VAT Time Bomb for Property Investors Following Rent to Serviced Accommodation (R2SA) Business Models

VAT Time Bomb for Property Investors Following Rent to Serviced Accommodation (R2SA) Business Models

9:45 AM, 21st January 2025, About 4 weeks ago 4

Text Size

For years, the Rent to Serviced Accommodation (R2SA) business model has been championed as a low-cost entry point into property investment. Promoted heavily by property education courses, this strategy involved leasing residential properties, forming Limited Companies, and subletting those properties as short-term lets under the Tour Operators’ Margin Scheme (TOMS). However, the recent HMRC v Sonder Europe Ltd Upper Tribunal ruling has turned this model into a potential financial disaster.

The implications are far-reaching, not just for future VAT liabilities but also for historical tax years. HMRC may now revisit past VAT filings, leaving businesses and directors scrambling to assess their exposure—and in some cases, protect their personal assets.


The Ruling That Changed Everything

The Sonder Europe ruling confirmed that many R2SA businesses cannot use TOMS to reduce VAT liabilities. Key findings from the Tribunal included:

  1. Long-Term Leases: Properties leased on a long-term basis for subletting as short-term accommodation do not qualify as services purchased for resale under TOMS.
  2. Property Modifications: Furnishing or adapting properties disqualifies them from TOMS, which requires minimal processing.
  3. Historical VAT Risks: HMRC has the authority to assess and reclaim underpaid VAT, with potential penalties and interest.

The ruling forces businesses to account for VAT on the full value of their supplies rather than just their profit margins. This could result in an effective 20% increase in tax liability—a crippling burden for many.


Is HMRC Targeting Directors Personally?

The decision also raises a critical question: will HMRC attempt to pierce the corporate veil? For R2SA businesses operated through Limited Companies, directors often believed they were shielded from personal liability. However, HMRC could pursue directors under certain circumstances, including:

  • Fraud or Misrepresentation: If HMRC finds evidence of deliberate underreporting of VAT or misuse of TOMS, directors could be held personally liable.
  • Improper Use of Company Funds: Dividends or loans taken by directors while VAT liabilities were underpaid could lead to accusations of misuse.
  • Recklessness or Negligence: Failing to seek proper tax advice or ignoring VAT obligations may expose directors to claims of negligence.
  • Insolvent Trading: Directors of companies that continue trading while unable to meet tax debts could face personal liability under insolvency laws.

One tax specialist warned, “HMRC is becoming increasingly aggressive in pursuing directors personally when they believe there has been abuse of the corporate structure.”


Historical VAT Liabilities: How Far Back Could HMRC Go?

Under VAT legislation, HMRC can reopen past returns for up to four years—or up to 20 years in cases of deliberate misrepresentation. This means R2SA businesses that followed TOMS guidance could face:

  • Backdated VAT Assessments: Full VAT liability on all rental income, not just the margin.
  • Penalties and Interest: Additional charges that can double or triple the total liability.
  • Personal Financial Risk: In cases of negligence or misuse, directors could find themselves personally liable.

“The combination of backdated liabilities and penalties could bankrupt even well-established businesses,” one VAT adviser noted.


The Role of Property Education Courses

Many R2SA operators were introduced to this business model through property education courses that painted a simplified picture of VAT compliance. While these courses promised a fast track to wealth, they often failed to address the complexities of VAT law and the risks of using TOMS.

One affected operator shared, “I followed the course advice to the letter. Now I’m looking at years of backdated VAT and wondering how I’ll pay.”

The Sonder Europe ruling raises the question of whether these course providers could face scrutiny for promoting models that may not align with VAT regulations.


What Should R2SA Businesses Do Now?

If your business followed the R2SA model, it’s vital to act immediately to mitigate potential risks:

  1. Review Past VAT Filings: Work with a VAT specialist to assess whether your filings comply with the latest interpretation of TOMS.
  2. Engage Legal and Tax Advisers: Seek professional advice to understand your liabilities and options for addressing them.
  3. Proactively Approach HMRC: Voluntary disclosure of any underpaid VAT can reduce penalties and demonstrate good faith.
  4. Consider Restructuring: Businesses may need to explore new models that minimise VAT risks while remaining compliant.
  5. Protect Personal Finances: Avoid actions that could blur the line between personal and corporate funds, which may expose directors to personal liability.

Could the Case Be Appealed?

There is still a possibility that Sonder Europe will appeal the decision to the Supreme Court. While an appeal might buy the industry some time, experts caution that businesses should not rely on this as a long-term solution.

“Even if the case is appealed, the likelihood of overturning the Upper Tribunal’s decision is slim,” one solicitor remarked. “Operators must prepare for the worst and start restructuring now.”


The Future of the R2SA Model

The Sonder Europe ruling signals a seismic shift in the R2SA business model. Operators, property owners, and investors must now grapple with the reality of higher VAT liabilities, increased scrutiny from HMRC, and the potential for significant financial losses.

Questions remain about the viability of this model moving forward:

  • Can operators adapt to the new VAT regime without collapsing under the financial strain?
  • Will property owners face reduced demand for long-term leases?
  • Should HMRC hold education course providers accountable for promoting risky strategies?

Join the Conversation

Are you a property owner, operator, or investor affected by this ruling? Share your thoughts and strategies in the comments below:

  • What steps are you taking to review and address VAT risks?
  • Do you believe education course providers should face accountability?
  • How do you see the R2SA business model evolving in the future?

Let’s work together to navigate this challenging time and ensure a sustainable path forward for the serviced accommodation industry.


Conclusion

The Sonder Europe ruling is a wake-up call for the R2SA industry. With HMRC likely to pursue backdated VAT liabilities and potentially target directors personally, now is the time to act. By seeking expert advice and proactively addressing risks, operators can protect their businesses and personal assets.

Don’t wait for HMRC to knock—be prepared when they do.


Share This Article


Comments

Rupert Chapman

Become a Member

If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!

Sign Up

10:22 AM, 21st January 2025, About 4 weeks ago

Many professionals were somewhat surprised at the FTT decision.

But TOMs is not a relief, nor an optional scheme.

Those who applied TOMs following the FTT decision, based on their circumstances reflecting Sonder, were acting in accordance with the law.

It would be grossly unfair if penalties were applied in such circumstances.

Also some leniency ought to be applied to the payment of VAT.

But I know these sentiments will not be reflected in the approach of HMRC.

The problem is whether they can legitimately continue trading with this new liability that is likely to make them insolvent.

The 14th Feb appeal deadline is the key date for this decision.

Owners who have leased their properties to operators, as opposed to using agency style operators, ought to be mindful that these operators could disappear overnight with their money.

Katy Ann

Become a Member

If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!

Sign Up

21:09 PM, 21st January 2025, About 4 weeks ago

A key point of the UT's decision - overlooked by the FTT - is the distinction between the nature of the property interest acquired by Sonder (namely a leasehold interest) versus the nature of the property interest granted by Sonder to the holidaymakers (namely a licence to occupy). I’d be surprised if Sonder's advisers could see a way round that to argue successfully that the supply provided by Sonder was materially unchanged from the supply provided to them. Let’s see what happens. Also worth bearing in mind that now we've left the EU, I believe it’s open to the UK government to change domestic VAT law unilaterally. I guess they might consider doing that if Sonder did appeal successfully and the govt didn’t like the outcome.

Kay Kay

Become a Member

If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!

Sign Up

9:31 AM, 22nd January 2025, About 4 weeks ago

Are Property owner liable for VAT too? Or just operator liable?

Jill Church

Become a Member

If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!

Sign Up

1:10 AM, 23rd January 2025, About 4 weeks ago

Reply to the comment left by Kay Kay at 22/01/2025 - 09:31No, the property owners who let residential property to the "serviced accommodation"
operators will not be liable for any VAT. The property owners rental income is "exempt" so they are not required to be VAT registered.
Basically HMRC have ruled that SA operators should not apply the TOMS method of calculating VAT payable, which means that potentially they have been underpaying HMRC.

Leave Comments

In order to post comments you will need to Sign In or Sign Up for a FREE Membership

[nextend_social_login provider="facebook"] [nextend_social_login provider="twitter"]
or

Don't have an account? Sign Up

Landlord Automated Assistant Read More