According to BV X, a showroom or website was not necessary because the trade often took place in a more or less private setting. According to the District Court, BV X had not made this concrete with objective data. It had not submitted any documents showing how it had attempted to gain a position on the market for exclusive cars and which channels or contacts it had used.
Source: FUTD
Latest Posts in "Netherlands"
- Netherlands 2026 Tax Plan: VAT Reversal, Property Rules, and Cross-Border Compliance Changes
- Court Ruling on Customs Debt Liability and Warehouse Regulation Compliance in Noord-Holland Case
- Supreme Court Ruling on VAT Refund Request and Objection Admissibility, September 12, 2025
- Court Denies Zero VAT Rate for Intra-Community Supplies Due to Insufficient Evidence
- Court Ruling on Tax Assessment and EU Defense Rights Principle Compliance
