On January 20, 2022, the ECJ issued the decision in the case C-90/20 (Apcoa Parking vs Denmark). The case deals with the question if fees for controlling a private parking are subject to VAT.
Context: Reference for a preliminary ruling – Common system of value added tax (VAT) – Directive 2006/112/EC – Taxable transactions – Supply of services for consideration – Fees charged for infringement of regulations on parking on private property – Characterisation
Article in the EU VAT Directive
2(1)(c) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC – Taxable transaction
Article 2
1. The following transactions shall be subject to VAT:
(c) the supply of services for consideration within the territory of a Member State by a taxable person acting as such;——-
Facts
Questions
Must Article 2(1)(c) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax 1 be interpreted as meaning that control fees for infringement of regulations on parking on private property constitute consideration for a service supplied and that there is therefore a transaction subject to VAT?
AG Opinion
Article 2(1)(c) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax must be interpreted as meaning that the fees levied by an economic operator in consideration for the parking of vehicles, where the amount of those fees is fixed by the operator on the basis of the conditions of use relating to that parking, must be considered to be remuneration for a supply of services for consideration and as such subject to that tax.
Decision
Article 2(1)(c) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax must be interpreted as meaning that the control fees levied by a company incorporated under private law, tasked with the operation of private car parks, in the event of failure by the motorists to comply with the general terms and conditions for use of those car parks must be regarded as consideration for a supply of services within the meaning of that provision and, as such, subject to value added tax (VAT).
Sources:
- Curia
- Unofficial translation/summary of the DK court case: Supreme Court Ruling in Case BS-12663/2019-HJR delivered on February 7, 2020
ECJ Cases referred to
- C-222/81
- C-16/93 (R. J. Tolsma) – A service is only provided “for consideration” if there is a legal relationship between the provider and the recipient of the service
- C-215/94 (Mohr) – An indemnity for the abandonment of milk production is not subject to VAT
- C-446/98
- C-277/05 (Société thermale d’Eugénie-Les-Bains) – Reservation for an accomodation was outside scope of VAT
- C-263/15 (Lajvér) – Operation of agricultural engineering works is an economic activity
- C-37/16 (SAWP) – Authors/artists do not provide a service for producers and importers of reproduction rights
- C-295/17 (MEO – Serviços de Comunicações e Multimédia) – VAT on early termination of broadband deal
- C-43/19 (Vodafone Portugal) – Termination fees subject to VAT
- C-94/19 (San Domenico Vetraria) – Secondment of staff without markup is subject to VAT
- C-501/19 (UCMR – ADA) – Collective management of copyright on musical works
- C-604/19 (Gmina Wrocław) – VAT on conversion of perpetual usufruct into a right of ownership is a supply of goods
- C-801/19 (FRANCK) – VAT exemption applicable when resources for financial activities are made available
