{"id":21978,"date":"2022-05-24T19:03:47","date_gmt":"2022-05-24T19:03:47","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/smh.group\/?p=21978"},"modified":"2022-05-24T19:03:47","modified_gmt":"2022-05-24T19:03:47","slug":"zero-rated-food-confusion","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/devstagesite.co.uk\/smhgroup\/zero-rated-food-confusion\/","title":{"rendered":"Zero-rated food confusion"},"content":{"rendered":"

The distinction between zero-rated food and standard VAT confectionery is a crucial, and complex, one<\/strong> \u2013 not helped by what may appear to be apparently arbitrary rulings. Despite its predecessor losing a notorious ruling over the zero-rating of Jaffa Cakes more than 30 years ago, HMRC refuses to give ground on marginal cases. The latest target was the simple flapjack.<\/strong><\/p>\n

As an example of the complexity, tap water is zero-rated, but a bottle of water is not (although a bottle of milk is). It \u2018logically\u2019 follows that ice is zero-rated if made from tap water, but not if from bottled water \u2013 although good luck telling the difference. Baked goods are a similar minefield.<\/p>\n

Flapjacks<\/strong><\/h2>\n

There might be little obvious difference between a flapjack and a cereal bar, but flapjacks benefit from zero-rating, being classed as cakes, simply because they were around first. The more recent cereal bars are classed as VAT-able confectionery.<\/p>\n

Not surprisingly, HMRC is not at all happy with the distinction, and define flapjacks as narrowly as possible.<\/p>\n