Now that the interested party invokes the exemption, the burden of proof for the application of this exemption rests with the interested party. This means that the interested party must make a plausible case that his activities meet the conditions of the education exemption. The Court is of the opinion that the interested party has not met the burden of proof. Although the Court has no doubt that the interested party has trained its employees properly, the activities of the employees do not fall under the exemption. [the foundation] pays for the provision of ICT services, of course by trained employees, and not for the training of those employees or [the foundation’s own employees]. There is no question of providing education within the meaning of Article 11(1)(o) of the VAT Act.
Source: rechtspraak.nl
