ECJ VAT C-465/25 (Matin Maier) – Questions – VAT deduction rights when a supplier is deregistered or declared inactive

The ECJ released the request for a Preliminary Ruling for the case C-465/25 (Matin Maier).

Summary

Case Background: The case involves Matin Maier SRL, a Romanian company challenging tax assessments related to VAT deductions for services provided by an inactive trading partner, Calzature Nuova SRL, during a tax inspection covering 2018-2019.
Legal Questions: The referring court seeks clarification on whether EU law allows for the denial of VAT deduction rights based on the inactivity of a trading partner and whether taxpayers have the right to access all documents in their administrative file during tax proceedings.
Decision: The Advocate General opines that denying access to documents based on tax secrecy may infringe on the taxpayer’s rights of defense and good administration, as outlined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU.
Justification: The opinion emphasizes that a taxpayer should not be penalized for VAT deductions if no fraud is proven and no damage to the Treasury has occurred, reinforcing the principles of legal certainty and protection of legitimate expectations.
Implications: This ruling could impact how VAT deductions are treated in cases involving inactive suppliers, highlighting the need for transparency and fairness in tax administration processes.

Article in the EU VAT Directive

Articles 168, 178, 213, 214, 273 of the EU VAT Directive 2006/112/EC.

Article 168 – Right of Deduction

In so far as the goods and services are used for the purposes of the taxed transactions of a taxable person, that person shall be entitled, in the territory of the country, to deduct the following from the VAT which he is liable to pay:

(a) the VAT due or paid in respect of goods or services supplied or to be supplied to him by another taxable person;
(b) the VAT due or paid in respect of imported goods;
(c) the VAT due in respect of intra-Community acquisitions of goods.

Article 178 – Conditions for Exercise of the Right of Deduction

In order to exercise the right of deduction, a taxable person must meet the following conditions:

(a) for the deduction pursuant to Article 168(a), he must hold an invoice drawn up in accordance with Articles 220 to 236 and Articles 238 to 240;
(b) for the deduction pursuant to Article 168(b), he must hold the import document stating him as consignee or importer, and stating the amount of VAT due;
(c) for the deduction pursuant to Article 168(c), he must comply with the formalities laid down in Article 250.

Article 213 – VAT Identification

Every taxable person shall state when his activity as a taxable person commences, changes or ceases. Member States may require that every taxable person be identified by an individual number.

Article 214 – VAT Registration

Member States shall take the measures necessary to ensure that the following persons are identified by means of an individual number:

(a) every taxable person, other than those referred to in Article 9(2), who within the territory of the country carries out supplies of goods or services which are not exempt from VAT;
(b) every taxable person who makes intra-Community acquisitions of goods subject to VAT;
(c) every taxable person who receives services for which he is liable to pay VAT pursuant to Article 196;
(d) every non-taxable legal person who makes intra-Community acquisitions of goods subject to VAT.

Article 273 – Member State Obligations

Member States may impose other obligations which they deem necessary to ensure the correct collection of VAT and to prevent evasion, subject to the condition that such obligations shall not, in trade between Member States, give rise to formalities connected with the crossing of frontiers.

Article	Topic	Context in Case C-465/25
Article 168	Right to deduct VAT	Mentioned in relation to whether a taxpayer can deduct VAT when a supplier is inactive but has fulfilled tax obligations.
Article 178	Conditions for deduction	Central to the dispute over whether deduction rights can be denied due to supplier status.
Article 213	VAT identification	Discussed in the context of revocation of VAT numbers and its impact on deduction rights.
Article 214	VAT registration	Related to whether a supplier’s deregistration affects the buyer’s right to deduct VAT.
Article 273	Member State obligations	Invoked to argue that deduction rights should not be denied unless fraud is proven.

Facts and background

Parties Involved: The case concerns Matin Maier SRL, a Romanian company operating in the healthcare sector, and the Administrația Județeană a Finanțelor Publice Alba (Provincial Administration of Public Finances, Alba, Romania).
Tax Inspection: Matin Maier SRL underwent a tax inspection covering the period from January 1, 2018, to December 31, 2019. The inspection aimed to ensure the accurate determination of taxable income and the validity of deductible expenses.
Tax Assessment: Following the inspection, the tax authorities issued a notice of assessment on October 13, 2021, requiring Matin Maier SRL to pay a total of 275,525 Romanian lei (RON) in corporation tax and 117,888 RON in VAT. A significant part of the disputed VAT deduction related to services provided by Calzature Nuova SRL, which had become an inactive taxpayer before the transactions took place.
Inactive Taxpayer: Calzature Nuova SRL was marked as an inactive taxpayer on February 26, 2018, due to failing to maintain a genuine registered office. This status was published in the Register of Inactive Taxpayers, raising concerns about the legitimacy of the services rendered to Matin Maier SRL.
Tax Authorities’ Rationale: The tax authorities argued that since Calzature Nuova SRL was inactive, Matin Maier SRL could not deduct expenses related to the services provided by this company. They cited Article 11(7) of the Romanian Tax Code, which prohibits the deduction of expenses from inactive suppliers.
Legal Proceedings: Matin Maier SRL contested the tax authorities’ decision, claiming that the refusal to allow VAT deductions was unjust, particularly as there was no evidence of fraud or damage to the Treasury. The company emphasized its right to access the entire administrative file related to the tax assessment.
Referral to CJEU: The case was brought before the Nejvyšší správní soud (Supreme Administrative Court of the Czech Republic), which decided to refer several questions to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) for a preliminary ruling. The questions focused on the interpretation of EU VAT law, particularly regarding the rights of defense and the right to deduct VAT despite the inactivity of a trading partner.
Legal Framework: The relevant legal provisions include Articles 41, 42, 47, 48, 52, and 53 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, as well as Articles 178, 213, and 214 of the VAT Directive (2006/112/EC), which govern the right to deduct VAT and the conditions under which it can be claimed.

Questions

(1) Do the general principle of respect for the rights of the defence, enshrined in Article 48(2) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, as defined at Union level, and the right to good administration, as set out in Article 41(2)(b) of the Charter, preclude a national practice, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, whereby access to the administrative file is denied to a taxpayer at the administrative stage of tax proceedings on the ground that the tax inspection authority claims that some of the documents contained in that file were not taken into account when determining the tax situation?
(2) If the answer to the first question is in the affirmative, do the provisions of Articles 41, 47, 48 and 53 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, as well as the principles of respect for the rights of the defence and the right to a fair trial, preclude a practice of the tax administration and the courts whereby fiscal administrative acts that are detrimental to the individual are not annulled where the condition that the outcome of the administrative procedure may have been different has been satisfied?
(3) Does Article 52(2) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, read in conjunction with Article 8(2) of the European Convention for the
Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, preclude the use, in administrative tax proceedings, of the results of secret information gathering in the context of actions pursued without any connection with the proceedings, where the taxpayer has not been made aware of such evidence?
(4) Do the provisions of Articles 178, 213 and 214 of the VAT Directive and the principle of fiscal neutrality preclude national rules by which a Member State
requires a citizen to collect VAT and pay it to the State, without, however, granting that citizen a corresponding right to deduct VAT, on the ground that a
trading partner’s VAT number has been revoked, even though that partner has fulfilled its payment obligations to the Treasury?
(5) In the light of the circumstances of the main proceedings, should the principles of legal certainty, protection of legitimate expectations, proportionality
and loyal cooperation, as they result from the VAT Directive, be interpreted as prohibiting the imposition of an obligation to collect and pay VAT on the taxpayer without granting that taxpayer the right to deduct VAT, until it is established that there has been tax evasion on the part of the taxpayer, in accordance with Article 273 of the VAT Directive?

ECJ Cases referred to

Case	Citation	Key Issue Addressed
Ispas	C-298/16	Right of access to the administrative file during tax proceedings.
C.F. (Tax inspection)	C-430/19	Scope of taxpayer rights during inspections and procedural fairness.
Paper Consult	C-101/16	VAT deduction rights when dealing with inactive suppliers.
Dankowski	C-438/09	Conditions for exercising the right to deduct VAT and the role of formal requirements.