Accounting for Uber Eats, Deliveroo & Just Eat: commissions, VAT, reconciliation

Delivery platforms have changed restaurant economics — and complicated its accounting. Between gross revenue, 25–35% commissions, reverse-charge VAT, customer refunds and payout delays, a restaurant can easily report wrong revenue and lose sight of its true margin. Here is the method to account for and reconcile Uber Eats, Deliveroo and Just Eat in 2026.

The most common and costly mistake is to book the net transfer received from the platform as revenue. That is wrong. The restaurant sells to the end customer (the invoicing-mandate scheme used by Uber Eats, Deliveroo and most platforms), so it must record the full price paid by the customer as revenue, at the applicable VAT rate. The platform commission is, separately, an expense. Booking the net amount understates revenue (distorting food cost, margin and prime cost), understates output VAT (reassessment risk), and loses the commission as a deductible expense with its VAT. The rule: gross revenue credited, commission as an expense debited, net payout reconciled in the bank.

For a delivered order of €30 incl. VAT (food at 10%, no alcohol), platform commission 30%: book €27.27 net + €2.73 VAT as revenue; book €9.00 net + VAT commission as an expense (account 622); record the net bank receipt; and balance through a "platform" third-party account (467) that tracks what the platform owes the restaurant between order and payout, net of commissions and refunds.

On sales, delivery of prepared meals is treated as immediate consumption: 10% on food, 20% on alcoholic drinks ordered alongside (see our restaurant VAT article). On the commission, it is a 20% service. Key technical point: when the platform invoices from another EU member state, VAT is reverse-charged by the restaurant — it collects and deducts the VAT on the commission simultaneously. The exact scheme depends on the terms and the invoicing entity, so read the commission invoices, not just the payout statements.

Platform statements contain far more than sales: customer refunds (cancelled order, missing item, dispute), adjustments, service fees, co-funded promotions. Refunds reduce revenue and the related output VAT; co-funded promotions must be split correctly; ancillary fees (in-app advertising, equipment) are expenses distinct from the commission. Without reconciliation these create gaps between theoretical revenue and bank payouts — gaps that, in delivery, commonly reach 3–5% of delivery revenue.

Best practice is a weekly reconciliation: for each platform, check that gross revenue − commissions − refunds = net amount received in the bank. Any gap is investigated immediately, while the data is available. This is what lets you file the right VAT and measure the real margin of the delivery channel. We build it into every delivery-led restaurant engagement.

Beyond accounting, delivery is a management question. With 25–35% commission, a dish at 30% food cost leaves a far thinner margin after commission and packaging than dine-in. Delivery is only worthwhile if it absorbs already-committed fixed costs, brings incremental volume without cannibalising higher-margin dine-in sales, and runs a delivery menu designed for margin. That is exactly what a margin-by-channel view reveals — see our article on restaurant profitability.

Not all platforms contract the same way, and the legal scheme changes the accounting. Under the invoicing mandate (most common — Uber Eats, Deliveroo), the restaurant sells to the end customer; the platform is an intermediary invoicing on the restaurant's behalf and taking a commission — the restaurant books gross customer revenue and the commission as an expense. Under buy-resell, the platform buys the dishes from the restaurant and resells them in its own name; the restaurant invoices only the platform, net, and never sees the final customer price — the commission is embedded in the gap between the price to the platform and the customer price. The applicable scheme is in the signed terms, not in habit. Getting it wrong means getting revenue, the VAT base and margin wrong. We check each platform's contract terms before fixing the accounting setup.

Facing 25–35% commissions, many operators build a direct-order channel — click and collect or own-delivery via their own site or app. The benefit is twofold: the restaurant keeps the full customer price, with no platform commission, and crucially recovers the customer data platforms never share. Accounting-wise it is a direct sale: revenue collected via a payment provider (Stripe, PayPal) whose fees (around 1–2%) are far below a platform commission; VAT follows takeaway rules (10% food, 20% alcohol). The real issue is strategic, not accounting: a direct channel is built, not decreed — but as it scales it mechanically improves margin versus platforms. Tracking margin by channel (see our profitability article) measures this gain precisely.

Three principles: book gross revenue (never net), treat the commission as an expense with the right VAT (often reverse-charged), and reconcile weekly. That is the condition for correct VAT and a readable delivery margin. For the full set-up, see our restaurant accounting support and our complete 2026 restaurant accounting guide.

Updated 3 June 2026. This article sets out general accounting schemes for delivery platforms; the exact VAT treatment depends on the terms and the invoicing entity. Sources: BOFiP, French Tax Code.