The Civil Chamber of the District Court of Noord-Holland ruled that Q violated his duty of care in September/October 2017. He has therefore failed to fulfill his obligations under the contract for services.
A and B operate a webshop in party supplies. In 2017, the company is contributed to P bv. Q carries out administrative work for P bv. In 2018, Q establishes that the threshold amount for distance sales to Belgian consumers has been exceeded. P bv should therefore have filed a VAT return in Belgium. The Belgian tax authorities impose additional VAT assessments on P bv for 2016 and 2017, imposing a penalty and charging penalty interest. P bv requests Q to compensate the damage suffered by it.
Source Taxlive.nl
Latest Posts in "Netherlands"
- Thrift Shops Return to Court Over VAT Collection Dispute
- Customs Court Rules Doctor Role Play Set as Toys, Not Clothing
- Adjustment of VAT deduction for services on immovable property: What can you still do?
- Government Responds to Questions on VAT Increase Impact Analysis for Accommodation
- Heijnen Maintains VAT Increase on Accommodation Despite Predicted Revenue Loss
