- Holding and financing company NV X provided loans for interest
- NV X issued bonds for a refinancing project in 2018
- Foreign service providers rendered services to NV X in 2020
- NV X argued it was not liable for reverse VAT in the Netherlands
- Court ruled NV X had not proven it was not based in the Netherlands
- Court rejected NV X’s claim of VAT-exempt mediation services
- Economic reality is a fundamental criterion for VAT application
- Contractual provisions can be disregarded if they do not reflect economic reality
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"
- VAT Liability of Dutch Kadaster’s Tactical Management Services for DSO-LV under Economic Activity Criteria
- Court Divided on VAT Abuse: Car Sales to Directors at Below-Market Prices and Tax Implications
- Dutch Supreme Court: Abuse of Law in VAT on Underpriced Car Sale by Holding Company to DGA
- Dutch Supreme Court Rejects VAT Refund Appeal; Lower Court Ruling Upheld Without Further Explanation
- Netherlands Raises VAT on Short-Stay Accommodation to 21% Effective January 2026
