The court sees no reason to ask the Court of Justice for a preliminary ruling. Article 12, second paragraph, second paragraph, VAT Directive 2006 has no direct effect and the court does not see any indications that the implementation of the VAT Directive 2006 in Dutch law would be incorrect. In the opinion of the court, the overlapping exemption can therefore only apply if there is a manufactured good as required by Dutch law and the VAT Directive 2006 does not force a different, less far-reaching test to be applied. . A renovation of a building that cannot be qualified as “substantially new construction” is therefore insufficient.
Source: deeplink.rechtspraak.nl
Latest Posts in "Netherlands"
- Late objection to additional VAT assessment remains inadmissible
- Municipal Entrepreneurs’ Fund Not Eligible for VAT Deduction Due to Non-Compliance with Approval Conditions
- Knowledge group position: VAT reverse charge mechanism applicable to contractor activities
- When Is a Theatre Drink a Separate VAT Supply? Lessons from the Dutch Supreme Court
- Fraudulent Employee Purchases Lead to VAT Liability Without Deduction for Company
