Monthly SAF-T VAT file in Poland (JPK-VAT)

Unknown

According to new regulation Large Enterprises are obliged to submit mandatory VAT SAF-T file in legal XML format for the first time on 25 August 2016. It is a monthly obligation even if the VAT reporting period itself is quarterly.

SAP and VAT SAF-T

I refer for complete overview to ‘SAF-T for Poland and SAP‘.

Most companies download the standard SAP VAT return reports from SAP to Excel and have an Excel working paper for review and adjustments. The data in the SAP reports are retrieved from various SAP tables.

The SAF-T VAT file need to reconcile with the submitted VAT return (monthly or quarterly). If this file does not reconcile to the submitted VAT return the risk that the PL tax authorities will ask questions – explain the differences – is high.

Our SAF-T VAT solution for Poland

  • First deadline to submit SAF-T file is August 25, 2016 (feasible)
  • Our solution ensures the completeness of the required data
  • Meets legal XML format
  • A control report exists that the total VAT amounts and data in the SAF-T VAT file reconcile

Read more

‘Brexit’: time to act?

Unknown

Relax, the VAT law will probably not change in the next 2 years.

The UK must first give the European Council notice of its intention to withdraw and a ‘Brexit’ agreement has to be negotiated. The negotiations are about setting the new relation between the UK and the EU and include tax and tariffs. That is already delayed as Prime Minister David Cameron considers that all a task of his successor.

“Mr Cameron has said it should be up to his successor to decide when to activate Article 50 by notifying the European Council. Once this happens, the UK is cut out of EU decision-making at the highest level and there will be no way back unless by unanimous consent from all other member states.

Quitting the EU is not an automatic process – it has to be negotiated with the remaining 27 members and ultimately approved by them by qualified majority. These negotiations are meant to be completed within two years although many believe it will take much longer. The European Parliament has a veto over any new agreement formalising the relationship between the UK and the EU.” Brexit: What happens now?

‘Brexit’ will result that trade between the UK and the EU countries will be treated again as imports and exports and most likely – unless negotiations will have a different outcome – result that customs duty have to be paid when goods move between the UK and the EU (duty rates might change).

As EU law will no longer apply – ‘be in force’ – the UK regains the right and flexibility to introduce own VAT legislation (again). That can be done much quicker as EU approval is also no longer required:

  • VAT rates and the scope of zero-rating and exemption.
  • Reversed CJEU decisions (e.g. broader scope of exemptions)
  • Place of supply rules that could result in double taxation or non taxation

The interpretation of UK VAT law during litigation becomes a UK matter only at least for issues that took place after the secession. With other words the UK regains full control.

VAT reporting will change as well as EC Sales Lists and Intrastat reporting will no longer apply unless a similar concept is negotiated with the EU. UK businesses that operate in the EU the VAT compliance obligations are impacted and an analysis should be made:

  • Appoint a fiscal representative
  • Invoicing and reporting requirements
  • Simplified trangulations for chain transactions
  • Distance sales rules
  • Mini One Stop Shop
  • EU VAT refund rules
  • etc.

From an operational perspective a company’s processes and controls have to be updated to the new situation at hand. ERP systems must reflect these changes and that means that tax determination logics, tax codes, invoice and reporting requirements have to be assessed and new rules implemented as well. IT time has to be scheduled in to make it happen.

That being said businesses will have sufficient time to oversee the consequences and be well prepared. It will probably take 2 years to come into force.

Lots can also happen in the meantime. Maybe a next referendum reverses the ‘Brexit’. Or United Kingdom will become less united as Scotland and the city of London (??? – LOL) decide to remain with the EU.

The future will tell.

Richard H. Cornelisse

Moving beyond tax technical advisory only

Surveys are alarming

If indirect tax risks are truly that high, then shouldn’t it receive more attention from the CFO?

Richard H. Cornelisse: That’s exactly the reason I started the Global Indirect Tax Management initiative. It’s not that the problem is unknown among the multinationals, but they just don’t share information sufficiently. The Indirect Tax Function is aware of the fact that it is understaffed and that budget is too limited to optimally execute its tasks, but they often don’t know how to change this and get it on the agenda of the CFO.

How it all started

How I started simply by ‘sharing my views’ and ‘take position’.

At Andersen around 2000, I discovered that my advice about VAT cash flow optimization was wrongly implemented in the ERP system resulting in a cash flow disadvantage for many years. That was my eye opener and was actually the reason that I set up as one of the first a team with a focus on ERP and indirect tax solutions.

Understanding the root cause and solving the real problem became from that moment on my mantra and I also started to write and share my views. Certain views – looking back – can now be argued, but that is exactly the reason why I am sharing these articles as it simply shows my way of thinking at that time and gives some insight about developments.

The Andersen team continued when we moved to EY. We branded the service offering in 2002: ‘ISIS’ (Indirect tax Solutions for Information Systems). In hindsight not really a good name.

VAT ERP remains still an important VAT critical process to manage, however it is only one of the building blocks of indirect tax function effectiveness. The launch of this website has taken it all a step further as all of its building blocks are addressed and discussed. I refer to the Tables of Contents.

How it all started: ‘2005 – 2012 – A selection of my publications‘: my own road trip.

Tax rulings: how to approximate market prices

images


EU – State aid – DG Competition – Internal Working Paper – 3 June 2016


As a rule, fiscal measures of a general nature that apply to all undertakings without distinction fall within the remit of the Member States’ fiscal autonomy and cannot constitute State aid, since they do not selectively advantage certain undertakings over others.

By contrast, fiscal measures that discriminate between taxpayers in a similar factual and legal situation constitute, in principle, State aid.

The “arm’s length principle” aims to ensure that all economic operators are treated in the same manner when determining their taxable base for corporate income tax purposes, regardless of whether they form part of an integrated corporate group or operate as standalone companies on the market.

The Commission does not call into question the granting of tax rulings by the tax administrations of the Member States. It recognises the importance of advance rulings as a tool to provide legal certainty to taxpayers. Provided they do not grant a selective advantage to specific economic operators, tax rulings do not raise issues under EU State aid law.

The inquiry has focussed, in particular, on tax rulings which endorse transfer pricing arrangements proposed by the taxpayer for determining the taxable basis of an integrated group company.

The Commission has also analysed “confirmatory rulings”, which confirm the application, or the non-application, of a certain legislative provision to a specific situation.

At the end of 2015 and the beginning of 2016, the Commission adopted three negative decisions with recovery with respect to the tax ruling granted by the Netherlands to Starbucks, the tax ruling granted by Luxembourg to Fiat and the Excess Profit Scheme in Belgium.

The Commission is continuing its investigations concerning the tax treatment of Apple by Ireland, and Amazon and McDonald’s by Luxembourg.


Read more: Preliminary findings of the ruling investigation with respect to transfer pricing rulings.


Other Tax Transparency chapters



SAF-T for Poland and SAP


From 1st July 2016 onwards it is required to provide SAFT-PL files (in Polish: “Jednolity Plik Kontrolny” or “JPK”) in XML format on request of the PL Tax authorities.


Filing SAF-T will be mandatory for large taxpayers: employ more than 250 people or 50 million EUR sales revenue irrespective of whether they are established in Poland or not. Per 1st July 2018 this extended to taxpayers with more than 9 employees or 2 million EUR sales revenue.

Foreign businesses not having a branch and/or fixed establishment but that are registered for VAT in Poland fall within the scope of the above reporting requirement when above conditions are met.

On 19 May 2016 the Upper Chamber of the Polish Parliament passed a bill on the amendment of provisions of the Tax Ordinance and of some other acts. According to the bill adopted by the Parliament, the obligation to generate VAT reports in a SAF-T data format and their monthly reporting to the tax authorities will apply initially only to the largest enterprises for each month begun on or after 1 July 2016.

It means that Large Enterprises will be obliged to file VAT reports in the SAF-T data format already on 25 August 2016. Thus, Large Enterprises will be obliged to submit in monthly period VAT register in SAF-T format (according to JPK_VAT structure 4 – VAT register) even if the VAT reporting period is quarterly.

Taxpayers will be obliged to submit the SAF-T format:

  • on request in the case of a preliminary tax inquiry, a tax audit and tax proceedings;
  • monthly mandatory – with respect to the VAT sales and purchases records only (Article 109(3) of the Value Added Tax Act of 11 March 2004 (VAT records) by submit monthly a SAF-T file that contains VAT sales and purchase records.

The first requests to submit audit files at their discretion will likely take place September 2016.  The monthly VAT reports on 25 August 2016.  Not complying with this obligation will not only negatively affect the position of taxpayers during a tax audit but also result in unforeseen tax costs as penalties will be levied.

‘Final’ version of the logical structures of the Standard Audit File (SAF) was published by the Ministry on 9 March 2016 including FAQ.

Besides introduced now in Poland similar EU obligations exist already in Portugal (2013) Luxembourg (2013), Austria (2009), France (2014), Lithuania (2015). More and more tax administrations around the world are implementing electronic auditing of a business’ financial records and systems.


SAF-T Poland and SAP


SAP developed currently only an extraction tool for SAP ECC 6 and higher version. The generation of the SAFT-PL XML files is not included. Certain companies use “older versions” of SAP and will not be supported by SAP.


Based on SAP’s OSS notes, SAP provides only at the moment a functionality for gathering and downloading the transactional data. However, it is not the complete set of data required and the creation of the SAF-T file for the tax authorities is also not included. The functionality will also only be available for companies established in Poland and not for companies with a foreign Polish VAT registration.

In order to be able to comply with the requirements and provide the XML file on request in time, tooling needs either to be developed or purchased.


Our solution


A SAFT-PL tool that already works for Portugal that includes also strategy for downloading the relevant data from SAP  for older SAP versions.


The basic design for a workaround solution is to extract the raw source data from the relevant SAP tables and use software tools to load the relevant data from the source SAP tables, perform additional mappings and data preparations and create the required XML files.

We offer 2 solutions:


  • A software application called Audit Command Language (ACL). This software is commonly used by auditing firms, tax authorities and internal audit departments. The process will be that the client will download the data from SAP and make it available to the Phenix. Phenix will then generate the XML files and some control reports and provide these files and reports available to client for submission.
  • A tool in MS Access in combination with a specific user interface for extracting the data from SAP. The result is a full in-house solution for the client.

Above process is based on our proven tool developed for the generation of the SAF-T files for Portugal.


Detailed information about SAF-T compliance and planning



Contact us for more information


Benchmark info, templates and approaches for process improvements and meeting objectives

Schermafbeelding 2016-05-12 om 17.32.47.jpg

Our aim is to share our expertise with you through this website, to create and share current state benchmarking knowledge, to inspire and also challenge your department functions through offering modules that can be used to scope process gaps from an Indirect Tax and Transfer Pricing perspective.

phenix7

You can enter either via: ‘Where you are and where you want to go‘. A ‘Table of Contents’ pops up, click on ‘to read’ and select the chapter you like to visit by clicking again.

The chapter ‘Roadmap to Indirect Tax function Effectiveness‘ is a executive summary and contains a section how to get internal buy-in and write a problem statement and business case. ‘Structure the Tax function‘ is my view and personal story.

‘Data and technology’ is an interesting read as the weaknesses of SAP VAT are explained in detail. ‘Tax Transparency’ gives you an overview of tax trends and correlation with TP. Of course the chapters ‘VAT Control Framework’, ‘Indirect tax Risk Management’ and an ‘Indirect tax Strategic Plan’ are discussed.

And a lot more …

Table of contents: click picture and select chapter

Schermafbeelding 2016-05-04 om 22.20.15.png

GITM – Tables of contents

 

Tax revenue in 2015 (EU and NL)

More than 160 countries have a VAT regime. In the EU, between 2008 and 2013, the average EU standard rate increased from around 19.5% to more than 21%. The EU average VAT rate is now approximately 21.5%. VAT accounts for more than 20% of total tax revenue (source: OECD).

Netherlands: Tax revenue in 2015

Indirect tax revenue in NL was in 2015 EUR 74,9bn compared to Corporate Income Tax EUR 21,3bn. Wage tax and income tax was EUR 133,7bn.

Taxation in the EU

The infographic below shows the income from direct and indirect taxes for each member state as well as total tax revenue as a percentage of the gross domestic product. The latter is divided between taxes on capital, consumption and labour. In addition this map shows how wealthy countries are.

AAEAAQAAAAAAAAf5AAAAJDU0MDcxNDRmLTQ4MzgtNDI0Yy1iODFmLWE2MjIzYTdmZjRjMw

Read more detail

Effectively manage consequences of publication of tax strategy in UK

phenixstrategicplan2


Certain businesses in the UK have to publish their tax strategy as it relates to or affects UK taxation


HMRC has published draft guidance on the new rules. The draft guidance applies to UK companies with turnover of more than £200m or a balance sheet of more than £2bn and makes it mandatory for businesses to publish their tax strategy and approach to tax planning every financial year. The tax strategy must be published online and must remain accessible to the public, free of charge.


This guidance provides information on the publication of a Large Business tax strategy


This guidance explains:


  • The qualifying criteria for publishing a tax strategy;
  • What a tax strategy must contain;
  • When penalties may be charged (including reasonable excuse); and
  • The appeals process.

What must a tax strategy contain?


The tax strategy must set out the company’s:


  • approach to risk management and governance arrangements in relation to UK taxation
  • attitude towards tax planning (so far as affecting UK taxation)
  • level of risk in relation to UK taxation that it is prepared to accept
  • approach towards its dealings with HMRC.

What to publish about tax risk management and governance arrangements?


  • How the business identifies and mitigates inherent tax risk because of the size, complexity and extent of change in the business 
  • The governance framework the business uses to manage tax risk 
  • The levels of oversight and involvement of the Board 
  • High level description of any key roles and responsibilities/ systems and controls in place to manage tax risk.

What to publish about the level of risk that the company is prepared to accept?


  •  An explanation of whether internal governance is prescriptive on levels of acceptable risk. If so, is this quantified and how is this affected or influenced by stakeholders?

Read more detail about the draft guidance: the qualifying criteria for publishing a tax strategy; what a tax strategy must contain; when penalties may be charged (including reasonable excuse); and the appeals process.


What is the impact and how to manage effectively?


In essence, HRMC’s increases its expectations towards large businesses with regard to a more and more transparent tax management strategy. However, the publication of a tax strategy will clearly not be sufficient. It is just the starting point for the provision of a clear picture about the risk management and controls in place of tax relevant processes. The daily management turns on the radar.


State-of-the-art tax compliance management software is required


Should the Tax Strategy not be published within the prescribed period, or be materially incomplete, the following penalty regime will apply:


In difference hereto, the view into the current daily practice provides a different and non-compliant picture:


Widespread use of Excel spreadsheets, decentralized storage of tax relevant documents, lack of documented controls, lack of automation, global lack of tax compliance software tracking individual changes and filings, lack of standardized reports immediately available upon request, lack of in-built double-checks for the calculation of current and deferred taxes on reporting entity level, lots of tax relevant data stored at external outsourcers (e.g. external tax advisors and accounting firms), several tax software tools in place at various locations which are neither interfaced among each other and with the ERP systems in place, etc. 


It is obvious that tax departments which are not adapting its process management to the requirements addressed by HMRC and other tax authorities may struggle with regard to compliance, efficiency and transparency.


Therefore, compliant tax software solutions for integrated tax management like the U² software from Universal Units become more and more important.


Compliant tax software solutions for the global management of tax processes


U2 products

Contact us to receive more information


Why do you think you can make poor data compliant?

Taxmarc is an ‘add-on’ for SAP which determines VAT in real time on your behalf. Because Taxmarc has a tax control framework, the consistency and correctness of transactions and VAT details are immediately assessed at source.

As a result you have guaranteed high- quality tax data in a central database which you can use for direct tax calculations such as transfer pricing.

Download Flyer Taxmarc

Taxmarc_02