Připomínky k implementaci pravidel pro DPH v e-commerce

CÍL ZÁMĚRU EVROPSKÉ KOMISE

Svaz průmyslu a dopravy ČR uplatnil připomínky k záměru návrhu implementačních pravidel k DPH v rámci e-commerce. Změnám, které byly v této oblasti přijaty, jsme se věnovali v článku zde. K těmto změnám připravila Evropská komise prováděcí pravidla (naleznete zde).

HLAVNÍ PŘIPOMÍNKY SVAZU PRŮMYSLU

Svaz průmyslu a dopravy ČR v rámci konzultace uplatnil tyto konkrétní připomínky (k nahlédnutí rovněž zde):

It is obvious that EC must implement regulation on the incoming VAT/E-Commerce package.

Firstly, we have remark to the Draft Implementing regulation document – on page 2 article (8) is stated: “Carrying out administrative enquiries about taxable persons making use of one of the special schemes should not create unnecessary administrative burdens for the Member State of identification. … (etc.)”. Our remark is that we appreciate the effort of diminishing existing administrative requirements but there must be clear effort to diminish administrative burden even for companies. Basic idea of reforming of OSS into a more effective tool for e-commerce is helpful and appreciable. Simplification of requirements for VAT agenda for special kinds of business via new regulation is obvious, but we would emphasize the necessity of emphasis on “de-bureaucratization” towards all target groups (e.g. even to business).

Next, the draft legislation is focused on the exchange of records and administrative inquiries between national tax authorities. Businesses will however need more clarity on the technical requirements they need to comply with (please see detailed questions below) as well as sufficient lead-time to implement these requirements in business processes. We therefore call for additional detailed technical specifications for businesses and a transition period of at least 3 months after the publication of such technical specifications.

It is also key that the requirements are harmonized both legally and in practice as much as possible to minimize the administrative burden on businesses and to ensure a smooth transition post go-live. Although the additional detail on the data requirements in the annex are welcomed, we ask to limit the required data points to the ones that are critical for the effective audit of the legislation. For example, the XML structure mandates the provision of personal identifying information for customers (i.e. personal names). For effective audit purposes, we believe this data point should be limited to the country of delivery only in line with Article 63c of the VAT Implementing Regulation. All data points going beyond what is required under article 63c of the VAT Implementing Regulation should be optional.

We also add detailed questions:

1. Mandatory .V. Non mandatory fields: Confirmation if the mandatory fields in the draft regulation will apply to all 27 member states and are they a minimum required data set. Question: The non-mandatory fields are these optional for businesses or can the 27 member states make them mandatory and if it is the latter when can businesses expect confirmation from each member state?
2. XML technical specification: Clarification from the EU relating to the XML technical specification of the following points: A) Will special characters allowed in the data fields (i.e. Chinese alphabet/@)?; B) Will the sales figures declared have to be exact or rounded up/down?; C) Will the net sales figure or sales and returns figures have to be declared and; D) Will the XML upload allow a negative sales figure?
3. Encryption of XML: Clarification of the expected encryption requirements (GPG or PGP) for the sensitive data required to be shared.
4. Business Support: Will there be technical support or the ability to discuss XML validation/upload issues with the tax authorities. When will this be confirmed and details provided to businesses?
5. Expected tax authority timelines for data share XML requests: Is it expected by the tax authorities that businesses will have the XML data share files ready for August 21, in line with the first deemed reseller reporting deadlines? Or will there be a flexible transition approach giving businesses time to implement the data share requirements and resolve technical issues?