This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. To find out more about cookies on this website and how to delete cookies, see our Cookie Policy.

Tools which collect anonymous data to enable us to see how visitors use our site and how it performs. We use this to improve our products, services and user experience.


Tools that enable essential services and functionality, including identity verification, service continuity and site security.

Where Taxpayers and Advisers Meet
Tax Insider Tip: Value Added Tax – Developers New Build
19/12/2016, by Tax Insider, Tax Tips - Property Tax
Rating: 1/5 from 1 people

A ‘new build’ property is z

ero-rated for VAT such that all VAT incurred on any related expenditure can be recovered. If the new property is not a new building, then the sale is likely to be VAT exempt which does not give the right to VAT recovery.
Generally, any pre-existing building needs to cease to exist in order for a claim to be made. However, HMRC’s VAT Notice 708 states that if ‘the new building makes use of no more than a single facade (or a double facade on a corner site) of a pre-existing building, the pre-existing building is demolished completely (other than the retained facade) before work on the new building is started and the facade is retained as a condition or requirement of statutory planning consent or similar permission’ then they will agree to the supply being zero-rated.

The Notice states that another external wall can be treated as a ‘facade’ if it is to be retained under the same rules and there is only one facade.

Two recent tax cases show the court’s view as to what qualifies as a ‘facade’.

In A D Reeves v HMRC (2016) the issue was whether the retention of a gable wall to the side of the property qualified. The tribunal decided that it did not by accepting the dictionary definition which defined a ‘facade’ as being ‘the face of front of a building towards the street or other open place’. The gable of Mr Reeves’ property did not ‘face the front’ and as such the claim was disallowed.

In M Lennon and Co Ltd v HMRC (2015) Mr Lennon intended to demolish the existing building and construct a new house. However, because of how the original building was constructed, there was a risk that the party wall would fall down. Therefore, one half of the front facade was retained to provide support. When the property was sold HMRC asserted that zero-rating did not apply because the original building had not been completely demolished.

The court held that no VAT could be reclaimed as no planning permission had been required and therefore the retained facade could not be said to be ‘retained as a condition or requirement of planning consent’.

This is a sample tip taken from our 112 page guide:

101 Tax Tips For Landlords 2016/17

About The Author

The above article is taken from 'Tax Insider,' TaxationWeb's own publication specifically for taxpayers and their advisors. 'Tax Insider' is a monthly magazine containing numerous tax tips, articles, questions and answers from leading tax experts, aimed at helping taxpayers to save tax and reduce their liabilities.

To register and download free copies of Tax Insider, and for details of special offers and how to order, visit:

Back to Tax Tips

Please register or log in to add comments.

There are not comments added

ICPA Chairman Tony Margaritelli discusses 3 topics centred around October, including: 1. HMRC Furlough Fraud & Fighting For Your Clients, 2. Think About Yourself, 3. Are You a HMRC Customer.