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"
- EU Excise Duty Law: Key Rulings on Direct Delivery, Security Deposits, and Formal Requirements
- Comments on C-158/25: Director Can Challenge Final Tax Assessment in Liability Proceedings
- Webinar Zampa Partners: VAT implications for holding companies (Sept 22)
- Roadtrip through ECJ Cases – Focus on ”Exemption – The ”leasing or letting of immovable property” (Art. 135(1)(l))
- Flashback on ECJ Cases C-108/99 (Cantor Fitzgerald International) – Accepting a lease assignment for payment is taxable, not exempt
