»Ê¹ÚÌåÓýapp

• It must be limp, i.e. not printed on stiff paper, laminated paper or card (but see VBOOKS3340 regarding function.
• It must be designed to be held in the hand for reading by individuals.

Limpness

Until 1 June 1990, card-based single sheet products were accepted as falling within the definition of leaflets, and were therefore eligible for zero-rating. However, in the Tribunal decision in Panini Publishing Ltd, the Chairman stated that a leaflet must be limp, and generally if not inevitably on unlaminated paper. This led to a policy review, under which we excluded single sheet products printed on card from the relief. »Ê¹ÚÌåÓýapp following items became specifically standard-rated:

• 1 June 1990: menu cards, cassette inlay cards, cookery cards, and any other products printed on card or laminated paper
• 1 September 1990: cigarette cards
• 1 May 1991: knitting patterns.

Articles such as membership cards and fixture lists will also usually fail this test.

Orders of service, whether printed on paper or card, became zero-rated with effect from 20 December 1996. »Ê¹ÚÌåÓýappre is no definition of limpness and it is really a matter of best judgement. You should resist any attempt to set rigid guidelines - such as grammage of paper - as these would have no basis in law and would be unworkable in practice.

»Ê¹ÚÌåÓýapp main Tribunal which supports this policy is Panini Publishing Ltd (LON/88/166Y) (VTD 3876). This ruled that stickers bearing reproduction photographs were not leaflets, as they were too stiff.

Further support is given by the decision in Marylebone Cricket Club (LON/81/88) (1074), which concerned score cards sold at cricket matches. In ruling that these were not leaflets, the Chairman stated that a leaflet was a flimsy piece of paper, and a score card is not a leaflet because the paper is too stiff.

Top of page

Designed to be held in the hand for reading by individuals

»Ê¹ÚÌåÓýappre are some articles - for example, car stickers - which are small enough to be held in the hand, but are intended for display. »Ê¹ÚÌåÓýappse articles are standard-rated. Several tribunals have provided examples of articles which are not leaflets for this reason.

»Ê¹ÚÌåÓýapp main precedent case is Arbroath Herald (EDN 75/9) (VTD 182), which considered car stickers. »Ê¹ÚÌåÓýappse were too small to be posters, but, nevertheless, did not qualify as leaflets, as they were designed to be read by the public at large. »Ê¹ÚÌåÓýapp following decisions confirm this thinking.

Pace Group Communications Ltd (MAN/77/210) (VTD 510) ruled that window banners and door stickers were not leaflets.

Cronsvale Ltd [1983] (VATTR 313) ruled that advertisements for public meetings were more appropriate for public display and thus ineligible for relief.

Greyform Publications Ltd [1988] VATTR 115 (3158) ruled that a wall sheet giving information about greyhound racing was too large to qualify.

Hall of Names (LON/91/1256) (VTD 8806) considered a family history chart in scroll format. This was small enough to be held in the hand and read, but was designed for display and was therefore ruled not to be a leaflet.