ECJ C-472/24 (Žaidimų valiuta) – Judgment – VAT Exemption Denied for Virtual Money Transactions

On March 5, 2026 the ECJ released the AG Opinion in the case C-472/24 (Žaidimų valiuta).

Context: Reference for a preliminary ruling – Common system of value added tax (VAT) – Directive 2006/112/EC – Exemption – Article 135(1)(e) – Sale of in-game Gold for real money outside the game – Transactions concerning legal tender – Calculation of the taxable amount – Article 30b(2) – In-game Gold as a voucher – Margin scheme – Article 315 – In-game Gold as second-hand goods

Summary

Context and Legal Framework: The case involves a preliminary ruling regarding the application of VAT to transactions involving the sale of virtual money (“Gold”) from the online game “Runescape.” The questions pertain to the interpretation of Article 135(1)(e) and Article 30a of the VAT Directive concerning VAT exemptions and definitions of vouchers.
Facts of the Case: The Tax Disputes Commission of Lithuania referred the case after a tax inspection determined that the sale of virtual currency by MB “Žaidimų valiuta” constituted taxable supplies. The company contested this, arguing that the transactions should be exempt from VAT, similar to rulings on other virtual currencies.
Questions to the Court: The court was asked whether the sale of “Gold” qualifies as an exempt transaction under Article 135(1)(e) of the VAT Directive. If not, it inquired about the correct taxable value of the transactions, questioning whether “Gold” should be classified as a multi-purpose voucher.
Court’s Decision: The Court ruled that transactions involving the exchange of currency for virtual money in an online game do not meet the criteria for VAT exemption under Article 135(1)(e). Additionally, it concluded that “Gold” does not qualify as a voucher, thus VAT must be applied to the full sale price as per Article 73 of the Directive.
Justification of the Decision: The Court reasoned that “Gold” serves no function outside the game, failing to act as a currency for real-world transactions, and does not meet the definition of a voucher because it cannot be exchanged for other unspecified goods or services. This strict interpretation aligns with the objectives of the VAT system to maintain consistency and fiscal neutrality across EU Member States.

Articles in the EU VAT Directive 2006/112/EC

Article 135(1)(e) of the EU VAT Directive 2006/112/EC

Article 135
1. Member States shall exempt the following transactions:

(e) transactions, including negotiation, concerning currency, bank notes and coins used as legal tender, with the exception of collectors’ items, that is to say, gold, silver or other metal coins or bank notes which are not normally used as legal tender or coins of numismatic interest;

Background

Facts:
The applicant, the company ‘Žaidimų valiuta’, has been ordered by the tax authorities to pay VAT and a fine. After an inspection, the tax authorities determined that the applicant obtains income by purchasing and reselling ‘gold’ in the computer game Runescape, and does not pay VAT on this correctly. The applicant disagrees with the tax authorities’ decision and has filed a complaint with the tax disputes committee.

Consideration:
The applicant has treated the income from the sale of in-game gold as income from trading in virtual currencies, and has therefore classified it as income from an exempt activity under national VAT law. The tax authorities state that this concerns the provision of services and that the sale of in-game gold should be regarded as an economic activity aimed at generating income, on which VAT is payable. The referring court seeks clarity on whether the sale of the gold from the game Runescape is a VAT-exempt transaction within the meaning of Article 135(1)(e) of the VAT Directive.

Questions

Is the sale of ‘gold’ from the game ‘Runescape’ an exempt transaction within the meaning of Article 135(1)(e) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (hereinafter: ‘the VAT Directive’)?
If the answer to the first question is in the negative: is the VAT Directive to be interpreted as meaning that the taxable value of in-game gold consists of the total consideration for its sale, or does it consist only of the difference between the purchase price and the sale price of the in-game gold, in so far as the trader does not charge a separate commission for its transfer?

AG Opinion

(1) Article 135(1)(e) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax must be interpreted as meaning that it exempts only transactions concerning legal tender or non-legal tender that is accepted as a contractual direct means of payment between operators and that thus has no other purpose than to be a means of payment in legal transactions.
(2) In-game Gold (as an electronic service) does not merely serve to procure a later consumable benefit in the form of an as yet unspecified service, which the issuer of a voucher would be obliged to supply, but is itself already a consumable benefit. Therefore, it is not a voucher within the meaning of Article 30a of the VAT Directive.
(3) Article 311(1)(1) of the VAT Directive must be interpreted, in the light of technological developments, in a teleologically broader manner as covering also transferable non-tangible objects, provided that they are traded in legal transactions in the same way as tangible objects. The decisive factor is that such services are traded on a secondary market in a comparable way to regular second-hand goods and typically contain residual VAT. It is for the referring commission to determine whether that is the case for in-game Gold here.

Decision

1. Article 135(1)(e) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax, as amended by Council Directive (EU) 2016/1065 of 27 June 2016,

must be interpreted as meaning that transactions consisting in the exchange, for payment purposes, of real currency for units of virtual money that can be used only in an online video game are not covered by the value added tax exemption laid down in that provision.

2. Article 30a of Directive 2006/112, as amended by Council Directive 2016/1065,

must be interpreted as meaning that units of virtual money that can be used only in an online video game, where they give access to certain functionalities within that game, do not fall within the scope of the concept of a ‘voucher’, in particular that of a ‘multi-purpose voucher’, within the meaning of that provision, with the result that valued added tax must be levied on those transactions in accordance with the general rule laid down in Article 73 of that directive.

Cited (recent) case law