VAT news in brief

The December advance payment for those submitting quarterly returns. 
VAT payers who submit periodic monthly returns are already familiar with the December advance phenomenon, and soon those who submit quarterly returns will also have to keep this requirement in mind. As part of the further simplification of the VAT legislation and administration, the Minister of Finance decided to scrap, as of 1 April 2017, the system of obligatory quarterly advance payments, which was required of those VAT payers who submitted periodic quarterly returns. The idea is that this measure will solve the issue of advance funding for VAT, but you can still pay quarterly advances on a voluntary basis since that date. This means that you can avoid a situation where:

  • at the end of a quarter you are required to pay excessive VAT;
  • and there is a risk that you have used all the payable VAT funds for other purposes.  

However, in order to place those submitting quarterly returns on an equal footing, it was decided that as of this year they would also have to pay a December advance, which must be deposited into the same bank account for Brussels VAT receipts by 24 December, with the usual reference for periodic VAT payments (your VAT number plus two additional figures).  

Whether this means that you must actually pay a given sum into the Belgian State’s bank account will depend on the taxed activities performed/received during the third or fourth quarter. That is because, just like those submitting monthly returns, those submitting quarterly returns can decide for themselves how they calculate this December advance payment.  

The December advance equals the VAT payable during the 1 October to 20 December period.  

Those submitting quarterly returns have two options: they can opt to pay the VAT payable for the 1 October to 20 December period. If you choose this calculation method, then the resultant VAT payable must be filled in in section 91 of the VAT return for the fourth quarter.

  • If the VAT payable for the 1 October to 20 December period is greater than the deductible VAT for that same period, then the difference must be inserted in section 91, and it must be paid by 24 December at the latest.
  • If the VAT payable for the 1 October to 20 December period is less than or equal to the deductible VAT for that same period, then fill in 0.00 EUR in section 91 and no December advance is payable.  

The December advance payment is equal to the VAT paid on the basis of the VAT return for the third quarter. 

The second option for those submitting quarterly returns is to pay the VAT payable on the basis of the VAT return for the third quarter once again as their December advance.

  • If the balance in section 71 of the VAT return for the third quarter is positive, then the same sum must be paid once again by 24 December;
  • If the balance in section 71 of the VAT return for the third quarter is 0.00 EUR or if there is a receivable sum (a VAT refund) in section 72 of the VAT return, then you are not required to pay a December advance to the Belgian State. 

If you select this second calculation method, a sum does not have to be entered into section 91 of the VAT return for the fourth quarter. So those who submit quarterly returns can, just like their monthly counterparts, perform the calculation themselves and see which method for the December advance is most advantageous in terms of cash flow. The advance paid is then offset against the balance of the VAT return payable for the fourth quarter, which must be submitted by 20 January of the following year. It is best to diarise the December advance now so that the payment (where applicable) is not forgotten and you find yourself paying interest.  

In the end, no optional VAT system for property leasing. 
It was announced in the government’s summer agreement that an optional system would be introduced in 2018 for subjecting the rental of property to professionals to VAT. In an earlier article we stated that this measure could consequently offer a future alternative  for avoiding the loss of a VAT deduction when, for example, a property company purchases or builds real estate for the purpose of making it available to an operating company that performs its economic activity on those premises (How the Summer Agreement affects VAT groups. 

But on 23 October we learned that the government had, for both budgetary and other reasons, decided that weekend to quit the introduction of this optional VAT system for property leasing – a move we find extremely regrettable. This means that, as opposed to what was initially announced, it will not be possible to choose, under certain conditions, to subject property rentals to professionals to VAT as of 1 January 2018. To make property leasing subject to VAT (and thus to be able to exercise the right to deduct VAT on costs incurred with respect to that property), you will have to continue using the options already available, such as creating a VAT group or financial leasing.

However, a new government circular is currently being prepared that will specifically provide for making the VAT regime for renting out warehouse space more flexible. That is because to date the taxman has been of the opinion that renting out storage space can only be VAT liable if the building is used solely as storage space (even though case law has frequently called the VAT authorities to order in this respect). Nevertheless, administrative tolerance applies when no more than 10% of the area of this warehousing space is used as an office by those persons tasked with managing the stored goods.

This so-called 10% rule will be scrapped as of 1 January 2018 and replaced by a 50% rule. So when office space is rented out as part of a warehouse, the rental could still be subject to VAT in its entirety when the area or the volume of offices makes up less than 50% of the total area or volume of the building (and can thus result in a right to deduct input tax on the part of the lessor). At the time of going to print the circular had not yet been published, but we will let you know as soon as it appears on Fisconet.   

Clarity from the VAT authorities – penalties resulting from delays in performing agreements qualify as damages. 
In a recent government circular dated 25 October 2017, the VAT authorities highlighted the fact that those sums paid in the form of damages as a result of the tardy performance of agreements constitute ‘damages due to delays’ and consequently do not affect the yardstick for taxing the agreed-to transaction. It is a regular occurrence in, for example, the construction industry that the contractor is required to pay a specific sum recorded in the contract because the performance of the work has been delayed. In practice that sum is deducted from the agreed-to price that the client pays to the contractor.  

The taxman has now underscored the fact that this ‘compensated deduction’ cannot be considered as a price discount on the transaction originally agreed to, which can be deducted from the original yardstick for determining the levy and means that less VAT is payable. In reality it is considered to be damages, which fall outside the scope of VAT and do not affect the yardstick for taxation that was originally agreed to. Let’s say that the agreed-to price is 1,000.00 EUR (excluding VAT) and the penalty for delayed performance is 10%. In practice the client would then pay 1,110.00 EUR to the contractor (1,000.00 EUR + 210.00 EUR VAT – 100.00 EUR default penalty). However the VAT payable and to be surrendered to the Belgian State remains 210.00 EUR.  

The new rules for VAT processing of vouchers
The wonderful world of VAT and vouchers
Vouchers are a very popular marketing tool. There are various types of vouchers: discount vouchers issued by a manufacturer, redeemable at any sales outlet in Belgium, discount coupons issued free of charge by retailers, vouchers where you can get a newly launched article free of charge, gift vouchers that can be redeemed for a whole range of products or services, electronic vouchers, etc. Are yo
A showpiece, or rather a sticking plaster for a broken arm?
The Belgian fiscal consolidation regime
The general intention with the introduction of a fiscal consolidation regime was clear, namely to put the Belgian tax system back in a positive light. After all, many of our neighbouring countries have had a system of fiscal consolidation in place for many years, and Belgium consequently scored badly on this point when international groups were looking to choose an investment location. The ques
The long-term lease revival
Superficies as stealth usufruct?
A noteworthy judgement was recently handed down by the Court of Appeal of Brussels regarding the taxation of overly cheap accession in the case of superficies (23 January 2019). In the past, a number of rulings had already been made on this subject (see, inter alia, Court in Ghent of 31 October 2017). The tax authorities are clearly keen to see the end of the right of superficies, and the two judg
'Paulian claim' to the rescue
Thwarting the taxman by rejecting an inheritance: is it possible?
In inheritance law, multiple heirs can have a statutory inheritance claim. As such, they are entitled to a minimum share of the inheritance. Since the new inheritance law, it is possible to freely dispose of half of one's assets. This is called the available part. If the available part is exceeded by donations, the statutory heirs may request the reduction. Through the reduction, the statutory hei
Appointing a Belgian fiscal representative is necessary
BREXIT: Important VAT news for UK companies with a Belgian VAT number
The Belgian VAT authorities confirmed that UK companies with a direct Belgian VAT registration need to appoint a Belgian fiscal representative for VAT purposes before 30/03/2019. This is in case of a no-deal Brexit on that date. The VAT administration will allow these UK companies to maintain their current Belgian VAT number, also after appointing a fiscal representative for VAT purposes. 
Legally most correct solution
Successive usufruct: The Flemish Tax Office (Vlabel) confirms the method of levying the registration duties
On 10 December 2018, a remarkable position was published on the Vlabel website (Position no 18083 of 26 November 2018). The real estate tax system is becoming more and more sophisticated with more (tax) advantages. The question must therefore be asked whether the well-known "simple" usufruct will not be partially replaced by transactions with a double or successive usufruct. In the area of registr
From 1 January 2019
New Flemish Lease Decree
On 24 October 2018, the Flemish Parliament approved the new Flemish Lease Decree. In our newsletter of 26 October 2017, we already hinted at the changes that this new decree will bring about. One of the most important changes remains the decree's broad scope. On the one hand, extensive regulations are provided for the rental of a house intended as a main residence. What is new here is that the ter
Confirmed in writing to our office
Confirmed: both usufructuary and bare owner are to be included in the UBO register
The Belgian Ultimate Beneficial Owner (UBO) register went live on 31 October 2018. On the basis of the legal texts and the explanatory notes, as ultimate beneficiary/ies of companies, the natural person(s) who directly or indirectly hold(s) a sufficient percentage of the voting rights or of the ownership interest in this company must first be notified. A holding of at least 25% is an indication of
The advantage is a taxable benefit
Fiches and withholding tax on benefits granted by foreign companies
Should payments received from a foreign company be subject to withholding tax and should this be declared on a fiche? At the moment, the answer to this question is negative in most situations, but this is set to change. A new draft law dated 18 December 2018 provides for the introduction of a tax fiction that requires the (Belgian) employer of the beneficiary employee not only to withhold withh
The requirement to register gets a broader scope
More entrepreneurs must register with the Crossroads Bank for Enterprises (CBE)
Under the aim of creating a more attractive business climate, changes were made to the existing company law. In that context, the legislator has done away with the ‘trader’ concept, replacing it with the umbrella term ‘enterprise. Besides forming the basis for the rules of the Code of Economic Law, the Judicial Code and the Civil Code, the new enterprise concept also has consequences for reg

Subscribe to our newsletter