The plaintiff is based in the Netherlands. She is part of a group of companies established in several Member States. The head office is located in Germany. The services provided to the claimant by the head office and other companies belonging to the group established outside the Netherlands lead to taxation for the claimant. The plaintiff argues that there is an obstacle to the freedom of establishment, because the territorial boundary of the fiscal unity confronts her with taxation that would not otherwise have been there. After all, in the case of a fiscal unity, mutual benefits are not taxed. The court ruled that the plaintiff is not hindered in her freedom of establishment. Nor has it become plausible that there is a similar case with companies that can form a fiscal unity.
Source: rechtspraak.nl
Latest Posts in "Netherlands"
- Response to Follow-up Questions on VAT Increase Impact Analysis for Accommodation Sector, March 2026
- Fuel Retailers Urge Tax Cuts as Pump Prices Soar, Warn Tanken Becoming Unaffordable
- Brokerage Fees Only Partially Deductible Due to Link with Agricultural Exemption, Court Rules
- Dutch Tax Authority Switching to Rabobank Account Numbers from May 1, 2026: What to Know
- Despite the absence of a tax representative, the application of the zero rate
