This is what happened in the ECJ/General Court (VAT) in May 2025 – 2 Decisions, 1 Order, 2 AG Opinions, 6 New Questions

Highlights in May 2025

2 cases Decided/ 1 Order
2 AG Opinions released
6 Question have been released
2 new cases, no details yet

Join us on Linkedin

ECJ VAT news as soon as published: Almost 4200 experts joined our Linkedin Group on ECJ VAT Cases … and you?

Your database of ECJ Cases with the link to the relevant article in the EU VAT Directive 2006/112/EC

Judgment

ECJ C-615/23 (Dyrektor Krajowej Informacji Skarbowej) – Judgment – Flat-Rate Compensation for Public Transport Services Is Not Taxable…
- Case Background: The Polish Supreme Administrative Court requested a preliminary ruling regarding whether flat-rate compensation paid by a local authority to a transport provider for public transport services should be included in the VAT taxable amount under Article 73 of the VAT Directive.
- Legal Question and Tax Authority’s Argument: The court sought to determine if the compensation qualifies as consideration for services subject to VAT, with the Polish tax authority arguing that it should be included as it supports public transport operations.
- Court’s Decision and Justification: The court ruled that the compensation does not count as part of the taxable amount because it primarily covers operational losses, lacking a direct link to the price of individual services, thus exempting it from VAT.
ECJ VAT C-405/24 (L.) – Judgment – Import VAT Exemption Applies to Small Non-Commercial Consignments to Any EU Member State
- Legal Context: The case revolves around the interpretation of Article 143(1)(b) of Directive 2006/112/EC and Article 1 of Directive 2006/79/EC, which provide VAT exemptions for small non-commercial consignments imported from third countries.
- Dispute Origin: L. s.c., a customs clearance company, contested a tax ruling denying VAT exemption for imported goods intended for individuals in other EU member states, citing Polish law that limits exemptions to goods consigned within Poland.
- Judgment Findings: The Court ruled that EU law does not allow member states to exclude VAT exemptions based on the consignee’s location, affirming that small non-commercial consignments should be exempt from VAT regardless of the recipient’s EU residence, thereby ensuring uniformity in VAT exemption application across the EU.

Judgment – Customs

ECJ Customs C-782/23 (Tauritus) – Judgment – Customs Value Determination for Provisional Prices in Imports
- Case Overview: The ECJ ruled on case C-782/23 (Tauritus), determining that the customs value for imported goods can be established using the transaction value method, even when only a provisional price is known at the time of declaration, provided the final price is determinable based on objective factors.
- Provisional Pricing and Customs Declarations: The court emphasized that customs value should reflect the true economic value of goods, allowing for provisional pricing as long as final prices are adjusted according to predetermined criteria, thus supporting a simplified customs declaration procedure.
- Implications for Importers: This judgment reinforces the obligation for importers to ensure accurate customs declarations and highlights that customs procedures can adapt to changing pricing structures, establishing a legal precedent for future cases involving provisional pricing within the EU.

Order

ECJ C-262/24 (Pegazus Busz) – Order – Court lacked jurisdiction; questions pertained to national court’s facts
- Legal Context: This case examines the interpretation of Article 143(1)(b) of Directive 2006/112/EC and Article 1 of Directive 2006/79/EC, which establish VAT exemptions for small non-commercial consignments imported from third countries.
- Dispute Origin: L. s.c., a customs clearance company, challenged a tax ruling that denied VAT exemption for goods intended for individuals in other EU member states, based on Polish law that restricts exemptions to goods consigned within Poland.
- Judgment Findings: The Court determined that EU law prohibits member states from excluding VAT exemptions based on the consignee’s location, affirming that small non-commercial consignments are exempt from VAT regardless of the recipient’s residence within the EU, promoting uniformity in VAT application across member states.

AG Opinion

ECJ C-234/24 (Brose Prievidza) – AG Opinion – Tooling supply is taxable in Bulgaria, not exempt
- Facts: A Slovak company manufactured tools used exclusively for producing goods for a German customer, but the tools remained in Slovakia; ownership transferred to the German customer.
- AG Opinion: The supply of tooling is a taxable supply of goods in Slovakia, not exempt or out of scope, even if the tools are not physically delivered to the customer.
- Key Point: Physical movement is not necessary for a supply of goods—transfer of ownership and control is sufficient for VAT liability at the place of location.
ECJ C-744/23 (Zlakov) – AG Opinion – Pro Bono Legal Services are subject to VAT
- Facts: A lawyer provided legal services free of charge under a court order for criminal defense, with only partial reimbursement from the state.
- AG Opinion: Such pro bono legal services constitute an economic activity subject to VAT, even if provided without full remuneration.
- Key Point: VAT liability arises where services are provided regularly in return for consideration (even partial), and pro bono legal aid is not automatically exempt.

Questions

ECJ C-158/25 (AEDT and État du Grand-Duché de Luxembourg) – Questions – Can managers challenge VAT assessments without prior notification under…
- Concerns whether managers of a company can challenge VAT assessments without being individually notified.
- Questions the scope of legal remedies available under EU law when a tax authority issues VAT decisions affecting third parties.
- Raises issues about procedural fairness and access to justice under Articles 41 and 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights.
ECJ C-308/25 (Isolanti Group) – Questions – Is Italy’s tax resolution mechanism compliant with EU law principles?
- Challenges Italy’s tax resolution mechanism, particularly its finality and limited appeal options.
- Examines whether such mechanisms comply with the principle of effectiveness and equivalence under EU VAT law.
- Explores whether national simplification rules risk undermining taxpayers’ EU rights to claim VAT deductions or refunds.
ECJ VAT C-462/24 (Braila Winds) – Questions – Competition and State Aid Legal Analysis
- Addresses whether certain preferential VAT treatments constitute illegal State aid under EU law.
- Seeks clarification on the intersection of VAT neutrality and competition law, especially where selective advantages are alleged.
- May influence how fiscal measures in regulated sectors (e.g., energy) are assessed for compatibility with EU competition rules.
GC VAT Case – T-233/25 (Mokoryte) – Questions – Can a subcontractor adjust VAT after claim assignment and insolvency?
- Involves whether a subcontractor can adjust VAT on unpaid invoices after the claim is assigned and the main contractor becomes insolvent.
- Explores whether VAT correction rights survive assignment and insolvency, under principles of fiscal neutrality and proportionality.
- May clarify the impact of third-party claim transfers on input VAT adjustment eligibility.
GC VAT Case T-198/25 (G. Kft) – Questions – Are VAT corrections and refunds only possible if new circumstances?
- Questions whether VAT corrections and refunds can be limited only to new facts or legal changes.
- Challenges restrictions on adjustments that may violate EU principles of effectiveness and taxpayers’ rights.
- The case could redefine temporal and substantive limits on correction mechanisms under national VAT procedures.
General Court T-184/25 (Veronsaajien oikeudenvalvontayksikkö) – Questions – Exemptions: Key Questions on Credit…
- Examines conditions under which VAT exemptions apply to financial services involving credit intermediation.
- Focuses on the level of legal clarity and predictability required for taxpayers to rely on exemptions.
- Raises broader implications for taxable persons operating in cross-border financial transactions and their compliance obligations.