On Wednesday 05/02/2020 there is a hearing in the case C-835/18 Terracult.
As we wrote here, this Romanian case is about denial of correction invoices after assessment has already been imposed.
Then, the next day on Thursday 06/02/2020 Advocate General Sharpston will provide an opinion about the C-276/18 KrakVet Marek Batko case.
This case questions if the Hungarian tax authorities are allowed – in the fight against VAT fraud – to levy VAT without checking the situation with the Polish tax authorities. Further, it raises the question how the concept of ‘transport by or on behalf of the supplier’ (the transport requirement from the distance selling scheme) should be interpreted in a situation where the seller gives the buyer the opportunity to opt for a carrier. More details can be found here.
Also on Thursday 06/02/2020, we can expect another opinion. This time by Advocate General Kokott about the case C-716/18 AJFP Caraş-Severin and DGRFP Timişoara.
As we wrote here, via this case we hope to learn how to define the definition of “main activity” in relation to the SME VAT exemption.
On Wednesday 12/02/2020, a hearing is scheduled in the case C-42/19 Sonaecom.
This case is about a situation where input VAT is incurred on costs relating to an acquisition that is canceled. See here.
On Wednesday 26/02/2020 we can expect a hearing in the case C-146/19 SCT.
More details here, but in short the case is about bad debts where a tax payer did not file its invoices with the bankruptcy register, and as such did not receive anything from the bankruptcy cash-pool. The Slovenian tax authorities argued that the tax payer should have tried to get some money from the customer first, but the tax payer argues that this is not required based on EU VAT rules.
Also on Wednesday 26/02/2020, a hearing is scheduled in the case C-235/19 United Biscuits (Pensions Trustees) and United Biscuits Pension Investments.
As you can read here, this UK case is about the VAT exemption for pension fund management services to trustees.
Then, on Tuesday 03/03/2020, we can expect two judgements in cases C-75/18 Vodafone Magyarország and C-323/18 Tesco-Global Áruházak.
In both cases, Advocate General Kokott’s advice was to treat the new retail/telecom tax not as a forbidden turnover tax in the sense of article 401.
More details can be found here and here.
