The Court found that the 24 apartments were rented furnished, with an inventory package, including electricity, gas, water, internet and television. According to the Court, the short-stay exception applied to this rental. The 24 apartments were equipped for short stays. According to the Court, it was not necessary that the temporary letting of the 24 apartments by BV X was identical to the provision of accommodation by hotel and holiday companies. It was sufficient that the provision of the accommodation was comparable enough to compete with such companies. That was the case if (as in the situation of BV X) the accommodation was equipped for a short stay without the temporary resident being responsible for the care of the inventory. The fact that certain circumstances were different at hotel and holiday companies did not therefore mean that the rental of the 24 apartments by BV X had to be classified differently.
Source: futd.nl
Latest Posts in "Netherlands"
- Sunscreen Taxed at 21% VAT Because Marketing Authorization Was Missing
- VAT Exemptions for a Member of a Fiscal Unity
- Medical VAT exemption for VAT group requires member to meet all conditions
- VAT Reduced Rate Denied for Sunscreen Products Under Dutch Tax Law
- General Court VAT Case – T-444/25 (Cavert) – Judgment – VAT Exemptions for Public Interest Activities within a VAT Group Require Individual Member Compliance
