The Lawyer Asia Pacific 150 is the only research report to provide a ranking of the top 100 independent local firms and top 50 global firms in the region. The report offers critical review of some of the fastest growing firms and their strategies, a country-by-country guide to leading legal advisers and legal services market trends, plus exclusive insight into the current business development opportunities in the Asia Pacific. Read more
This year, The Lawyer’s annual ranking of the largest UK law firms by turnover is available as an interactive, digital benchmarking tool. For the first time this will allow you to manipulate each data set against the metrics of your choice.
HM Revenue & Customs is forced to defend its policy of charging VAT on biscuits and not cakes in what is a tough taste challenge for the Scottish courts
It wasn’t too long ago that retail giant Marks & Spencer (M&S) fought HM Revenue & Customs in the courts over the revenue’s historic decision to class its marshmallow teacakes as biscuits, meaning that VAT had to be paid on the product. M&S won its battle to have the product reclassified as a cake in 2009 after the House of Lords accepted the chocolate covered snack was indeed a cake.
Last week the legal debate came to the fore again. This time around the Scottish court was asked to decide if the same marshmallow-based confectionary should be classed as biscuit or cake in Scotland. HMRC, which had officer Luke Connell defending the claim, once again insisted that it should be deemed a biscuit.
Two Lanarkshire-based confectioners, Lees of Scotland and ThomasTunnock, instructed Terra Firma Chambers’ Philip Simpson to challenge the classification. According to Lees, the snack in question, Snowballs, are a “soft fluffy mallow with a chocolate coating and sprinkled with the finest flakes of coconut to create a delicious sweet treat”.
The court had rejected a £2m VAT rebate claim by Lees of Scotland and for £800,000 by ThomasTunnock in 2012. The pair had appealed the ruling to the First-Tier Tax Tribunal.
For Judges Anne Scott and Peter Sheppard this turned out to be a tough case. Not only were they treated to a display of complex legal debate, but they were also challenged to taste the biscuits/cakes in question.
The taste test turned out to be a killer blow for HMRC.
In her ruling Judge Scott described the ordeal the two judges were subjected to: “We […] were each provided with a plate comprising a number of confections including one each of a Jaffa cake, Mr Kipling Bakewell Tart, Waitrose meringue, a tea cake manufactured by each appellant, a Lees snowball and a mini jam snow cake.”
Each snack was tasted “in moderation”, leaving the judicial pair “with very sticky fingers”, the kind one might get if they were “eating a cake such as a vanilla slice”.
As well as applying the taste test the judges also examined the manufacturing process, best occasion to eat a Snowball and positioning on a supermarket aisle.
Eating a Snowball in the street would be ill advised, they concluded. The age of the consumer, their gender and background might help to determine whether they would eat it off a “plate, a napkin or a piece of paper or even just a bare table so that the pieces of coconut which fly off do not create a great deal of mess”.
The Snowball would be best consumed with a beverage, and could be a cake of choice at an office birthday party, the judge continued. The product was not dissimilar from the marshmallow-based teacake, which was already deemed to be a VAT free cake.
HMRC, the court concluded, should refund the £2.8m in VAT paid by the two manufacturers. A sweet victory, no doubt.