- The Supreme Court has ruled that an entrepreneur who is established outside of Sint Maarten but has a permanent establishment there is not considered an entrepreneur established within the tax area.
- X nv, a resort operator in Sint Maarten, had renovation work done by a US-based entrepreneur with a permanent establishment in Sint Maarten.
- The court upheld the additional tax assessment imposed on X nv as the buyer of the renovation work.
- X nv argued that the US entrepreneur should be considered an entrepreneur established in Sint Maarten due to their permanent establishment there.
- However, the Supreme Court disagreed and stated that the BBO (turnover tax) could be levied on X nv as a customer because they are an entrepreneur established within the tax area.
- X nv’s appeal was deemed unfounded, but they will receive non-pecuniary damages of €500 due to the case exceeding a reasonable period of time.
Source Taxlive
Latest Posts in "Netherlands"
- Rental of Workroom by Silent Partnership: Entrepreneurship Confirmed, VAT Deduction Denied Due to Private Use
- Court Rules Taxpayer Responsible for Late ICP Filing Despite Advisor’s Involvement
- Update on NCTS Disruption: Message Re-injection Delayed, Next Update Expected Tomorrow Morning
- Memorandum in response to the report on the Bill on the retention of a reduced VAT rate on culture, media and sport
- Netherlands Sets Out Four-Phase Plan for Implementing EU ViDA
