- A practicing doctor, referred to as A, applied for VAT refunds for 2015 and 2016 related to developing a harvesting machine, but investigations revealed her partner was the primary contributor, handling design, business contacts, and patent registration, while A had minimal involvement.
- The District Court and Court of Appeal examined the definition of entrepreneurship based on CJEU case law, concluding that A did not fulfill the criteria of acting independently or bearing entrepreneurial risk, as her partner managed all aspects of the business.
- Although the District Court initially awarded A €3,500 for unreasonable delays in handling her case, the Court of Appeal found that the procedural time was acceptable, resulting in no further damages or reimbursement of legal costs.
Source BTW jurisprudentie
Latest Posts in "Netherlands"
- Hospice performance does not qualify as exempt service or short stay
- Assessment of Dispute: Single or Multiple Services in Hospice Guest Care and Tax Implications
- Netherlands Suspends €2 Handling Fee on Non-EU Parcels, Awaits EU Customs Measures in 2026
- Decision on the introduction of a national handling fee postponed
- No VAT Fiscal Unity Without Financial Integration, Rules Advocate General Ettema
