Court rules no new building created despite significant investment in office buildingJuly 8, 2024

• The Court of Amsterdam confirmed that only changes in the structural construction can justify the conclusion that a renovation has been so extensive that a new building has essentially been created
• The overlap exemption does not apply
• X BV acquired the shares in Y BV in 2018, which owns a office building that was renovated for €25.2 million in 2016-2017
• Despite the significant investments, the overlap exemption does not apply as no newly manufactured immovable property was created
• The number of changes in the structural construction was limited, as demonstrated by the inspector
• The Court referred to a previous ruling by the Supreme Court and emphasized that member states can determine the conditions for applying the criterion ‘for first use’ themselves
• X BV’s direct appeal to article 12 paragraph 2 of the VAT Directive was rejected
• The appeal was dismissed as unfounded.

Source: taxlive.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.

---

---