# How to find if a VAT invoice is submitted to Revenue



## elff009 (29 Nov 2010)

I would like to know if it is possible to find out if a VAT invoice is submitted to the revenue.I have the invoice with me and the VAT No is present on the invoice.
Couple of months ago, we got our garage converted into 4th bed room. we got a plumbler to do the flooring.He gave a quote which he said is inclusive of VAT (he clearly said it is inclusive of VAT)and we accepted it as it was reasonable. when the work was almost completed, he gave the invoice but he calculated the VAT on the quote which he said earlier as inclusive of VAT.we had many issues with this guy.2 weeks back I met one of our neighbours in a pub and he inquired if we had hired the services of this plumber as he had seen the van infront of our house. while discussing this, i found out that he had hired the same plumber some time in the beginning of this year and had issues with him regarding money he charged.

This guy is not being honest in what he said, how much he is charging . we also felt the VAT money charged by this guy is not reaching the revenue . from my knowledge of the accounting i know that VAt is a very serious thing for Revenue. i want to make sure i make a complaint to Revenue on this plumber but want to be 100 % sure before I complain.

Can some one pl let me know if there is any way i can find out if a VAT invoice is submitted to the revenue or not with the details(Invoice No, VAT No, name of the business)


----------



## T McGibney (29 Nov 2010)

elff009 said:


> Can some one pl let me know if there is any way i can find out if a VAT invoice is submitted to the revenue or not with the details(Invoice No, VAT No, name of the business)



No, on 2 grounds

- VAT invoices are not submitted to Revenue _per se_. Figures for VAT on Sales and VAT on Purchases totals are included in periodic VAT returns which are submitted to Revenue. Invoices included in these totals must be retained for inspection if required.

- A taxpayer's tax affairs are confidential between the taxpayer and Revenue and particulars are not divulged to third parties.


----------



## JoeB (29 Nov 2010)

I'd have to agree with the poster above. Meteor Mobile illegally overcharged VAT in Jan of this year, by .5%. This affects up to 500,000 people or more, and may amount to overcharged VAT of 200,000 Euros or more. This is based on Meteor having up to 1.2 million customers.


Although Revenue accept that the VAT was illegally overcharged they refuse to do anything about this. I am still in discussions with them as to what companies are allowed to break the law with no comeback... they are slow to answer.


Revenues advice on overcharged VAT states that if the overcharged customers can be identified then they should be refunded, but Revenue refuse to apply their own rules in relation to Meteor.


----------



## T McGibney (29 Nov 2010)

JoeBallantin said:


> Revenues advice on overcharged VAT states that if the overcharged customers can be identified then they should be refunded, but Revenue refuse to apply their own rules in relation to Meteor.



The Taxes Consolidation Acts also state that where a VAT overcharge is not refunded to the customer, the overcharge amount must be remitted by the trader to Revenue. 

It is therefore in Revenue's interest not to insist that a VAT overcharge is not refunded to customers, as they ultimately stand to collect the overcharge.


----------



## Time (29 Nov 2010)

Would that not give the overcharged customer a course of action against revenue?


----------



## JoeB (29 Nov 2010)

Yes, any overcharged VAT must be returned to Revenue... but this is to prevent unscrupolous companies making windfall gains, by 'engineering' certain situations.

For example, if a company 'incorrectly' charges 21% VAT for several years, and then they turn around and say '' god, we should only have been charging 13.5% for all these years,.. let's make a massive windfall gain through our mistake, by reclaiming all the 7.5%'s.'


So Revenue prevent that by saying that all VAT charged, even if charged incorrectly, must be submitted to Revenue. But Revenue also say that if the overcharged customers can be identified then the customers should receive their money back, not Revenue.

But Revenue are not applying their own rule to Meteor, and they aren't saying why. I wonder why some companies appear to be treated differently to others. All I want is some clarity.

Revenue say that they cannot help in obtaining refunds,.. that I must go to the Consumer Assoc. or the courts.


I have asked Revenue would they take the same position if Meteor had overcharged VAT by 1000% and not just .5%. Would Revenue happily take in 8 million of overcharged VAT and refuse to refund the rightful owners?, as they do for a paltry .5% (perhaps 200,000 Euros in total)


----------



## dereko1969 (29 Nov 2010)

Don't know why you would expect Revenue to refund the money to you that another company overcharged. You're also hi-jacking this thread and should really start a new one.


----------



## Time (29 Nov 2010)

I would FOI them and see what happens.


----------



## dereko1969 (29 Nov 2010)

Time said:


> I would FOI them and see what happens.


 
FOI who? If it's Revenue It would be pointless as they can't divulge any customer specific material. It would be cheaper to ask them their policy for these cases.


----------



## Time (29 Nov 2010)

And then off to the Ombudsman with your findings.


----------



## dereko1969 (29 Nov 2010)

Time said:


> And then off to the Ombudsman with your findings.


 
You still won't get anywhere.


----------



## JoeB (29 Nov 2010)

OP, sorry for hi-jacking thread.

In the OP's case I think there is little you can do. Revenue will definitely say that the dispute is between yourself and the plumber. But you're not asking for a refund, instead you want to know if the plumber is actually passing the VAT over to Revenue... there is no way for you to find out. I think you should have refused to pay the plumber any extra.

Revenue will refuse to discuss the case of the plumbers taxes with you. However they will happily accept information from you that might show up some tax evasion and they might investigate... but I don't think you'll find out the outcome. 

Most people don't complain to Revenue in your case, although some do I'm sure.


My posts were different... in my case a large company is in denial as to reality.. they consistently claim that the VAT rate is 21.5%, when it's not. Revenue should take some action against companies that make up VAT rates.


----------



## JoeB (29 Nov 2010)

dereko1969 said:


> Don't know why you would expect Revenue to refund the money to you that another company overcharged. You're also hi-jacking this thread and should really start a new one.



To be honest I don't expect Revenue to refund the money. But I do expect Revenue to apply their own rules, which include that in cases of VAT overcharging where the overcharged customers can be identified the customers should be refunded. (I agree that my post wasn't clear)


This doesn't seem to be happening, and I'm just wondering why...


----------



## mandelbrot (29 Nov 2010)

JoeBallantin said:


> To be honest I don't expect Revenue to refund the money. But I do expect Revenue to apply their own rules, which include that in cases of VAT overcharging where the overcharged customers can be identified the customers should be refunded. (I agree that my post wasn't clear)
> 
> 
> This doesn't seem to be happening, and I'm just wondering why...



Yes if the customers can be identified they should be refunded - by the person who overcharged them.

It's up to meteor to refund their customers, not up to Revenue to clean up meteor's mess!

Having refunded the VAT overcharged, Meteor should then self-correct the VAT error.

I don't really understand what your beef with Revenue is here, there isn't really any means for them to unilaterally rectify meteor's error? Can you clarify what you'd like them to do?


----------



## JoeB (30 Nov 2010)

The situation is slightly more complex in that Meteor deny that they have overcharged any VAT.. but this is not accepted by Revenue. So while Revenue acknowledge that Meteor have incorrectly over charged VAT, Meteor deny this. Meteor refuse to accept that the VAT rate in Jan, 2010 was 21%... and while Revenue agree that the VAT rate was 21% they refuse to insist that companies use the correct rates.


So I'm stuck in the middle, and I find it hard to believe that Revenue are not interested in companies deliberately overcharging VAT... even if the overcharged VAT is correctly returned to Revenue.


So I'd like Revenue to write to Meteor telling them to observe the law, or to take some action against Meteor. Instead Revenue seem to be doing something else, ,.. this gives the impression that Revenue are somehow giving Meteor a 'leg up', or a 'dig out'.


The number of affected people, or absolute amounts are not small... up to 500,000 people are affected, and the overcharged VAT amounts to 100,000s of Euros.


Perhaps Revenue are doing this deliberately... perhaps the government has directed Revenue not to return overcharged VAT to customers,. and instead to keep the extra booty in the government coffers.


----------



## Time (30 Nov 2010)

It would be interesting to see if there was any such direction issued by some civil servant.


----------



## Mizen Head (30 Nov 2010)

Hi Eff

Forget about going the Reveue route.
You have a case under consumer law. It is clear that the original quote included VAT, you should NOT have paid on top of that quote.

See 
*PRICES AND CHARGES (TAX-INCLUSIVE STATEMENTS) ORDER, 1973*.

4. Where, for the purposes of or in connection with the rendering of a service by a person, the charge for the service is stated orally by the person or by a servant or agent of the person or is stated in any catalogue or advertisement or in a notice or other document (other than an invoice), the charge so stated shall be stated as a single amount inclusive of any charge made by the person for any tax payable in respect of the service.


----------



## elff009 (30 Nov 2010)

Looks like Revenue route is not going work, more over as this is not a very big guy not sure if Revenue will be really interested. I just didnt want this guy to make use of VAT to make extra bucks and keep VAT money with him which should be going to Revenue.

will try the consumer law route.

thanks all


----------



## dereko1969 (1 Dec 2010)

Have you actually paid over any money yet? Has the work been completed? You can advise Revenue that you think this guy is not remitting VAT collected - this may lead to an audit of him - you can do this anonymously if you wish.

Off Topic but why did you get a plumber to do flooring?


----------

