- The European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruled that the compensation received by rhtb is considered payment for a service rendered under a contractual obligation.
- rhtb had started executing the service that was later terminated and was willing to complete it.
- Parkring 14‑16 Immobilienverwaltung GmbH informed rhtb, a few months into a €5.4 million project, that they no longer wanted rhtb to continue.
- An Austrian court determined that rhtb is entitled to the full agreed compensation but questioned whether the amount owed should be considered as remuneration subject to VAT.
- The ECJ concluded that the amount owed to rhtb is equal to the contractually agreed sum for the complete execution of the service, and it cannot be viewed as a flat fee for compensation of damages.
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.
Latest Posts in "European Union"
- General Court VAT case – T-614/25 (Trading 4) – Questions – VAT Exemption in EU Chain Transactions: When Does Ownership Transfer Trigger Tax Liability?
- Determination of Customs Value and Proof of Origin for Preferential Treatment: Logista v Spanish State
- Determining Customs Value of Goods: Successive Sales and EU Customs Code Interpretation (Case C-500/24)
- Determination of Customs Value and Proof of Origin for Preferential Treatment: Logista v Spanish State
- Determining Customs Value of Goods: Successive Sales and EU Customs Code Interpretation (Case C-500/24)
