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"
- Netherlands VAT Guide for Cross-Border Amazon FBA Sellers
- Shareholder of Belize Company Cannot Challenge VAT Assessment and Penalties
- No VAT insurance exemption due to lack of direct link between premium payment and pension benefit
- Industry Pension Fund May Partially Deduct VAT on Execution Costs for Employee Services
- VAT exemption for debt counselling as of Jan 1. 2026
