The applicant took the view, in the light of the case law of the Bundesfinanzhof (BFH), that there was a service commission because it provided services to C, which in turn provided services to final customers.
The action was successful. By enabling the electronic data in the user’s game app and in its game database, the applicant provided another service, albeit to C, which is not established in Germany. C had acted in its own name as operator of the website.
Note: The proceedings are pending before the BFH. The dispute concerns the legal situation until 31.12.2014. The FG therefore did not have to deal with the new regulation for electronic services which has been in force since 01.01.2015.
Source: js-steuerberater.de
Latest Posts in "Germany"
- Civil Courts Not Bound by Party’s VAT Returns in Disputes Over VAT Liability
- Remission of Interest on VAT Arrears for Equitable Reasons: Ruling by Lower Saxony Tax Court
- Germany Clarifies Input VAT Deductions for Subsidized Service Providers Operating at Persistent Loss
- Germany Clarifies Input VAT Deductions for Subsidized Service Providers Operating at Persistent Loss
- German Cabinet Approves Law to Prevent Double RETT on Share Deals, Raises Trade Tax Rate
