- The Amsterdam Court of Appeal issued a ruling on January 14, 2025, regarding a VAT dispute.
- The taxpayer argues that the additional tax assessments should be annulled due to the wrongful issuance of a VAT identification number.
- Since 2009, the taxpayer’s business activities have involved holding and financing activities, as described in the Chamber of Commerce register.
- The tax inspector designated the taxpayer as a VAT entrepreneur in 2010 and issued a VAT identification number, stating it was a preliminary judgment.
- The taxpayer engaged in a legal procedure against the Croatian government, involving advisory services from EU-based entrepreneurs, and provided them with the VAT number.
- The taxpayer did not declare the reverse-charged VAT, leading to additional tax assessments and penalties totaling 606,678 euros.
- The taxpayer claims that the VAT Directive only allows VAT numbers for taxable persons or non-taxable entities making intra-community acquisitions, which does not apply to them.
- The taxpayer argues that the VAT number was wrongly issued and that they are not liable for Dutch reverse-charged VAT.
- The taxpayer also contends that the VAT number issuance based on assumptions from the Chamber of Commerce register violates the principle of proportionality.
- The taxpayer claims they had no opportunity to contest the VAT number issuance and references a European Court of Justice ruling to support their position.
Source: uitspraken.rechtspraak.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.
