Granting access to the performances and providing the intermission drink for VAT purposes must be regarded as distinct and independent performances. In that case, it is not in dispute that the inspector correctly taxed the alcoholic intermission drinks at the regular VAT rate. In view of what the Supreme Court considered in the judgment of 18 November 2022 under 3.3.2, the Court sees reason to rule that in this case too no tax interest should be calculated over the period that the inspector, and therefore not the interested party, had the tax amount due.
Source: rechtspraak.nl
Latest Posts in "Netherlands"
- Netherlands: Shadow Accounting Triggers Reversed Burden of Proof and VAT Assessments
- Netherlands: FIOD Arrests Man in €240,000 EU VAT Carousel Fraud Probe
- Dutch entrepreneur disputes €33,000 VAT debt in accountant disciplinary case
- Netherlands Urged to Speed Up E-Invoicing to Combat VAT Fraud
- Netherlands: VAT Assessment on Furnished Holiday Rentals and Small Business Scheme Misuse
