X works as a tax advisor for clients of two cooperatives. X is also a member and co-director of those cooperatives. He receives a monthly advance of € 2500 from one cooperative. He always charges € 400 to the other cooperative for each cooperative that has been set up. After a due diligence, the inspector states that X is not a VAT entrepreneur and that he has therefore wrongly deducted input tax. According to the Supreme Court (28 February 2020, 18/00873, UN 2020/12.16), the Court of Appeal’s judgment on the lack of VAT entrepreneurship is insufficiently substantiated. Follows reference.
The ‘s-Hertogenbosch Court ruled that X has a legal relationship with both cooperatives and in that context independently provides services to them for consideration. The inspector argues in vain that there is an employment contract between X and the cooperatives. X argues, without being contradicted, that he carries out the work completely independently and is not under any authority. He therefore carries out the activities under his own name, for his own account/responsibility and bears the economic risk for those activities. X correctly deducted the input tax.
Source Taxlive.nl
Latest Posts in "Netherlands"
- Reduced VAT Rate for Open Access Publication Rights: Single or Separate Service from Reading Rights?
- Dutch Government Under Pressure to Act as Fuel Prices Soar Amid Middle East Conflict
- Amsterdam Court Convicts Director for Tax Fraud and Non-Cooperation, Imposes Community Service and Suspended SentencePoland
- ViDA E‑Invoicing and Digital Reporting in the Netherlands: Strategic Choices and Phased Timeline to 2032
- Netherlands announces changes to non-EU VAT refund scheme as of 1 April 2026













