Export Sale VAT‑Exempt Even When Buyer Arranges Transport Outside EU

🧾 Case Summary

A Finnish company, A Oyj, sold electric vehicle charging equipment to an EU‑established group sales company, which immediately resold the goods to a non‑EU end customer. In both sales, the buyer was responsible for arranging transport from Finland to a destination outside the EU.

A fully independent logistics operator, acting under the non‑EU end customer’s instructions, collected the goods in Finland and transported them directly to the final destination outside the EU. A Oyj was listed as exporter in Finland and obtained:

• an electronically validated export decision from Finnish Customs confirming exit from the EU, and
• a CMR/transport document signed by the independent carrier confirming delivery outside the EU.
  [kho.fi]

🏛 Key Legal Question

Could A Oyj treat its sale to the EU‑based sales subsidiary as a VAT‑exempt export sale, even though the transport was arranged by the buyer and the goods changed ownership twice before leaving the EU?

⚖️ KHO Ruling

Yes.
KHO overturned the decisions of the Tax Administration and Helsinki Administrative Court and ruled that: A Oyj’s sale met all the conditions for VAT‑exempt export under EU case law.

The fact that the buyer arranged the transport did not remove the essential link between the goods and their exportation outside the EU.
[kho.fi]

KHO held that interpreting the VAT rules to deny zero‑rating was not justified under the Member State’s discretion to prevent abuse. The sale clearly formed part of a continuous export chain, supported by verified transport evidence and Customs exit confirmation.

Therefore, under Arvonlisäverolaki 70 § 1 mom. 2 kohta, the transaction qualifies as a VAT‑exempt export sale.

📚 EU Case Law Referenced

KHO relied heavily on established CJEU jurisprudence confirming that export exemption applies when:

• the goods physically leave the EU, and
• the supplier can demonstrate the export with reliable evidence, even if transport is carried out on behalf of the buyer.

Cases cited include C‑185/89 Velker, C‑563/12 BDV Hungary, C‑401/18 Herst, C‑653/18 Unitel, and C‑602/24 W. [kho.fi]

📌 Significance

This ruling:

• Provides important clarity for Finnish exporters selling via intermediaries such as intra‑EU sales hubs.
• Confirms that buyer‑arranged transport does not automatically block export exemption if the supplier can prove that the goods left the EU.
• Aligns Finnish practice with EU VAT neutrality principles and CJEU case law.