TC09617 - [2025] UKFTT 01018 (TC)
First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber)

TC09617 - [2025] UKFTT 01018 (TC)

Fecha: 13-Jun-2025

Deos’ pattern of trading with Estanza

Deos’ pattern of trading with Estanza

32.

The general pattern of Deos’ trading with Estanza was as follows:

(1)

a trading cycle would begin with Estanza making known to Deos that it could offer a given amount of some particular type of electronic consumer goods, at a given price;

(2)

Deos would then seek an onward buyer (including by offering it on IPT), offering the price equal to that quoted by Estanza plus a mark-up (generally 1-3%); the buyers from Deos were invariably EU companies;

(3)

once Deos found an onward buyer at a price it was prepared to accept (about which there would be some negotiation), it went back to Estanza and confirmed terms (via Estanza’s pro forma invoice to Deos, and Deos’ purchase order to Estanza);

(4)

Estanza used Unicorn to hold goods; before paying for the goods, Deos verified that they existed, were as described and were in good condition, by having Unicorn conduct a stock inspection and provide an inspection report; Unicorn also gave Deos an excel spreadsheet of the serial numbers of each unit in the consignment; and Deos provided these serial numbers, and Unicorn’s inspection report, to its customer for verification;

(5)

once Deos received confirmation of a satisfactory stock inspection, it paid Estanza for the goods, and took title to them in Unicorn; this preceded Estanza’s being paid by its customer;

(6)

Deos’ customer would send a purchase order stipulating the terms that had been agreed, which Does would sign and return;

(7)

only after payment had been received in Deos’ account would Deos instruct Unicorn to ship the goods to its customer. Deos received an endorsed copy of the international consignment note that travelled with the goods.

33.

Deos did not generally take out insurance for the goods it bought from Estanza and sold on. This was because Mr Smith understood Unicorn to carry insurance for the stock it held.

34.

In the purchases, Deos paid Estanza for the stock (or, in two instances, attempted to do so before the payment cut-off for the day) before it was paid by its customers