- The Supreme Court has ruled that an entrepreneur who is established outside of Sint Maarten but has a permanent establishment there is not considered an entrepreneur established within the tax area.
- X nv, a resort operator in Sint Maarten, had renovation work done by a US-based entrepreneur with a permanent establishment in Sint Maarten.
- The court upheld the additional tax assessment imposed on X nv as the buyer of the renovation work.
- X nv argued that the US entrepreneur should be considered an entrepreneur established in Sint Maarten due to their permanent establishment there.
- However, the Supreme Court disagreed and stated that the BBO (turnover tax) could be levied on X nv as a customer because they are an entrepreneur established within the tax area.
- X nv’s appeal was deemed unfounded, but they will receive non-pecuniary damages of €500 due to the case exceeding a reasonable period of time.
Source Taxlive
Latest Posts in "Netherlands"
- Parcel from China on average € 6 more expensive from January 2026
- No VAT refund for the customer if VAT has not been levied retrospectively at the supplier
- Dutch Court Denies Input VAT Deduction for 2016 Due to Statute of Limitations Expiry
- Preliminary questions to the ECJ in VAT case on the application of the transfer of a totality of assets
- Agreements on the agreement do not lead to intermediary services for financial VAT exemption
