According to the Court of Appeal, BV X had not made it plausible that renting the accommodations was primarily prompted by the special needs of the company. The Supreme Court had explained in the order for reference that it was relevant whether the temporary workers accepted the accommodation offered to them, without leaving them room – in a legal or factual sense – for their own choice of a particular accommodation or with regard to its shared use by one or more others.
Source: futd.nl
Latest Posts in "Netherlands"
- VAT Assessments: Audit Officer’s Presence at Objection Hearings Permitted
- Principle of legitimate expectations precludes the imposition of additional assessments
- Court Upholds VAT Assessments Despite “Sovereign Citizen” Arguments and Wet Signature Claim
- Abolition of reduced VAT rate for floriculture: justification of the estimation method and policy choice
- Ryan Acquires Svalner Atlas in Major European Tax Expansion
