A BV offers a virtual sports platform for athletes to access workout videos, instructional content, and healthy lifestyle tips for a fee. The platform also provides personalized sports schedules for subscribers to follow and train at home or another location. The company does not have a physical sports facility. The dispute is whether A’s services qualify for a reduced VAT rate. The Court of Appeal ruled that A does not provide sports facilities, and the recent VAT Rates Directive also does not change this.
Source BTW jurisprudentie
Join our Linkedin Group on ”VAT Rates – Legislative changes”, click HERE
Latest Posts in "Netherlands"
- Dutch Supreme Court Refers Key VAT Real Estate Questions to CJEU, Creating Market Uncertainty
- Dispute Over VAT on Final Payment for Business Transfer and Software Use Agreement, Arnhem-Leeuwarden Court 2025
- Supreme Court Confirms: No Destruction of Ruling; No Mediation or Foreign Establishment Proven
- General Court Excise T-690/24 (Kolinsen) – Judgment – Member State of arrival competent to levy excise duty in the event of irregularity detected on arrival
- Dutch Court Denies VAT Deduction for Crypto Platform Over Lack of Direct Service to Non-EU Clients
