- A practicing doctor, referred to as A, applied for VAT refunds for 2015 and 2016 related to developing a harvesting machine, but investigations revealed her partner was the primary contributor, handling design, business contacts, and patent registration, while A had minimal involvement.
- The District Court and Court of Appeal examined the definition of entrepreneurship based on CJEU case law, concluding that A did not fulfill the criteria of acting independently or bearing entrepreneurial risk, as her partner managed all aspects of the business.
- Although the District Court initially awarded A €3,500 for unreasonable delays in handling her case, the Court of Appeal found that the procedural time was acceptable, resulting in no further damages or reimbursement of legal costs.
Source BTW jurisprudentie
Latest Posts in "Netherlands"
- Netherlands 2026 Tax Plan: Overview of Major VAT Changes
- Tax Plan 2026: Reduced VAT Rate for Culture, Media, and Sports Retained
- No Reduced VAT Rate for Nightclub Entry Fees with DJ Performances, Court Rules
- Proposed VAT Revision Rules for Renovation Services Starting 2026: Key Changes and Implications
- VAT deduction apartment: business office or home? Ruling on actual use and the principle of equality
