It is precisely X’s laconic reaction to the warning (formulated in a fairly general sense) and his laxity/negligence in taking his tax obligations in this respect seriously, according to the Court of Appeal, should have prompted B to take additional measures, all the more because the reaction of X, in any case, it clearly emerged that the border for making a declaration in Belgium had been exceeded. However, the Court agreed with B that the damage that had occurred was also the result of X’s own negligence, once warned, to arrange for VAT returns in Belgium or at least to provide B with the necessary information
Source: FUTD
Latest Posts in "Belgium"
- Belgium Launches Next Phase of VAT Chain Modernization Effective May 1, 2026
- Belgium to Launch VAT Provision Account, Replacing Current System from May 2026
- Advocate General: VAT Exemption for Credit Management Applies Only to Current, Not Original, Lender
- Belgian VAT Chain Modernisation: New System and Rules Effective from 1 May 2026
- Key VAT Chain Changes from May 2026: New Accounts, Simplified Management, and Updated Refund Rules
