- Advocate General Ettema concludes the court correctly relied on the Supreme Court ruling from December 9, 2016.
- The focus is on whether the investment risk for participants of X is comparable to that of icbe participants.
- X is an industry pension fund participating in a mutual fund since January 1, 2010.
- X and the fund receive fiduciary asset management services from foreign suppliers.
- X argues these services should be VAT-exempt as management of collective investment funds.
- The inspector disagrees, and courts rule the exemption does not apply to X.
- The investment risk is not borne by the pension fund members.
- The Advocate General agrees with the court’s decision and references the EU Court of Justice ruling from September 5, 2024.
- The Advocate General also addresses the comparison between collective and individual defined contribution schemes.
- The Advocate General advises the Supreme Court to dismiss X’s appeal.
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.
