The two shareholders in a dental practice devised a construction whereby, as a medical company not subject to VAT, they still hoped to be able to reclaim the VAT on the purchase price of a business premises in full. That failed, after which they held the financial adviser they had engaged in the purchase liable at the Amsterdam court.
Source: fiscaalvanmorgen.nl
Latest Posts in "Netherlands"
- Volt Netherlands Proposes Uniform VAT Rate in Election Program
- Rotterdam Court Sentences X to 18 Months for €7 Million Tax Fraud Attempt
- Tax Classification of Parking Lot Parcels with Paving: A-G’s Conclusion on VAT Status
- E-invoicing obligation in the Netherlands: where does The Hague really stand?
- AG Dutch Supreme Court: When Does Brick Paving Qualify as Developed Land in Dutch Law?
