Single and composite supplies EU VAT case law

7 cases of the Court of Justice and the General Court of the European Union on this point of VAT law, from 1999 to 2025.

Search within this topic The cases ↓

Provisions these cases interpret most

Article 2 of Directive 2006/112/EC Subject matter and scope · 5 of these cases
Article 135 of Directive 2006/112/EC Exemptions for other activities · 5 of these cases
Article 1 of Directive 2006/112/EC Subject matter and scope · 3 of these cases
Article 78 of Directive 2006/112/EC Supply of goods or services · 3 of these cases
Article 73 of Directive 2006/112/EC Supply of goods or services · 2 of these cases
Article 28 of Directive 2006/112/EC Supply of services · 2 of these cases
Article 13 of Sixth Directive 77/388/EEC Exemptions · 2 of these cases
Article 146 of Directive 2006/112/EC Exemptions on exportation · 1 of these cases

The 7 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-427/23 Határ Diszkont

Judgment · 1 August 2025

A refund handling fee is its own supply, and it is not a net amount

The Court held that the handling service is a distinct and independent supply and not part of a single supply with the goods, and that it is not covered by the exemptions relied on. The protection of legitimate expectations may be relied on against the tax authority where that authority had consistently treated such services as exempt and had not informed the taxable person of the change in the national legislation which, in its earlier version, expressly listed them among exempt activities. It is irrelevant in that context that the taxable person later received a non-binding reply, given after the event on a request for a ruling, stating that the services were ancillary costs sharing the treatment of the exempt principal transaction. Articles 73 and 78 preclude the practice of treating the amounts invoiced as the handling fee as net amounts not including VAT, where the supplier treated its supply as exempt and it is manifestly impossible for it to recover the VAT afterwards from the purchasers. The judgment separates two operations that a retailer performs in the same transaction with the same customer and gives them different treatment, and it does so without allowing the exemption on the goods to carry across to the service.

C-89/23 Companhia União de Crédito Popular

Judgment · 18 April 2024 · Portugal

Auction of pledged goods as a supply separate from exempt pawnbroking

The Court held that the auction organisation services are not ancillary to the granting of pledge-secured credit and do not share its VAT treatment. They are substantively and procedurally independent, the credit could be supplied identically if a third party ran the auction, the sale is not the usual outcome of the loan but follows only from default, and it is an end in itself. Final factual assessment remains for the national court. Pawnbrokers and other lenders realising security must treat enforcement fees and sale commissions as separate taxable supplies, not as part of exempt credit, even where national law obliges the lender to conduct the sale and fixes the commission rate.

C-505/22 Deco Proteste - Editores

Judgment · 5 October 2023 · Portugal

Subscription gifts as an ancillary supply, not a free transfer

The gift is a supply ancillary to the principal supply of the periodicals, forming part of a supply of goods for consideration under Article 2(1)(a), and is not a disposal of goods free of charge under the first paragraph of Article 16. It has no distinct purpose for the average consumer, who pays at least one month's subscription to obtain it, and it aids enjoyment of the magazines. Whether the criteria are met remains for the national court. The questions on the small-value gift ceiling were not answered. Publishers and any business using a device or gadget as an enrolment incentive can treat the item as following the tax treatment of the principal supply, here the reduced rate for periodicals, rather than accounting for output tax as a free transfer. Relevant to subscription media, telecoms bundles and loyalty and acquisition promotions generally.

C-208/15 Stock ‘94

Judgment · 8 December 2016 · Hungary

Tied vendor finance as part of a single supply of goods

A single transaction, in which the supply of the goods is the principal supply and the tied loan merely a means of acquiring them. The taxable amount comprises both the price of the goods and the interest. The Court's reasoning turns on the loan being usable only to buy the integrator's inputs, so it has no independent interest for the farmer, a matter for the national court to verify. The options to supply additional services or buy the production are irrelevant. Relevant to suppliers offering tied or restricted purchase financing, notably agricultural input suppliers, equipment dealers and other vendor credit arrangements, where interest has been invoiced as exempt under Article 135(1)(b).

C-224/11 BGŻ Leasing

Judgment · 17 January 2013 · Poland

Insurance re-invoiced by a lessor with the leasing service

Leasing and insurance of the leased asset are in principle distinct and independent supplies. Insurance is an end in itself for the lessee, and a contractual requirement to insure, or a termination clause covering unpaid premiums, does not make it ancillary. The national court must still verify the specific circumstances. Where the lessor insures the item and re-invoices the exact cost, that is an exempt insurance transaction. The reasoning does not apply if the lessee is charged more than the insurer charged the lessor. Lessors and other asset finance providers offering block cover to customers can treat the re-invoiced premium as exempt, and insurance costs of that kind do not fall into the taxable amount of the lease under Article 78. Relevant to leasing, equipment and vehicle finance, and to advisers reviewing composite supply analyses generally.

C-532/11 Leichenich

Judgment · 15 November 2012 · Germany

Letting of a permanently moored houseboat as immovable property

The exemption applies. Where the houseboat is fixed by attachments not easily removable to the riverbank and bed, occupies a demarcated identifiable location and is used under the contract exclusively for the permanent operation of a restaurant-discotheque, it forms a functional and economic unit with the submerged and non-submerged ground. That is a single exempt supply, the landing stage being ancillary. Such a houseboat is not a vehicle. What matters is actual current function, not original use.

C-349/96 CPP

Judgment · 25 February 1999 · United Kingdom

Single or multiple supplies and the insurance exemption for block policy holders

Procuring insurance cover for customers under a block policy, in one's own name and account, is itself an insurance transaction. "Insurance" includes the listed assistance categories. Each supply is normally distinct, but a single economic supply must not be split artificially. A single supply exists where elements are ancillary, not an aim in themselves but a means of better enjoying the principal service. A single price is not decisive. If two distinct services are bought, the insurance part must be apportioned by the simplest method. Classification is for the national court. Restricting the exemption to authorised insurers is unlawful. The source of the composite supply test now applied across the board.