While the ECJ concurred that the provisions give rise to distortions of competition and go against the principal of fiscal neutrality, it said: “It must be borne in mind that, in accordance with the settled case-law of the Court, the interpretation of a provision of EU law in the light of its context and aims cannot have the result of depriving the clear and precise wording of that provision of all effectiveness. Thus, where the meaning of a provision of EU law is absolutely plain from its very wording, the Court cannot depart from that interpretation.”
Source: answerconnect.cch.com
See also
- Summary of ECJ C-180/22 (Mensing) – VAT paid on intra-EU acquisition is to be included in taxable amount under profit margin scheme
- C-180/22 (Mensing) – Judgment – VAT paid on intra-EU acquisition is to be included in taxable amount under profit margin scheme
- C-264/17 (Mensing) – Judgment – Margin scheme on works of art; right to deduct input VAT by taxable dealer
- 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"
- Advocate-General: Transfer Pricing Adjustments for Intra-Group Goods Likely Subject to VAT Compliance
- Transfer Pricing Adjustments Affect VAT Only if They Alter Agreed Transaction Price Between Parties
- A-G CJEU: Transfer Pricing Adjustments Are VAT Price Corrections for Previous Sales, Not Services
- AG Kokott: Transfer Pricing Adjustments Affect VAT Only if They Change Consideration, Not Just Profit Allocation
- EU Introduces Flat EUR 3 Customs Duty Per Item for Low-Value Imports from July 2026
