Analysis of various cases of the European Court of Justice (ECJ).
Rules intended to prevent tax avoidance often place the burden of proof on the taxpayer. Such an allocation of the burden of proof is incompatible with the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ).
In this article, the authors provide examples of Netherlands and Italian tax laws that are in breach of the allocation of the burden of proof as prescribed by the ECJ. As these examples concern types of rules applied in other EU Member States, the authors expect that there will be similar issues in many other EU Member States.
Source Frederico Franconi/IBFD
Latest Posts in "European Union"
- CJEU Clarifies 0% VAT Documentation for Intra-Community Supplies: Key 2025 Ruling for Businesses
- Key CBAM Changes for EU Importers Effective January 2026: New Thresholds and Reporting Rules
- GENA Urges EU to Harmonise and Expand Digital E-Invoicing in Public Procurement Reform
- Audit Office Monitors Council’s VAT Filing Amid Potential £600k HMRC Fine Risk
- EU VAT Gap 2023: Key Findings, Country Comparisons, and Policy Insights from Mind the Gap Report












