly aware of the unreliability of witnesses’ memory when considering evidence at trial. While judges may take differing views as to the reliance that ought to be placed on oral evidence as compared to contemporaneous documents, procedural safeguards are now in place to help strengthen the reliability of witness evidence, in CPR Practice Direction 57AC - Trial Witness Statements in the Business and Property Courts (“PD 57AC”).

Privilege update: Privy Council confirms the shareholder principle no longer applies in England & Wales

We have previously written about the potential death of the shareholder principle in our previous blogs. The recent Privy Council decision in Jardine Strategic Limited v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd & Ors No 2 confirms what we suspected; the shareholder principle no longer exists in England & Wales.

 

Skip to content Home About Us Insights Services Contact Accessibility