- The European Court of Justice (ECJ) has ruled in the Cabot case that a Swiss principal does not have a fixed establishment in the country where its toll manufacturer, a legally distinct group entity, is established.
- The concept of VAT fixed establishment has been a source of litigation in several Member States, causing legal uncertainty for businesses.
- The notion of fixed establishment is important when assessing the place of supply rule, VAT liability, and cash flow perspective.
- The Cabot case provides clarity on the interpretation of VAT fixed establishment and offers clear guidance in relation to recent technical positions taken by some national tax authorities.
- PwC and PwC Legal assisted Cabot Corporation in the case.
Source PwC
See also
- ECJ C-232/22 (Cabot Plastics Belgium) – Judgment – Toll manufacturing with ancillary services does not lead to Fixed Establishment
- Summary of ECJ-232/22 (Cabot) – No fixed establishment due to lack of human and technical resources even if ancillary services are performed, exclusivity
- Join the Linkedin Group on ECJ VAT Cases, click HERE
- For an overview of ECJ cases per article of the EU VAT Directive, click HERE
Latest Posts in "European Union"
- Virtual Currency Taxation: Analyzing VAT Implications in Gaming Post Case C-472/24
- EU Targets Chinese Customs Fraud Networks Amid Rising Organized Crime Concerns
- 2025 Update: VAT Rates Across European Union Countries and Key Reduced Rate Categories
- Peppol International (PINT) Specifications for the European Union – EU PINT Billing V1.0.0
- ECJ Customs C-86/24 (CS STEEL a.s.) – Judgment – EU Court Rules on Non-Preferential Origin and Substantial Transformation
