- A service for consideration exists when there is a direct link between the service provided and the compensation received, typically within a contractual or legal relationship.
- The plaintiff’s customers buy or sell cryptocurrency on her platform, after which she conducts an opposite transaction on another exchange (B), paying a fee to B; B does not pay her any fee.
- The court finds that the plaintiff is the recipient of a service from B, not a provider of a service to B, as she receives a specific benefit (access to B’s facilities) for payment.
- The FNBC case cited by the plaintiff is not applicable, as it involved currency transactions without fees, unlike the present case where services are provided for compensation.
- The court concludes that the plaintiff’s only customers are within the EU, so the additional tax assessments were correctly imposed.
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 "Netherlands"
- Zero rate rightly refused due to VAT fraud
- No VAT Deduction Without Proper Evidence: Burden of Proof on Entrepreneur After Late Filing
- Zero VAT Rate Denied Due to Knowledge of UK VAT Fraud in Metal Trade Chain
- VAT refund for uncollectible debt: bankruptcy period starts, error regarding cash accounting is no excuse
- No refund of import VAT on show jumping horse: prize money and subsidies do not constitute an economic activity
