The plaintiff is an occupational pension fund and invokes the exemption contained in Article 11, first paragraph, letter i, third, of the Dutch VAT Act (Wet OB). In the opinion of the District Court, the plaintiff has not met all (four) criteria as established by the ECJ EU, so that she is not comparable to undertakings for collective investment in transferable securities (UCITS) and therefore does not qualify for the exemption. The investment risk of the members of the pension fund is not sufficiently significant to equate it with the risk borne by members of a UCITS.
Source: rechtspraak.nl
Latest Posts in "Netherlands"
- When Is a Theatre Drink a Separate VAT Supply? Lessons from the Dutch Supreme Court
- Fraudulent Employee Purchases Lead to VAT Liability Without Deduction for Company
- Correct VAT Deduction Revision for Rented Business Building After Transfer, Says Advocate General
- No VAT Deduction Allowed for Private Purchases; Municipality Entitled to VAT on Invoiced Amounts
- Judge dismisses ChatGPT analysis as evidence of breach of contract
