The Court considered that Article 9a was introduced to ensure a uniform application of Article 28 of the VAT Directive and, by extension, of the common VAT system within the single market. Article 9a was also safeguarding legal certainty for operators concerned as a means to avoid non or double taxation that could arise as a result of dissenting interpretations between Member States. Finally, the Court held that the Council did not exceed its implementing powers as it only sought to ensure a uniform application of the VAT Directive across EU countries
Source DLA Piper
See also ECJ C-695/20 (Fenix International) – Judgment – Art. 9a of the Implementing Regulation is valid
- Join the Linkedin Group on ECJ VAT Cases, click HERE
- For an overview of ECJ cases per article of the EU VAT Directive, click HERE
Latest Posts in "European Union"
- EU Parliament Approves CBAM Reforms: New 50-Ton Threshold, Delayed Certificate Purchases to 2027
- ViDA: Transforming EU VAT with Harmonized e-Invoicing and Real-Time Reporting
- EU Court Ruling on Arcomet: Transfer Pricing Adjustments Pose VAT Risks for Companies
- Italian Tax Authorities Remove Non-EU Companies from VIES for Failing New VAT Guarantee Requirements
- Comments on ECJ C-121/24: Non-payment of declared VAT does not constitute VAT fraud
