VATupdate

ECJ VAT Cases – Pending cases

Last update: October 21, 2021

    • C-627/21 (Administraţia Judeţeană a Finanţelor Publice Sibiu and Direcţia Generală Regională a Finanţelor Publice Braşov) – Not yet published
    • C-616/21 (Gmina L.) – Not yet published
    • C-615/21 (Napfény-Toll) – Not yet published
    • C-612/21 (Gmina O.) – Not yet published
    • C-596/21 (Finanzamt M) – Not yet published
    • C-550/21 (Leonardo) – Not yet published
    • C-519/20 (DGRFP Cluj)  – Not yet published
      • A Romanian Case
    • C-482/21 (Euler Hermes) – Question
      • A Hungaria Case
      • Exemption
    • C-461/21 (Cartrans Preda) – Question
      • A Romanian Case
      • Taxable amount upon importation

    • C-459/21 (The Navigator Company and Navigator Pulp Figueira) – Facts known
      • A Portuguese Case
      • Deduction of VAT vs. Corporate Income Tax

    • C-458/21 (CIG Pannónia Életbiztosító) – Question
      • A Hungarian Case
      • Medical exemption for service used by an insurance company
    • C-398/21 (Conseil national des barreaux and Others) – Question
      • A French Case
      • Reportable Cross-Border Arrangements (DAC6)
    • C-397/21 (HUMDA) – Question
      • A Hungarian Case
      • Refund of wrongly charged VAT when the issuer of the invoice has gone into liquidation
    • C-378/21 (Finanzamt Österreich) – Question
      • An Austian Case
      • Is invoiced VAT due, and are correction invoices needed, in case they are addressed to consumers and there is no risk of loss of revenue?

    • C-368/21 (Hauptzollamt Hamburg) – Question
      • A German Case
      • Place of importation for VAT purposes of a means of transport registered in a third country and brought into the EU

    • C-330/21 (The Escape Center) – Question
      • A Belgian Case
      • VAT rate applicable to he right to use sports facilities if no individual/group guidance is provided

    • C-294/21 (État du Grand-duché de Luxembourg and Administration de l’enregistrement and des domaines) – Question
      • A Luxembourg Case
      • Place of supply of cruise activities on a section covered by the public international condominium status

    • C-293/21 (Vittamed technologijos) – Question
      • A Lithuanian Case
      • Review of VAT deduction of capital goods in case of liquidation of the taxable person

    • C-267/21 (Uniqa Asigurări) – Question
      • A Romanian Case
      • Place of supply of claims handling and settlement services (B2C)

    • C-250/21 (Szef Krajowej Administracji Skarbowej) – Question
      • A Polish Case
      • Exemption
      • Does the exemption for the granting of credits apply to sub-participation agreements?
    • C-247/21 (Luxury Trust Automobil) – Question
      • An Austrian Case
      • Triangulation, Invoice requirements, Liability to pay VAT
    • C-235/21 ( RAIFFEISEN LEASING) – Question
      • A Slovenian Case
      • Liability to pay VAT
      • Can a written agreement be considered as an invoice?

    • C-227/21 (HA.EN.) – Question
      • A Lithuanian Case
      • Right to deduct VAT
      • Denial of input VAT if the buyer knew or should have known the seller would not pay output VAT

    • C-218/21 (Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira) – Question
      • A Portuguese Case
      • VAT Rate
      • Reduced rate for the repair and maintenance of elevators
    • C-194/21 ( Staatssecretaris van Financiën) – Question
      • A Dutch Case
      • Right to deduct VAT
      • A referral from the Netherlands asking whether Articles 184 and 185 of the VAT Directive are to be interpreted as meaning that a taxable person who, at the time of acquiring goods or services, has failed to deduct input tax (the initial deduction) within the applicable national time limit in accordance with the intended use, is entitled, when an adjustment is made – on the occasion of the subsequent first use of those goods or services – to make that deduction if the actual use at the time of the adjustment does not differ from the intended use? Is the answer affected by the fact that the failure to make the initial deduction does not involve fraud or abuse of rights and that no detrimental impact on the treasury has been established?
    • C-191/21 (Ministère de l’Économie, des Finances and de la Relance) – Not yet published
      • A French Case
    • C-188/21 (Megatherm-Csillaghegy) – Question
      • A Hungarian Case
      • Right to deduct VAT when the tax authorities revoke the Tax Number
    • C-146/21 (DGRFP Bucureşti) – Question
      • A Romanian Case
      • Liability to pay VAT
      • Application of Reverse-Charge before VAT registration

    • C-98/21 (Finanzamt R) – Question
      • A German Case
      • Right to deduct VAT
      • Input VAT recovery by holding for free services to subsidiaries that perform mostly VAT exempt activities
    • C-97/21 (MV – 98) – Question
      • A Bulgarian Case
      • Whether sealing of business premises together with administrative penalty is proportionate for failing to issue invoices

    • C-56/21 („ARVI“ ir ko) – Question
      • A Lithuanian Case
      • Exemption, Right to deduct VAT
      • Option for a VAT taxable sale of real estate to a non/late registered buyer

    • C-714/20 (U.I.) – Question
      • An Italian Case
      • Liability to pay VAT
      • Identifying the person liable to pay import VAT

    • C-697/20 (Dyrektor Izby Skarbowej w L.) – Question
      • A Polish Case
      • Taxable person
      • Treating agricultural spouses as one, or separate VAT taxable persons

    • C-696/20 ( Dyrektor Izby Skarbowej w W.) – Question
      • A Polish Case
      • Taxable transaction, Triangulation
      • Acquisition already taxed due to incorrect designation in chain transaction

    • C-695/20 (Fenix International) – Question
      • A UK Case
      • Taxable transaction
      • Legality of Art. 9a of the Implementing Regulation
    • C-643/20 (Energott) – Question
      • A Hungarian Case
      • Taxable amount, Bad debts
      • Limitation period for VAT on bad debts

    • C-637/20 (DSAB Destination Stockholm) – Question
      • A Swedish Case
      • Taxable transaction
      • City card a multi-purpose voucher?

    • C-612/20 (Happy Education) – Question
      • A Romanian Case
      • Exemption
      • School after school program VAT exempt?

    • C-607/20 (GE Aircraft Engine Services) – Question
      • A UK Case
      • Taxable transaction
      • Issue of retail vouchers to employees

    • C-605/20 (Suzlon Wind Energy Portugal) – Question
      • A Portuguese Case
      • Taxable amount
      • VAT treatment of “free” warranty repairs

    • C-598/20 (Pilsētas zemes dienests) – Question
      • A Latvian Case
      • Exemption
    • C-596/20 (DuoDecad) – Question
      • A Hungarian Case
      • Place of supply of e-commerce support services
    • C-585/20 (BFF Finance Iberia S.A.U.) – Question
      • A Spanish Case
      • Late payment interest
      • Interest also on the VAT amount

    • C-583/20 (EuroChem Agro Hungary) – Question
      • A Hungarian Case
      • Penalty
      • Limitations to member states’ freedom to impose penalties?

    • C-582/20 (SC Cridar Cons SRL) – Question
      • A Romanian Case
      • Right to deduct VAT
      • Refusal of VAT deduction without disposing of objective information about VAT fraud

    • C-570/20 (Direction départementale des finances publiques de la Haute-Savoie) – Question
      • A French Case
      • Duplication of proceedings and penalties of a criminal nature satisfied by national rules

    • C-515/20 (Finanzamt A) – Question
      • A German Case
      • VAT Rate
      • Reduced rate for firewood

    • C-513/20 (Termas Sulfurosas de Alcafache) – Question
      • A Portuguese Case
      • Exemption
      • Is a thermal registration a VAT exempt medical and healthcare service?
    • C-489/20 (Kauno teritorinė muitinė) – AG Opinion
      • A Lithuanian Case
      • Taxable transaction, chargeable event
      • VAT still due if smuggled goods are seized and subsequently confiscated?

    • C-487/20 (Philips Orăştie) – Question
      • A Romanian Case
      • Right to deduct VAT
    • C-398/20 (ELVOSPOL) – Question
      • A Czech Case
      • Taxable amount, Bad debts
    • C-358/20 (Promexor Trade) – Question
      • A Romanian Case
      • VAT registration
    • C-334/20 (Amper Metal) – Question
      • A Hungarian Case
      • Right to deduct VAT
    • C-333/20 (Berlin Chemie A. Menarini) – Question
      • A Romanian Case
      • Place of Supply of Services, Fixed Establishment
      • eting, advertising and regulatory support services, has treated those services as being outside the scope of Romanian VAT, and subject to reverse charge VAT in Germany. The Romanian tax authorities believe, by virtue of its own subsidiary, BC has sufficient human and technical resources at its disposal in Romania to create a fixed establishment there. This would mean BCAM’s services to BC are subject to VAT. The concept of business establishment and fixed establishment is relevant to place of supply questions regarding the provision of services and, whilst branch structures create fixed establishments, the question of whether a subsidiary of a company can create a fixed establishment for a parent company, or other legal entity within the group continues to be the subject of disputes.
    • C-324/20 (Finanzamt B) – Question
      • A German Case
      • Chargeable event, Taxable amount
    • C-281/20 (Ferimet) – Question
      • A Spanish Case
      • Right to deduct VAT
    • C-269/20 (Finanzamt T) – Question
      • A German Case
      • Taxable person, VAT grouping
    • C-228/20 (I GmbH) – AG Opinion
      • A German Case
      • Exemption of hospital & medical care
    • C-156/20 (Zipvit) – AG Opinion
      • A UK Case
      • Right to deduct VAT
      • Topics – Postal services – VAT deduction despite misinterpretation of the VAT Directive – exempt v taxableA UK referral asking, subject to specific circumstances – where a tax authority, the supplier and the trader (who is a taxable person) misinterpret EU VAT legislation and treat a supply, which is taxable at the standard-rate, as exempt from VAT, is the effect of the VAT Directive that the price actually paid is the combination of a net chargeable amount plus VAT such that the trader can claim to deduct input tax under article 168(a) as VAT which was in fact ‘paid’ in respect of that supply? Alternatively, in those circumstances can the trader claim to deduct input tax under article 168(a) as VAT which was ‘due’ in respect of that supply? Does the absence of a VAT invoice impact the trader’s ability to recover the VAT?Is it relevant to investigate whether the supplier would have a defence, whether based on legitimate expectation or otherwise, arising under national law or EU law, to any attempt by the tax authority to issue an assessment requiring it to account for a sum representing VAT in respect of the supply? Is it relevant that the trader knew at the same time as the tax authority and the supplier that the supply was not in fact exempt, or had the same means of knowledge as them, and could have offered to pay the VAT which was due in respect of the supply (as calculated by reference to the commercial price of the supply) so that it could be passed on to the tax authority, but omitted to do so?
    • C-154/20 (Kemwater ProChemie) – Question
      • A Czech Case
      • Right to deduct VAT
    • C-141/20 (Norddeutsche Gesellschaft für Diakonie) – Question
      • A German Case
      • Taxable person, VAT grouping
    • C-90/20 (Apcoa Parking Danmark) – AG Opinion
      • A Danish Case
      • VAT on fees for parking infringements – Private property
      • A Danish referral asking whether Article 2(1)(c) of the VAT Directive is to be interpreted as meaning that control fees for parking infringements on private property constitute consideration for a taxable supply?
    • C-57/20 (Commission v Germany) – Question
      • A German Case
      • Right to deduct VAT
      • A German referral asking whether Article 168(a) of the VAT Directive, read in conjunction with Article 167, conflicts with national law which precludes VAT deduction where a business is entitled to choose the allocation of the costs against private and business use at the time of purchase but a decision on the allocation is not made before the expiry of the deadline for submission of the annual VAT return?C-46/20 (Finanzamt G) – AG Opinion
    • C-9/20 (Grundstücksgemeinschaft Kollaustraße 136) – AG Opinion
      • A German Case
      • Right to deduct VAT
      • A German referral asking, inter alia, whether the right to deduct VAT in accordance with Article 167 of the VAT Directive, without exception, always arises at the time when the deductible tax becomes chargeable, or whether Member States may derogate from this principle?

Sponsors:

Advertisements:

* click here if you have interesting news to share *