When it comes to providing online service on YouTube platform, there are generally four types of scenarios.
Nature of Transaction: YouTube provides a platform for YouTubers to upload videos, acting as a service provider, with YouTubers as service recipients.
Tax Implications: Under Section 13(12) of the IGST Act, 2017, this transaction is treated as ‘Import of Service’ since YouTube (service provider) is outside India, and the YouTuber (service recipient) is in India. However, since YouTube does not charge YouTubers for this service, there is no GST liability for the YouTuber under the Reverse Charge Mechanism (RCM).
Nature of Transaction: YouTube shares a portion of ad revenue with YouTubers. Here, YouTubers are service providers, and YouTube is the service recipient.
Tax Implications: This is considered ‘Export of Service’ as per Section 2(6) of the IGST Act, 2017. The service is zero-rated under GST, meaning no GST is payable, but the YouTuber must comply with certain conditions like filing a Letter of Undertaking (LUT).
Nature of Transaction: YouTube acts as a service provider to advertisement companies.
Tax Implications: This scenario also falls under ‘Import of Service’, and the advertisement companies (service recipients) are liable to pay GST under RCM.
Nature of Transaction: YouTube offers a premium subscription service to individuals.
Tax Implications: This is an ‘Import of Service’ transaction. However, since the recipient is a non-taxable online recipient, YouTube is responsible for discharging GST as per section 14 of the IGST Act, 2017.
Example: Imagine a YouTuber, Priya, based in Delhi, who uploads cooking tutorials on YouTube. In this case, YouTube (located in the US) is the service provider, and Priya is the service recipient. According to the IGST Act, this setup falls under ‘Import of Service’. However, since YouTube doesn’t charge Priya for uploading her videos, there is no GST liability for her under the Reverse Charge Mechanism.
Example: Imagine a YouTuber, Priya, based in Delhi, who uploads cooking tutorials on YouTube. In this case, YouTube (located in the US) is the service provider, and Priya is the service recipient. According to the IGST Act, this setup falls under ‘Import of Service’. However, since YouTube doesn’t charge Priya for uploading her videos, there is no GST liability for her under the Reverse Charge Mechanism.
Example: Let’s say Priya’s cooking channel becomes popular, and YouTube starts displaying ads on her videos. YouTube shares a portion of this ad revenue with Priya. This is an ‘Export of Service’, as Priya (in India) is providing content to YouTube (outside India). The transaction is zero-rated under GST, meaning Priya doesn’t have to pay GST on this income. She does, however, need to file a Letter of Undertaking (LUT) to comply with GST regulations.
Example: Suppose an Indian company, Spicy Foods Ltd., decides to advertise its products on YouTube, including on channels like Priya’s. In this scenario, YouTube is the service provider, and Spicy Foods Ltd. is the service recipient. This transaction is classified as ‘Import of Service’ under GST, and Spicy Foods Ltd. is liable to pay GST under the Reverse Charge Mechanism.
Example: An individual, Rohan from Mumbai, subscribes to YouTube Premium to watch videos without ads, including Priya’s cooking tutorials. In this case, YouTube is providing a service to Rohan. As per GST laws, this is an ‘Import of Service’. However, since Rohan is a non-taxable online recipient, YouTube (the service provider) is responsible for discharging the GST on this transaction.
In today’s intricate financial landscape, understanding and mastering personal finance is not just a bonus – it’s an essential skill. Daily decisions, from opting for a simple cup of coffee to saving for significant milestones like a home or education have long-lasting implications.
The primary distinction between the two approaches lies in the timing of asset transfer. A gift deed takes effect immediately upon execution, transferring ownership to the donee during the donor’s lifetime. In contrast, a will becomes operative only after the testator’s death. Both methods have their advantages and disadvantages.