- Supply for Consideration Examination: Advocate General Ettema affirmed that the Court of Appeal correctly examined whether Municipality X made a supply for consideration when transferring the school building to foundation Z for 9.2% of the actual costs, emphasizing that the referral assignment was not interpreted too broadly.
- Economic Activity Determination: The Court of Appeal had initially determined that the supply of the school building did not qualify as an economic activity, leading to the conclusion that the input tax related to this supply was not eligible for deduction. The Supreme Court later indicated that the supply should be considered part of X’s overall economic activity.
- Advice on Appeal Outcome: The Advocate General concluded that X’s appeal in cassation was unfounded, advising the Supreme Court to reject it, as the reference order only stated that the supply was part of X’s economic activities without confirming that it was made for consideration.
Source Taxlive
Latest Posts in "Netherlands"
- Senate accepts bill to retain reduced VAT rate on culture, media and sports
- VAT on residential rent by foreign temporary workers not deductible
- Dutch Court Rules Outsourced Payment Processing Qualifies for VAT Exemption
- No Reduced VAT Rate for Head Spa Treatments at Hairdressers, Dutch Tax Group Rules
- Netherlands Plans Mandatory Peppol-Based B2B E-Invoicing Regime by July 2030
