The referring court notes that the ECJ, in particular in WebMindLicenses, has interpreted the relevant provisions of the VAT Directive, but considers that an additional explanation is necessary, as the Portuguese and Hungarian tax authorities have treated the same transaction differently from a tax point of view. Where are the limits of harmonization of law within the Union? Even if all Member States have correctly transposed the VAT Directive, its application to a cross-border service nevertheless leads to different results. Both Portugal and Hungary consider that the place where a service is provided is located on their territory and claim the VAT for themselves. Thus, despite the full harmonization of the law, one and the same transaction is ultimately taxed twice.
Source BTW jurisprudentie
Latest Posts in "European Union"
- EU VAT Rate Changes in 2026: Key Updates for Finland, Lithuania, and Germany
- Amazon Phases Out Commingling: New FNSKU Barcodes Reshape Fulfilment and VAT Compliance
- Delayed EN 16931 Standard Leaves Businesses in Limbo – A Call for Urgent Action
- The EU Commission proposes new collaborative measures in view of ViDA
- How did the EU Member States implemented ”Domestic Reverse-Charge” (Art. 194 of the Directive 2006/112)?
