- Coöperatie X UA provided insurance services, including coverage for damages in other EU and EER countries.
- X appointed foreign claims handlers to handle damages in other countries.
- X had separate entities in Germany, Belgium, and France to handle most of the claims, while non-affiliated individuals were appointed in other countries.
- X had two phases for handling damages: the insurance contract phase (service 1) and the claims handling phase (service 2).
- X initially treated the services of the claims handlers as taxable services and paid VAT on them.
- X believed that the VAT paid on the claims handling services was wrongly paid.
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 "European Union"
- EU Council Approves Customs Duty Cuts on Ukrainian Agri-Food Products
- EC Report: Three EU Countries Account for 75% of VAT Rate Deviations
- EU Report Reveals Major Disparities in VAT Rate Exception Applications
- Roadtrip through ECJ Cases – Focus on Place of Supply of Intra-Community Acquisitions – ”Triangulation” (Art. 42)
- Briefing document & Podcast: C-536/08 (X) and C-539/08 (Facet Trading) – No deduction on Intra-EU acquisitions taxed at the MS of identification of the purchaser, instead of the destination
