- Supply for Consideration Examination: Advocate General Ettema affirmed that the Court of Appeal correctly examined whether Municipality X made a supply for consideration when transferring the school building to foundation Z for 9.2% of the actual costs, emphasizing that the referral assignment was not interpreted too broadly.
- Economic Activity Determination: The Court of Appeal had initially determined that the supply of the school building did not qualify as an economic activity, leading to the conclusion that the input tax related to this supply was not eligible for deduction. The Supreme Court later indicated that the supply should be considered part of X’s overall economic activity.
- Advice on Appeal Outcome: The Advocate General concluded that X’s appeal in cassation was unfounded, advising the Supreme Court to reject it, as the reference order only stated that the supply was part of X’s economic activities without confirming that it was made for consideration.
Source Taxlive
Latest Posts in "Netherlands"
- No Defensible Position for VAT Fraudster, Rules Advocate General Van Kempen in Tax Case
- Smoking Cessation Programs Not Exempt from VAT Due to Lack of Required Medical Qualifications
- Payment Not Considered Compensation for Transfer of Generality of Goods, Article 37d Not Applicable
- Reduced VAT Rate Applies to Live Events Featuring Online Communities and Streamers, Court Rules
- Court Lacks Jurisdiction Over VAT Refund Requests for 2018; 2019 Claim Also Denied
