VATcodexEU VAT case law · Court of Justice and General Court

Principles of fiscal neutrality and proportionality EU VAT case law

24 cases of the Court of Justice and the General Court of the European Union on this point of VAT law, from 2008 to 2026.

Search within this topicThe cases ↓

Provisions these cases interpret most

The 24 cases, most recent first

Under each case, what the Court decided, from its summary. The summaries are AI-generated and are not official documents: open the case for the Court’s own text.

C-167/26 RX Dyrektor Krajowej Informacji Skarbowej

Opinion of the Advocate General · 10 September 2026 · Poland

Review, when the right to deduct is exercised where the invoice arrives in a later period

Advocate General’s proposal, not a ruling. The Advocate General proposes that the Court hold that the judgment of the General Court of 11 February 2026 in Dyrektor Krajowej Informacji Skarbowej (T-689/24) affects the unity and consistency of EU law. On the substance she proposes that the provisions and principles at issue be interpreted as meaning, first, that the right to deduct input tax must be exercised in respect of the period during which the two required conditions are satisfied for the first time, the goods have been delivered or the services performed and the taxable person holds the relevant invoice, and, second, that they do not preclude national legislation under which a taxable person may not assert the right in a return for a period in which the substantive conditions were met but the invoice had not yet been received, even where the invoice arrived before that return was submitted.

T-638/24 Finanzamt Österreich (Intra-Community acquisition and supply – double taxation)

Judgment · 25 February 2026 · Austria

Article 41 taxation of intra-Community acquisitions alongside liability for VAT wrongly shown on the invoice

They do not preclude it. Articles 41 and 203 have distinct conditions and purposes and may apply simultaneously. The Dyrektor Izby Skarbowej w W. case is distinguished because there the supply had been definitively treated as non-exempt and taxed, whereas an Article 203 liability arises from the invoice alone, not from taxation of the supply, and can in principle be corrected. The second question was not examined. Businesses that quote the departure Member State's VAT number on cross-border purchases can face acquisition tax there under Article 41 even where the supplier has also been made liable for VAT wrongly shown on the invoice. Relevant to periods before Directive 2018/1910.

C-602/24 W. (Export without the knowledge of the taxable person)

Judgment · 1 August 2025 · Poland

Export exemption where the customer exports without the supplier's knowledge

The exemption applies. Where the right to dispose as owner passed, the goods physically left the European Union and there was no consumption inside it, the objective conditions of Article 146(1)(b) are met. The parties' original intention to make an intra-Community supply and the supplier's ignorance of the export are subjective factors and irrelevant, as is the fact that the tax authorities, not the supplier, produced the proof. The limits remain because formal breaches preventing conclusive proof of the substantive conditions, or the supplier's knowing participation in evasion. Relevant wherever a supplier zero-rates on the basis of the customer's transport documents and the goods turn out to have gone to a third country instead.

C-341/22 Feudi di San Gregorio Aziende Agricole

Judgment · 7 March 2024 · Italy

Denial of deduction to "non-operating" companies

Status as a taxable person depends solely on whether an economic activity is actually carried on. It cannot be made conditional on output transactions exceeding a pre-set income threshold. Nor may deduction be refused on the ground that output transactions are insufficient. A volume-based presumption is unconnected to the criteria for establishing fraud or abuse and goes beyond what is necessary under Article 273. Deduction may still be refused where fraud or abuse is established on objective evidence, not by assumption. Italian companies caught by the Article 30 Law No 724/1994 shell company regime can challenge refusals of VAT credits, refunds, offsets and carry-forwards based purely on turnover falling short of the asset-based threshold.

C-418/22 Cezam

Judgment · 17 May 2023 · Belgium

Penalties calculated on gross VAT before deduction

Article 273 and those principles do not preclude such legislation, subject to the referring court's assessment of proportionality in the individual case. Neutrality is not infringed where the fine does not itself deny or hinder the right of deduction. Here input VAT was allowed of the authorities' own motion. EN.SA. is distinguished because there the output tax had been paid and no revenue was at risk, whereas here declaration and payment were withheld over a prolonged period. Confirms that Member States may compute VAT penalties on gross output tax rather than on the net amount payable, provided the right of deduction itself remains intact.

C-696/20 Dyrektor Izby Skarbowej w W. (Incorrect classification of chain transactions)

Judgment · 7 July 2022 · Poland

Article 41 safety net where a chain transaction is misclassified

Article 41 applies even where the Member State of identification is the Member State of departure, and taxation there is not excluded merely because the customers taxed the separate later transaction at destination. It does, however, preclude such taxation where the intra-Community supply giving rise to the acquisition has not been treated as exempt in that Member State. Taxing both breaches proportionality and neutrality, and no risk of avoidance arises.

C-717/19 Boehringer Ingelheim

Judgment · 6 October 2021 · Hungary

Reduction of the taxable amount for voluntary payments to a State health insurance agency

Article 90(1) of the VAT Directive precludes both conditions. Article 90(1) is not limited to price reductions imposed by law. A voluntary contractual payment reducing the consideration actually retained is a price reduction after the supply, the health insurance agency being treated as final consumer. Member States' discretion cannot extend to conditions that deny the reduction to an entire category of taxpayers. Where no invoice has been issued, neutrality and proportionality require the taxpayer to be allowed to prove the transaction by other means, particularly where the counterparty is a State entity. Confirms and extends Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma (C-462/16) to voluntary rebate arrangements with public payers, relevant to pharmaceutical and medical device suppliers operating under price volume or clawback agreements with State reimbursement bodies across the EU.

C-48/20 P (Fuel cards)

Judgment · 18 March 2021 · Poland

Adjusting VAT wrongly shown on fuel card invoices

They do preclude such legislation. Where the issuer acted in good faith, here relying on a consistent practice of the Polish authorities treating fuel card arrangements as chain supplies rather than exempt financing, Member States must provide a means of adjustment. Denying it while the underlying supplies by the service stations are themselves taxed imposes a tax burden contrary to neutrality. Member States otherwise remain free to set the conditions for adjustment. Relevant to fuel card and similar intermediation structures reassessed after Vega International, and more broadly to anyone facing an Article 203 assessment on invoices issued in reliance on published rulings or settled administrative practice.

C-895/19 A. (Exercise of the right of deduction)

Judgment · 18 March 2021

A three-month deadline that split the deduction from the tax on an intra-Community acquisition

The Court held that Articles 167 and 178 preclude such national legislation. The right to deduct arises at the time the deductible tax becomes chargeable, and in the case of an intra-Community acquisition the tax due and the deduction relate to the same period. A national rule making the exercise of the deduction in that period dependent on compliance with a declaration deadline subjects the substantive right to a formal requirement, produces a charge to interest on a sum which the taxable person did not in fact owe to the treasury, and goes beyond what is necessary to ensure the correct collection of the tax and to prevent evasion. The judgment applies to the reverse charge on intra-Community acquisitions the distinction between formal and substantive requirements that runs through Ecotrade and its line.

C-656/19 BAKATI PLUS

Judgment · 17 December 2020 · Hungary

Retail export scheme and goods carried in travellers' personal luggage

The traveller exemption does not cover goods carried out of the EU for commercial purposes with a view to resale in a third State. Article 147 targets natural persons not acting as economic operators and promotes tourism. But Article 147 is only a special case of Article 146(1)(b), so failure of its conditions does not defeat the export exemption, which turns on objective criteria, not customs formalities or intention. Automatic refusal is precluded, unless the breach prevents proof of actual export or the taxable person knew or should have known of fraud jeopardising the VAT system. Relevant to retailers and wholesalers operating retail export (tax free shopping) schemes near external borders, and to their advisers.

C-146/19 SCT

Judgment · 11 June 2020 · Slovenia

Bad debt relief where the claim was not lodged in the debtor's insolvency

Extinction of the claim through failure to lodge it produces a definitive reduction of the debtor's obligations, so this is not "non-payment" under Article 90(2) but falls under Article 90(1). Requiring lodgement is in principle a legitimate formality under Articles 90(1) and 273, but refusal is precluded where the taxable person shows the claim would not have been recovered even if lodged. Article 90(1) has direct effect. National courts must interpret national law consistently or disapply it. Creditors in Member States that condition bad debt relief on procedural steps in the debtor's insolvency now have an escape route. Relevant to insolvency practitioners, credit control and finance teams, and advisers handling write-offs.

C-756/19 Ramada Storax

Order · 29 April 2020 · Portugal

Bad debt relief cannot be refused because the insolvency was declared abroad

The Court holds that those provisions preclude such legislation. Article 90(1) reflects the principle that the taxable amount is the consideration actually received, and a Member State cannot confine bad debt relief to insolvencies declared before its own courts under its own law. A finding of irrecoverability made by a court of another Member State must be given effect. An important order for cross border trade, where the customer insolvency will normally be handled abroad.

C-653/18 Unitel

Judgment · 17 October 2019 · Poland

Export exemption where the actual customer is not identified

Such a blanket practice is precluded. Identification of the acquirer is not a condition of a supply of goods, which depends on the objective criteria of transfer of the right to dispose as owner and physical exit from the European Union. The exemption may nonetheless be refused where the failure to identify the acquirer prevents proof that those substantive conditions are met, or where the taxable person knew or should have known the transaction formed part of a fraud damaging the common VAT system. Fraud in a third country does not automatically exclude this. If refused, there is no taxable transaction and no input tax deduction. Exporters facing assessments because the invoiced customer turns out to be a front cannot be denied the zero rate on that ground alone. Relevant to electronics and other high risk export trades.

C-127/18 A-PACK CZ

Judgment · 8 May 2019 · Czechia

Bad debt relief where the insolvent debtor has lost taxable person status

Article 90 precludes national legislation denying correction of the taxable amount for total or partial non-payment on the ground that the debtor is no longer a taxable person. The derogation in Article 90(2) exists only to address uncertainty as to whether non-payment is definitive. Loss of taxable person status in insolvency points the other way. Article 273 cannot justify a rule that forces a supplier to pay VAT it never received, absent any particular evasion risk.

C-214/18 PSM K

Judgment · 10 April 2019 · Poland

Whether statutory fees are treated as VAT inclusive

Those provisions and principles do not preclude such a practice. The Directive contains no rule on whether such fees include VAT, so it is for Member States to decide. Where national law does not permit VAT to be added to the statutory fee, the fee must be regarded as VAT inclusive. That respects neutrality and ensures the taxable amount does not exceed the consideration actually paid. Macikowski, which concerned an officer liable for another person's tax, is distinguished. The answer assumes the officer is a taxable person outside Article 13 and cannot gross up. Confirms that where a regulated tariff is silent on VAT, the taxable person, not the customer, absorbs the tax.

C-491/18 Mennica Wrocławska

Order · 13 December 2018 · Poland

An error in describing the goods on an invoice does not defeat deduction

The Court holds that those provisions preclude such a refusal, where the taxable person supplied the authorities, before their decision, with the documents and explanations needed to determine the real subject matter of the transactions and to show that they had actually taken place. Deduction may still be refused where the right is invoked fraudulently or abusively, but the referring court had found no fraud here. A clear application of Barlis 06 and Senatex.

C-648/16 Fontana

Judgment · 21 November 2018 · Italy

Assessing VAT on turnover estimated by sector studies

No objection in principle. Article 273 leaves Member States discretion, and extrapolation from sector studies to assess additional VAT where declared and estimated revenue differ seriously is permissible. The qualification is that the studies must be correct, reliable and up to date, the discrepancy can create only a rebuttable presumption, the taxable person must be able to contest the study's accuracy and its relevance to his situation with any contrary evidence and without an excessive standard of proof, and must still exercise deduction under Title X. Verification is for the national court. Relevant wherever indirect assessment methods, standard margins, sectoral benchmarks or turnover reconstruction are used, notably in Italy but also in other Member States operating similar presumptive tools.

C-664/16 Vădan

Judgment · 21 November 2018 · Romania

Proving input tax without invoices

No deduction may be granted solely on the basis of an assessment resulting from a court-commissioned expert report where the taxable person cannot evidence the input VAT actually paid by invoices or any other document. Formal defects need not be fatal where the authorities have the information to verify the substantive conditions, but the burden of proof rests on the claimant. Objective evidence, including documents held by suppliers, is required. An expert report may supplement or reinforce such evidence, never replace it. Relevant to property developers and any taxable person reconstructing historic input tax after a retrospective registration or assessment, and to advisers arguing substance over form.

C-69/17 Siemens Gamesa Renewable Energy România

Judgment · 12 September 2018 · Romania

Deduction of VAT on acquisitions made while the taxpayer was declared inactive

The Court held that the Directive precludes such a refusal where it is based on the sole ground that the acquisitions fell within the period of de-activation. Registration and notification duties under Articles 213 and 214 are formal requirements only. Deduction must be allowed provided the substantive conditions of Article 168 are met and the right is not invoked fraudulently or abusively. The date of the return or invoice is not decisive. The national court must verify that the authorities had the data needed to establish the substantive conditions. Businesses whose VAT numbers have been cancelled for non-filing, a common Romanian practice and mirrored elsewhere, can recover input VAT incurred during the inactive period once reactivated, provided the substantive conditions are shown and there is no fraud or abuse.

C-576/15 Maya Marinova

Judgment · 5 October 2016 · Bulgaria

Estimated assessment where supplies and revenue are concealed

They do not preclude such legislation. Failure to keep accounts and to record invoices may be treated as tax evasion, and Article 273 leaves Member States discretion to re-establish the position that would have existed absent evasion, estimating the taxable amount as closely as possible to the consideration actually received. Fiscal neutrality cannot be invoked by a taxable person who intentionally concealed transactions. The national court must still verify that the rules go no further than necessary. Article 80 was irrelevant, concerning tied parties. Confirms that estimated or "analogous" assessments based on suppliers' invoices, stock absences and typical margins are compatible with the Directive, even though they depart from Article 73 and identify no customer.

C-499/13 Macikowski

Judgment · 26 March 2015 · Poland

Obligations of the court enforcement officer as paying agent on compulsory sales

None of these provisions precludes the Polish mechanism. The officer is a mere intermediary collecting tax on the taxable person's behalf, not a person liable, jointly liable or a tax representative under Article 204. The scheme falls within Article 273. Personal liability with all his assets is proportionate only if the officer actually has all the legal means to discharge the obligation in time, which the national court must verify. The supplier retains its right to deduct and may claim repayment of any overpayment. Confirms that Member States may use third party collection agents under Article 273 without engaging the liability rules in Articles 193 to 205. Relevant to enforcement officers, insolvency practitioners and auctioneers in Member States operating similar withholding mechanisms, and to advisers on compulsory sales of land.

C-259/12 Rodopi-M 91

Judgment · 20 June 2013 · Bulgaria

Penalty for belated adjustment following cancellation of an invoice

Fiscal neutrality does not preclude such a fine, even where the taxable person has since remedied the omission and paid the tax with interest. The fine sanctions belated rectification of a deduction that had ceased to have a basis, not a transaction, so no double taxation arises. Proportionality is for the national court, having regard to the time taken to rectify, the seriousness of the irregularity and any evasion or circumvention. Late payment alone is not evasion. Confirms that Member States may penalise late adjustment of deductions at up to 100% of the tax, and that voluntary correction plus interest does not itself neutralise the penalty. Relevant to any business making credit note or cancellation adjustments in Member States with fixed percentage penalty regimes, and to those handling Bulgarian ZDDS assessments.

C-107/10 Enel Maritsa Iztok 3

Judgment · 12 May 2011 · Bulgaria

Default interest on delayed refunds of excess VAT

Article 183 precludes retrospective extension of the refund period where it deprives the taxable person of an accrued right to default interest. It also precludes deferring the start of interest to completion of a tax investigation where the excess has already been carried forward for three tax periods. The option of posting cash security does not save that regime. A 45 day normal refund period is compatible. Refund by set-off is permitted, provided effective remedies exist to contest the debt relied on. Relevant to any business holding persistent VAT credits in Member States that suspend refund clocks during audits.

C-25/07 Sosnowska

Judgment · 10 July 2008 · Poland

Extended repayment period for newly registered taxable persons

Article 18(4) and the principle of proportionality preclude such rules. Combating fraud is a legitimate aim, but a general, preventive regime applied to a whole category of taxable persons with no opportunity to show the absence of any risk of fraud goes too far, particularly where 180 days is not shown to be necessary and the fixed guarantee bears no relation to the credit or the trader's size. Absent unanimous Council authorisation, the rules cannot be Article 27(1) derogations. Confirms that repayment of VAT credits must be made within a reasonable time and by means carrying no appreciable financial risk for the trader. Relevant to advisers dealing with repayment-position businesses, new registrations and intra-Community traders facing extended verification periods.

Related topics

Right of deduction · Rules governing exercise of the right of deduction · Origin and scope of right of deduction · Exemptions on importation and exportation · Proof · Obligations of taxable persons · Supply of goods or services · National derogations · Tax evasion and abuse · Taxable amount