- The court ruled that the pension fund cannot be considered a common investment fund.
- It was not proven that pension rights and payments depend primarily on investment results.
- Participants do not bear investment risk.
- The pension fund is not comparable to other funds classified as common investment funds.
- The appeal was dismissed.
- The court posed questions to the European Court of Justice regarding the interpretation of the VAT directive.
- The European Court of Justice clarified that participants are considered to bear investment risk only if pension amounts depend primarily on investment results.
- Factors such as years of pension accumulation and salary are not relevant in this assessment.
- The risk being individual or collective and employer guarantees are relevant but not decisive factors.
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.
Latest Posts in "European Union"
- CBAM: Expansion to cast iron, steel and complex metal products from 2028
- VAT and Transfer Pricing – Four recent cases @ ECJ/CJEU – 3 cases decided, 1 AG Opinion
- Comments on ECJ C-639/24: Limits on Denying VAT Exemption for Intra-Community Supplies
- EU Advocate General: VAT Implications of Transfer Pricing Adjustments in Car Distribution Cases
- EU and Member States Introduce €2-€5 Parcel Customs Fees Ahead of 2026 Reforms













