A taxpayer entrepreneur sells goods to customers in other EU member states. The tax inspector refuses to apply the zero rate for intra-community supplies and levies value-added tax accordingly. The Court of Appeal ‘s-Hertogenbosch restates a general legal framework for assessing intra-community supplies. In essence, this framework states that a supplier may apply the zero rate in case of pickup transactions if a customer presents a VAT identification number and based on objective data provided by the customer, the supplier can reasonably assume that the goods will be transported to another member state. If later on, the tax inspector finds that the goods were not taken outside the Netherlands and/or the VAT identification number is incorrect, the tax inspector cannot levy VAT retrospectively based on the principle of legal certainty under Union law. The tax inspector can only levy retrospectively (1) if it can be reasonably proven that the supplier was actively involved in tax fraud with the transactions or (2) if it can be reasonably proven that the supplier involuntarily became involved in tax fraud with the transactions and did not do everything to prevent being involved in such tax fraud. The retrospective tax assessment is upheld because the taxpayer had objective indications that the goods being picked up would not be transported to another member state. Since emails provided by the taxpayer indicate that she had these objective indications, her gross negligence can be attributed to her. As for the punishment, the judge must determine an appropriate and necessary fine independently and is not dependent on what the parties argue.Regenerate response
Source: uitspraken.rechtspraak.nl
