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"
- VAT IOSS Scheme: Intermediary Registration Available from April 2026 for Non-EU Businesses
- Customs and VAT Fraud Cost EU €45 Billion in 2025, Officials Warn
- EPPO Investigates Record 3,600 Customs Fraud Cases in 2025, Damages Reach 67 Billion Euros
- Intermediary Registration for UK Import One Stop Shop Scheme Opens April 2026
- EPPO Uncovers €45 Billion VAT and Customs Fraud, Reshaping EU Criminal Landscape in 2025













