Amsterdam Court agreed that Y offered X a marketing platform, a meeting place where sellers and consumers could conduct transactions. According to the Court, Y fulfilled the role of intermediary in that context and not that of purchaser or supplier of the products and services offered on that platform. The exchange of the vouchers resulted in Y making payments to X. Those payments, plus the fees that Y withheld therefrom for its services, therefore constituted the fee under which X had made its supplies of goods.
Source: FUTD
Latest Posts in "Netherlands"
- Benelux Study Day on E-Invoicing (25 March 2025): Conclusions and Strategic Outlook
- Netherlands Reveals Four-Phase Plan for EU ViDA Implementation by 2030 Deadline
- Easily Avoiding VAT on Webshops: A Loophole Exploited by Business Accounts
- Tax authorities do not inspire confidence that there is a regular customer with ICLs
- Evading VAT via webshops turns out to be a piece of cake
