The place of supply was the residence of the performer. BV X facilitated the establishment of contact between the performer and the user. According to the Court of Appeal, the inspector had also not made it plausible that BV X concluded agreements in its own name. The argument of the inspector that BV X provided exempt payment services and that it had therefore wrongly deducted all input tax was submitted too late.
Source:
Latest Posts in "Netherlands"
- Mandatory E-Invoicing in the EU: What Does ViDA Mean for Your SME Clients?
- Dutch Tax Authorities Announce Major Changes to 13th Directive VAT Refund Procedure
- ViDA E‑Invoicing and Digital Reporting in the Netherlands: Strategic Choices and Phased Timeline to 2032
- VAT OSS in the Netherlands: Managing Multi-Channel Marketplace Sales and Bookkeeping Challenges
- Cabinet Response to ViDA E-Invoicing and Digital Reporting Report Sent to House of Representatives
