- The ECJ clarified that for a supply to be zero-rated as an intra-Community supply, the goods must physically move to another EU Member State.
- In the Brose Prievidza case, the tool remained in Bulgaria, so its supply could not be classified as an intra-Community supply.
- Each supply must generally be treated as a separate supply for VAT purposes, unless there is an artificial split or an ancillary supply.
- The ECJ found no artificial split or ancillary supply in this case; the tool had its own economic purpose and was a separate, VAT-taxable supply.
- The ECJ rejected the Bulgarian tax authorities’ view and confirmed that the tool sale was subject to Bulgarian VAT, allowing for a potential VAT refund.
Source: kmlz.de
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"
- Recent ECJ/General Court VAT Jurisprudence and Implications for EU Compliance (November 2025)
- Navigating VAT Exemptions: Recent ECJ Judgments and Their Implications for Intra-Community Transactions and Imports
- Review of the VAT treatment of Transfer Pricing adjustments
- EU VAT Rate Changes in 2026: Key Updates for Finland, Lithuania, and Germany
- Amazon Phases Out Commingling: New FNSKU Barcodes Reshape Fulfilment and VAT Compliance
