The plaintiff is based in the Netherlands. She is part of a group of companies established in several Member States. The head office is located in Germany. The services provided to the claimant by the head office and other companies belonging to the group established outside the Netherlands lead to taxation for the claimant. The plaintiff argues that there is an obstacle to the freedom of establishment, because the territorial boundary of the fiscal unity confronts her with taxation that would not otherwise have been there. After all, in the case of a fiscal unity, mutual benefits are not taxed. The court ruled that the plaintiff is not hindered in her freedom of establishment. Nor has it become plausible that there is a similar case with companies that can form a fiscal unity.
Source: rechtspraak.nl
Latest Posts in "Netherlands"
- Liability of Director for Payroll and VAT Debts: Valid Notification of Inability to Pay Disputed
- Pension Fund Not Classified as Investment Fund for VAT Exemption on Management Services
- VAT Zero Rate, Reverse Charge, Input Tax Deduction, and Penalty Dispute for Wholesale Trader 2018-2019
- Fiscal Unity X-Y: VAT Assessments, Penalties, and Organizational Cohesion Upheld by Dutch Courts
- Tax Relief Approved for Economic Ownership Transfer Before VAT Delivery of Building Land
