- CV X developed a new construction project and obtained a sales option from housing corporation A in 2010.
- CV X exercised the sales option in 2013.
- The tax authority imposed a VAT assessment on CV X for the years 2013 and 2014.
- CV X argued that the sales of the new construction properties in 2013 fell under the transitional arrangement for the VAT rate increase.
- The lower court agreed with CV X, but the higher court ruled in favor of the tax authority.
- The Supreme Court upheld the decision of the higher court, stating that the transitional measure only applied to agreements for the delivery of a property, not agreements for the exercise of a sales option.
Source: futd.nl
Note that this post was (partially) written with the help of AI. It is always useful to review the original source material, and where needed to obtain (local) advice from a specialist.
Latest Posts in "Netherlands"
- Rental of Workroom by Silent Partnership: Entrepreneurship Confirmed, VAT Deduction Denied Due to Private Use
- Court Rules Taxpayer Responsible for Late ICP Filing Despite Advisor’s Involvement
- Update on NCTS Disruption: Message Re-injection Delayed, Next Update Expected Tomorrow Morning
- Memorandum in response to the report on the Bill on the retention of a reduced VAT rate on culture, media and sport
- Netherlands Sets Out Four-Phase Plan for Implementing EU ViDA
