Plaintiff operates an app. The app is an e-wallet with which payments can be made with the smartphone. The court is of the opinion that the defendant has not made it plausible that the plaintiff’s services have the characteristic and essential functions of payments or remittances. The respondent has also not made it plausible that the plaintiff’s services consist of mediation. This leads to the conclusion that Plaintiff is entitled to deduct input VAT.
Source: rechtspraak.nl (Dutch)
Latest Posts in "Netherlands"
- Netherlands Raises Accommodation VAT to 21%, Keeps 9% Rate for Culture, Media, and Sports
- Uncertainty Over VAT on Pension Premiums: State Secretary Maintains Policy Amid Conflicting Court Rulings
- Uncertainty Over VAT on Pension Premiums: State Secretary Maintains Policy Amid Conflicting Court Rulings
- Pension Administration Remains a Single VAT-Exempt Service Pending Supreme Court Decision
- State Secretary Rejects Court Rulings: Pension Premiums Remain VAT-Exempt Pending Supreme Court Decision
