- A-G Ettema believes the subsidy for supporting disciplinary proceedings for lawyers is subject to VAT.
- The foundation provides support to disciplinary boards without charging them, receiving a subsidy from the Dutch Bar Association instead.
- The tax inspector and courts agree that VAT is due on this subsidy.
- The foundation argues its work serves the public interest and lacks an identifiable consumer, claiming the subsidy should not be taxed.
- A-G Ettema concludes the disciplinary boards directly benefit from the foundation’s services.
- The subsidy is considered payment for services, justifying the VAT charge.
- The foundation’s appeal is unsuccessful.
Source: taxence.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.