Fernando Matesanz of Spanish VAT Services looks at a case that focuses on the controversial issue of VAT penalties and considers whether the latest judgments from the ECJ are moving towards a harmonised criterion.
Source: internationaltaxreview.com
See also
- C-210/91
- C-110/99
- C-262/99
- C-181/04
- C-502/07
- C-188/09
- C-385/09 (Nidera Handelscompagnie BV) – Right to get a refund of VAT if the taxpayer was not identified as a taxable person for VAT purposes
- C-424/12 (Fatorie) – No deduction of VAT in case reverse-charge should have been applied
- C-272/13
- C-183/14 (Salomie and Oltean) – Reclassification by the national tax authority of a transaction as an economic activity subject to VAT
- C-564/15 (Farkas) – Undue payment of VAT. Purchaser must be able to adress his application for reimbursement to the tax authority directly in case of insolvency of the seller
- C-895/19 (A. (Exercice du droit à déduction)) – Timing of exercising right to deduct VAT on intra-community acquisitions of goods
- C-935/19 (Grupa Warzywna) – Provisions on the possibility of imposing a 20% VAT sanction by tax authorities do not comply with the provisions of the VAT Directive
Latest Posts in "European Union"
- Questions to ECJ – Quick Fixes Under Scrutiny: Is an EU VAT ID a Substantive Requirement for Zero-Rating?
- Briefing document & Podcast: ECJ VAT C-622/23 (RHTB) – VAT Implications in Work Contract Cancellations
- New GC VAT Case: C-689/25 (British Company) – No details known yet
- Comments on ECJ Case C-726/23 (Arcomet) – ECJ clarifies VAT rules for Transfer Pricing adjustments in intragroup transactions
- ETAF Calls for Modern, Harmonised VAT Rules for EU Travel and Tourism Sector Reform
