Supply of goods or services EU VAT case law

T-643/24 Credidam

Judgment · 11 February 2026 · Romania

Unlicensed communication to the public and the triple tariff surcharge

The General Court (Preliminary Ruling Chamber) held there is a taxable supply for consideration. Neither the absence of a licence, nor the rightholders' inability to object, nor the statutory origin of the remuneration, nor collection through a management organisation breaks the direct link. VAT applies to the entire sum due, including the element exceeding the notional licence fee, because that surcharge flows directly from the statutory framework governing unlicensed communication. Verification of the facts, including whether communication occurred, is for the referring court. For collecting societies and users of protected content, a statutory surcharge for unlicensed use is taxable consideration and not VAT-free damages, wherever the uplift is fixed by the same legal framework that governs the licensed use. Relevant to hotels, bars, broadcasters and other commercial users facing retrospective claims.

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-808/23 Högkullen

Judgment · 3 July 2025 · Sweden

Open market value of parent company management services to subsidiaries

Articles 72 and 80 preclude a tax authority from treating such services as in all cases a single supply that excludes determination of open market value by the comparison method in the first paragraph of Article 72. The services, although supplied together, each appear to have their own identifiable character, and a single global price charged to subsidiaries cannot be decisive for intra-group supplies. The second question, resting on the opposite premiss, did not require an answer. Relevant to any group where a holding or parent company charges management fees to subsidiaries with restricted deduction rights, and to Member States operating Article 80 revaluation rules.

C-615/23 Dyrektor Krajowej Informacji Skarbowej (Services de transport public)

Judgment · 8 May 2025 · Poland

Public transport compensation and the taxable amount

The Court held that such compensation is not included in the taxable amount. It is not paid so that the operator supplies a service to a particular recipient, and fares are not fixed so as to fall in proportion to it. The fact that fares would otherwise be higher is not enough. The Le Rayon d'Or line is distinguished. Here the beneficiaries are all potential passengers, and the compensation ignores the identity and number of users, depending instead on vehicle-kilometres offered. Useful for public transport operators and their advisers across the EU where authorities fund public service obligations under Regulation 1370/2007.

C-248/23 Novo Nordisk (VAT – Contributions paid pursuant to an ex lege obligation)

Judgment · 12 September 2024 · Hungary

Statutory clawback payments by pharmaceutical companies as a price reduction

Article 90(1) precludes such legislation. Even though the payments may be included in the taxable amount as a tax under Article 78(a) and Article 401 does not stand in the way, their ex lege character is irrelevant. The health insurance agency is the actual beneficiary and the final consumer, the payments serve the same subsidy purpose as contractual price volume payments, and the company never freely disposed of that part of the consideration. Collection via the tax authority, which transfers the sums immediately, does not change this. Confirms and extends Boehringer Ingelheim (C-717/19) to purely statutory clawbacks. Relevant to life sciences and healthcare indirect tax advisers.

C-87/23 Latvijas Informācijas un komunikācijas tehnoloģijas asociācija

Judgment · 4 July 2024 · Latvia

Non-profit association, EU-funded training and the taxable amount

Subcontracted training invoiced by a non-profit association, subsidised by European funds up to 70%, is a supply of services for consideration. Article 28 does not apply absent an express agency agreement showing supply in one's own name on behalf of another. Subsidies paid by a European fund for a specific supply enter the taxable amount as third-party payment. Non-profit status does not preclude taxable person status where conduct is comparable to a typical operator. The referring court must still consider the Article 132(1)(i) exemption. Relevant to associations, foundations and other non-profit bodies delivering EU or nationally co-funded training and similar programmes, and to their advisers.

C-241/23 P

Judgment · 8 May 2024 · Poland

Taxable amount of an in-kind property contribution in exchange for shares

The taxable amount is determined by reference to the issue value of the shares where the companies agreed that this was the consideration. The consideration is the subjective value actually agreed and received, not an objective one, and the fact that the issue value was fixed by reference to market valuations of the property does not change that. The referring court may still check that the agreed value reflects economic and commercial reality and is not abusive. Article 80 applies only in its exhaustive listed cases. Relevant to any share-for-asset capital contribution, common in property and group restructurings.

C-657/22 Bitulpetrolium Serv

Judgment · 25 April 2024 · Romania

VAT on penalty excise duty for energy products reintroduced into a tax warehouse

Directive 2003/96 and the principle of proportionality preclude both practices. Energy products must be taxed according to actual use. Imposing the motor fuel rate as a penalty for breach of formal conditions, without allowing the operator to prove actual use, exceeds what is necessary to counter evasion. Although Article 78(1)(a) prima facie brings excise duty into the taxable amount, VAT on the additional excise duty is not due unless a taxable supply of the product for use as a motor fuel actually takes place. Relevant to fuel distributors, tax warehousekeepers and their advisers in Member States that convert documentary or notification breaches into the higher motor fuel excise rate.

C-207/23 Finanzamt X (Application and disposal of goods free of charge)

Judgment · 25 April 2024 · Germany

Free-of-charge disposal of surplus heat and calculation of cost price

Yes: where the goods (heat is tangible property) formed part of business assets and input VAT was wholly or partly deductible, the free transfer is a deemed supply for consideration, regardless of the recipient's tax status or use. The only exception is samples and gifts of small value under the second paragraph of Article 16. Cost price under Article 74 applies only absent a purchase price for the goods or similar goods, and then includes direct and indirect costs, including financing costs, whether or not they bore input VAT. Energy producers, biogas and CHP operators and anyone releasing surplus output free of charge cannot argue away Article 16 on the basis that the recipient is a taxable person using the goods in a deductible activity.

C-606/22 Dyrektor Izby Administracji Skarbowej w Bydgoszczy (Possibility of adjustment in the case of incorrect rate)

Judgment · 21 March 2024 · Poland

Correcting an incorrect VAT rate where only till receipts were issued

Such a practice is precluded. VAT is automatically included in the agreed price under Article 78(a), even where the rate was wrongly determined, but that does not deprive the supplier of a right to a refund, notably where the excessive rate cost it sales volume or margin. Refusing correction solely because till receipts, not invoices, were issued breaches effectiveness where cash register memory allows accurate correction. Unjust enrichment may be invoked only if the authorities establish, by economic analysis of all relevant circumstances, that the burden was completely neutralised. Retailers and consumer facing businesses across sectors (leisure, hospitality, food) that have charged too high a rate on till receipt sales can pursue adjustment by amended return.

C-377/23 Sancra

Order · 5 February 2024 · Portugal

A price invoiced at a wrong zero rate is treated as including the correct VAT

The Court holds that the invoiced price must be regarded as already including VAT, unless national law gives the taxable person the possibility of passing the corrected tax on to the final consumers and recovering it from them. VAT is a tax borne by the final consumer, and adding the tax on top of a price already paid would make the supplier bear a burden the system does not intend. The natural companion to Tulica and Plavosin and to the Galicia case.

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-521/19 Tribunal Económico Administrativo Regional de Galicia

Judgment · 1 July 2021 · Spain

Undeclared consideration in a fraud is treated as VAT inclusive

The Court holds that they must be regarded as a price already including VAT, unless national law allows the taxable person to pass on and deduct the VAT afterwards notwithstanding the fraud. VAT is a tax on consumption borne by the final consumer, and treating the reconstituted sum as net would make the supplier bear a tax burden contrary to neutrality, even though the concealment was deliberate. An important judgment for the arithmetic of assessments, and a Spanish one.

C-802/19 Firma Z

Judgment · 11 March 2021 · Germany

Discounts to insured persons and reduction of the taxable amount

The pharmacy cannot reduce its taxable amount. The pharmacy's supply to the fund was an exempt intra-Community supply, so there was no taxable amount capable of adjustment, and the onward supply by the fund to its insured persons fell outside the scope of VAT altogether. The conditions of Article 90(1) were therefore not met, and there was no need to consider whether a chain of transactions within the meaning of Elida Gibbs existed. Offsetting a reduction against the taxable amount of a different transaction is precluded. Elida Gibbs relief presupposes a taxable amount of the discount-giver that can be reduced.

C-787/19 Commission v Austria (VAT – Travel agents)

Judgment · 27 January 2021 · Austria

Austria could not exclude business customers from the travel agents scheme or use global margins

The Court finds the infringement established on both counts. The scheme applies to all types of customer, so business clients cannot be carved out, and the margin has to be determined for each supply of travel services rather than globally by category or period. Austria was ordered to pay the costs. The judgment closes the two most common national departures from the margin scheme.

C-573/18 C and C (VAT and agricultural subsidies)

Judgment · 9 October 2019 · Germany

Subsidies from a producer organisation's operational fund as consideration

Payments made by the operational fund to the producer organisation for the supply of the capital goods to its members form part of the consideration and are subsidies directly linked to the price paid by a third party. The price to producers was reduced by exactly the amount coming from the fund, so a direct link existed. The fund has its own legal capacity and its assets may be used only for approved operational programmes. The remaining questions did not require an answer. A producer organisation in fruit and vegetables accounts for output VAT on the full acquisition cost of capital goods passed on to members, not merely on the part invoiced.

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-295/17 Meo - Serviços de Comunicações e Multimédia

Judgment · 22 November 2018 · Portugal

Early termination charges as consideration for a supply

The sum is remuneration for a supply of services and subject to VAT, provided it corresponds to what the operator would have received had the contract run to term, which the national court must verify. The consideration is the customer's right to benefit from performance, whether or not exercised. The deterrent or compensatory purpose, the agent's commission structure and classification as a penalty under national law are all irrelevant. Where the sum is not actually collected, Article 90 adjustment may apply. In telecoms, utilities, gyms, subscription media and any business using minimum term contracts, an early termination charge calculated by reference to unexpired subscriptions is taxable consideration rather than compensation outside the scope.

C-544/16 Marcandi

Judgment · 5 July 2018 · United Kingdom

Sale of bid credits for online auctions as a separate supply of services

Issuing the credits is a supply of services for consideration, the consideration being the amount paid for them. The credits give an autonomous chance to buy below market value and are exhausted on bidding, so this is not a preliminary transaction to the supply of goods. The payment is not a payment on account for goods. Credit value is excluded from the taxable amount of the goods. For winners the taxable amount is the winning bid plus shipping, and for "buy now" and "earned discount" purchases the credits are a price discount under Article 79(b). Relevant to gamified e-commerce, entry-fee and pay-to-play platforms selling non-refundable tokens, credits or bid packs.

C-380/16 Commission v Germany

Judgment · 8 February 2018 · Germany

Travel agents' margin scheme excluded for business customers and applied on a global base

The Court upheld both complaints. Articles 306 to 310 do not restrict the special scheme to services supplied to final consumers, so excluding supplies to taxable persons acting for their business narrows the scheme beyond what the directive allows. And the margin must be determined by reference to each supply of travel. A global computation for groups of services or for a whole tax period is incompatible with Article 73 and with the structure of the scheme. Germany was ordered to pay the costs. The judgment that settled the customer-based reading of the travel agents' scheme against Germany and several other Member States, and it matters well beyond tour operators.

C-462/16 Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma

Judgment · 20 December 2017 · Germany

Statutory discounts to private health insurers and the taxable amount

The Court held that Article 90(1) requires the reduction. The manufacturer cannot freely dispose of the full price because the discount is fixed and mandatory by law, so part of the consideration is not received. The absence of any contractual link, or of a modification of contractual relations, does not preclude Article 90(1). On these facts the private insurer is to be treated as the final consumer of the manufacturer's supply, so VAT collected may not exceed what that final consumer paid. Manufacturers subject to statutory or regulated rebate schemes paid to parties outside the invoicing chain, in pharmaceuticals and comparable regulated sectors, can reduce the taxable amount rather than absorbing VAT on rebated amounts.

C-427/16 CHEZ Elektro Bulgaria and FrontEx International

Judgment · 23 November 2017 · Bulgaria

VAT as an inseparable part of lawyers' minimum fees

The minimum fee regime is capable of restricting competition, but it falls to the national court to check whether it pursues legitimate objectives proportionately. Reimbursement of lawyers' remuneration to parties represented by legal advisers is not precluded, and lies outside Directive 77/249. Article 78(a) precludes national law treating VAT as an inseparable component part of a registered lawyer's fee where the result is double taxation of that fee in VAT terms. Narrow but useful confirmation that the taxable amount excludes VAT itself, so a tariff cannot be defined as VAT inclusive in a way that produces tax on tax.

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-128/14 Het Oudeland Beheer

Judgment · 28 April 2016 · Netherlands

Valuing a self-supply of an office building held under a long lease

The Court holds that both elements may be included, notwithstanding the earlier payment and full deduction. As to measurement, where the land and the building under construction were acquired through the grant of a right in rem, the value of that right corresponds to the amount payable each year for the remainder of the long lease, corrected or capitalised by the same method used to value the grant of the leasehold. One of the technical anchors of the self supply rules now in Articles 18(a) and 74.

C-209/14 NLB Leasing

Judgment · 2 July 2015 · Slovenia

Repossession under a finance lease and reduction of the taxable amount

Where the lease provides for transfer of ownership on expiry, or the lessee enjoys all essential powers of ownership with substantially all risks and rewards and the present value of the payments is practically identical to market value, the transaction is an acquisition of capital goods. Article 90(1) does not permit reduction where the taxable person has in fact received all the consideration, or where, absent refusal or cancellation, the recipient is no longer liable for the price. Neutrality does not bar separate taxation of the lease and the onward sale unless they form a single supply, for the national court to decide. Relevant to lessors and to sale and lease back structures over immovable property.

C-256/14 Lisboagás GDL

Judgment · 11 June 2015 · Portugal

Municipal land use taxes passed on by a gas concessionaire belong in the taxable amount

The Court holds that they must be included in the taxable amount under Article 73. The sums are not amounts received as repayment of expenses paid in the name and for the account of the customer, because the concessionaire pays the municipal taxes in its own name and on its own account for the right to use public property that it needs in order to make its own supplies. A useful counterpoint to De Danske Bilimportorer.

C-16/14 Property Development Company

Judgment · 23 April 2015 · Belgium

Taxable amount on self-supply of a self-constructed building

Where the taxable person constructed rather than purchased the building and similar goods exist on the market, the taxable amount is the purchase price at the time of the application of buildings of similar location, size and other essential characteristics. Cost price applies only if no purchase price for the goods or similar goods exists. It is therefore irrelevant whether interim interest forms part of that purchase price. The taxable amount may never include value on which VAT was already paid without a right of deduction. Relevant to property developers and any business applying self-built assets to exempt use, notably lettings, and to Member States operating the Article 18 self-supply option.

C-92/13 Gemeente ‘s-Hertogenbosch

Judgment · 10 September 2014 · Netherlands

Self-supply charge on a building used mainly for public authority activities

Article 5(7)(a) applies to that situation where the Member State has exercised the option, the condition being that input VAT would not have been wholly deductible had the building been bought from another taxable person. Article 6(2)(a) allocation is not available where economic and non-economic activities are mixed. The full construction VAT is deductible, but the VAT due on the deemed self-supply (on the whole value of land and building) is recoverable only in the proportion used for taxable transactions. Relevant to public bodies and other partly non-taxable persons in Member States that have implemented the self-supply option for goods produced in the course of business, including works built by contractors on the owner's land.

C-461/12 Granton Advertising

Judgment · 12 June 2014 · Netherlands

VAT treatment of discount cards

Neither of the two exemptions applies to the sale of such a card. The card gives no ownership right, no claim against the issuer, has no nominal value and cannot be exchanged for money or goods, so it is not comparable to the securities listed and its sale is not a financial transaction. Nor is it a payment instrument. It does not transfer money, unlike payments, transfers and cheques. Use of the card is a price discount excluded from the affiliated business's taxable amount under Article 11(A)(3)(b), not a payment. Issuers of discount and loyalty cards must account for VAT on the full consideration received from consumers, the taxable amount being simply the card price.

C-151/13 Le Rayon d’Or

Judgment · 27 March 2014 · France

Lump-sum public funding as consideration for care services

Such a lump sum is consideration for the care supplied by the home to its residents and falls within the scope of VAT. Payment by a third party rather than the recipient does not break the direct link. Where the supply consists in the provider's permanent availability to give care as required, it is unnecessary that the care be defined in advance, personalised, or requested at a specific time, provided the amount is fixed in advance on well-established criteria. Relevant to care homes, hospitals, clinics and other operators funded by block or capitation payments from public insurance or social funds, and to advisers computing partial exemption fractions.

C-618/11 TVI

Judgment · 5 December 2013 · Portugal

Inclusion of a national screening tax in the taxable amount

The screening tax must be included in the taxable amount. Although it is not consideration and adds no value, it has a direct link with the supply because its chargeable event coincides with that for the VAT. It becomes chargeable as soon as, and only if, the screening services are supplied. The fiscal substitution mechanism and the use of suspense accounts do not make the tax a repayment of expenditure incurred in the name and on behalf of the customer. Confirms that the coincidence of chargeable events is the decisive test for whether a national levy sits inside the VAT base, so sector specific levies on broadcasting, advertising and similar services will normally be taxed even where the statutory debtor is the customer.

C-494/12 Dixons Retail

Judgment · 21 November 2013 · United Kingdom

Goods handed over against a fraudulently used bank card

The Court answers both questions in the affirmative. The concept of supply of goods is objective. The customer's fraudulent intent as to the means of payment is irrelevant, the retailer voluntarily handed over the goods, and no VAT fraud was involved. This is unlike theft, which neither transfers owner-like power nor produces any payment. Consideration need not come from the recipient. Payment by the card issuer or acquirer, the retailer having complied with the scheme procedures, is the taxable amount. Confirms that retailers and other card-accepting merchants cannot reclaim output VAT on sales later found to involve fraudulent card use where the acquirer or issuer has paid and not charged back. Relevant to high-value retail, e-commerce and any sector with significant card fraud exposure, and to advisers considering repayment claims framed on a theft analogy.

C-249/12 Tulică and Plavoşin

Judgment · 7 November 2013 · Romania

Whether a price agreed without reference to VAT is treated as VAT inclusive

Where the supplier cannot recover the VAT subsequently claimed from the purchaser, the agreed price must be treated as already including VAT. Otherwise the supplier bears a tax intended for the final consumer and the authorities collect more than the taxable person received. The position is different if national law allows the supplier to add a supplement equal to the tax and recover it from the purchaser. Whether such recovery is possible is for the national court to determine. The answer turns entirely on national contract and tax law. Relevant to property developers and individuals reclassified as taxable persons, and more widely to any silent-contract or undeclared-supply assessment.

C-440/12 Metropol Spielstätten

Judgment · 24 October 2013 · Germany

Cumulative VAT and gaming tax on slot machines, and the taxable amount

Cumulative levying is permitted provided the special national tax cannot be characterised as a turnover tax. Cash receipts over a set interval are a permissible taxable amount. With statutory limits on stakes, winnings and losses, the consideration is only the proportion of stakes the operator may keep, following Glawe. The hopper performs the same function as the earlier reserve compartment. Full offset of VAT against an unharmonised tax is not precluded. The pass-on questions were hypothetical, since the legislation does allow full pass-on. Confirms the German cash box method and closes the Glawe-based challenge to it, including the argument that new hopper technology distinguishes modern machines. Relevant to gaming advisers in any Member State with sector-specific levies.

C-283/12 Serebryannay vek

Judgment · 26 September 2013 · Bulgaria

Rent-free use of property in exchange for fitting-out works

The fitting-out and furnishing services are supplied for consideration. There is a direct link between them and the right, obtained under the contract, to have the apartment at the supplier's disposal for its business during the contractual term. That the owner benefits only when the contract expires is irrelevant, since the parties assumed reciprocal obligations on conclusion of the bilateral contract. The remaining questions on Articles 26, 62 and 63 therefore did not need to be answered. Confirms that rent-free occupation granted in return for tenant works is a barter of two taxable supplies, not a gratuitous supply. Relevant to property developers, hoteliers and operators taking shells on fit-out-for-rent-free terms, and to related-party arrangements between owner-managers and their companies.

C-651/11 X

Judgment · 30 May 2013 · Netherlands

Share disposal as a transfer of a going concern

The Court answers all three questions in the negative. A share transfer, whatever the size of the holding, is not equivalent to a transfer of a business unless the holding forms part of an independent unit permitting an independent economic activity which the transferee then carries on. Shares alone do not confer that. Article 5(8) speaks of a single transferor, so each sale is assessed separately. Only if the management activities were an autonomous business, separately priced, could a going-concern transfer arise, and then only for those activities. Sellers of shareholdings cannot escape VAT on the disposal by aggregating their sale with simultaneous sales by co-shareholders reaching 100%, and SKF paragraph 79 does not help where there are multiple vendors. Relevant to holding companies, private equity vendors and advisers structuring management buy-outs and exits in the Netherlands and elsewhere.

C-142/12 Marinov

Judgment · 8 May 2013 · Bulgaria

Taxable amount on retention of goods after deregistration

Article 18(c) covers cessation whatever its cause, including removal from the register by the authorities, subject only to the Article 19 cases. The taxable amount is governed by Article 74, not Article 80 (whose conditions are exhaustive and not met here). It is the residual value of the goods at cessation. An open market value rule is precluded unless in practice it produces that residual value, reflecting the change in value since acquisition. Article 74 has direct effect. Relevant wherever a business is struck off the VAT register while holding assets on which input tax was recovered, in particular vehicle fleets and other depreciating equipment.

C-153/12 Sani treyd

Order · 21 March 2013 · Bulgaria

Building rights granted in exchange for construction make the tax chargeable at once

The Court holds that tax may become chargeable when the right is granted, provided all the relevant elements of the future supply are already known, so the services are precisely identified and the value of the right can be expressed in money. It is irrelevant that granting the right is an exempt transaction made by non taxable persons. Articles 73 and 80 do preclude a national rule imposing open market value in every barter, outside transactions between connected parties. A reasoned order under Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure that follows Orfey Balgaria closely.

C-19/12 Efir

Judgment · 7 March 2013 · Bulgaria

Value added tax · Directive 2006/112/EC · Articles 62, 63, 65, 73 and 80 · Establishment by natural persons of a building right in favour of a company in exchange for construction services by that company for those persons · Barter contract · VAT on construction services · Chargeable event · When chargeable · Whether…

C-310/11 Grattan

Judgment · 19 December 2012 · United Kingdom

No retrospective reduction of the taxable amount under the Second Directive

Article 8(a) confers no such right. Under Article 5(5) the chargeable event occurred on delivery and the tax debt arose on the basis of assessment fixed at that moment. The Second Directive contained nothing allowing regularisation afterwards. Fiscal neutrality cannot supply what Article 11C(1) of the Sixth Directive later added. Since the sub-customers, as final consumers, paid the unreduced catalogue price and the commission went to the agents, the taxable amount was that full price. Closes off pre-1978 repayment claims resting on post-supply rebates, credits or agents' commission, a Fleming-style claim pattern familiar to UK retailers and their advisers.

C-549/11 Orfey

Judgment · 19 December 2012 · Bulgaria

Payments on account in kind and the taxable amount in barter construction deals

Article 65 covers payments on account in kind, including where they represent the entire consideration, so VAT on the construction services became chargeable when the building right was granted, provided all relevant information about the future supply was already known, the services were precisely identified, and the right's value could be expressed in money. A possible future extinction of the right is only a cancellation condition. Absent Article 80 ties between the parties, open market value cannot replace the subjective consideration. Articles 63, 65 and 73 have direct effect. Relevant to property developers and their advisers using land-for-build or building-right barter structures.

C-299/11 Gemeente Vlaardingen

Judgment · 8 November 2012 · Netherlands

Self-supply charge on goods improved by a third party on the taxable person's own land

The self-supply option covers not only goods produced entirely in-house but also goods constructed or improved by a third party using materials, including land, supplied by the business, and VAT may be charged on the aggregate of the transformation costs and the land value, measured by market value at the time of application. But no VAT may be charged on an element of value on which the taxable person has already paid VAT, and the charge cannot apply if the land falls within the exemption for land not built on that is not building land. Relevant to any exempt operator (local authorities, sports and leisure providers, healthcare, education, social housing) that refurbishes or develops its own land using contractors in a Member State applying the self-supply option.

C-377/11 International Bingo Technology

Judgment · 19 July 2012 · Spain

Statutory prize element of bingo card price and the deduction fraction

The taxable amount does not include the portion of the card price fixed in advance by legislation and destined for winnings. The organiser cannot freely dispose of it and it is not consideration for its service. Consequently Member States may not include that amount in the denominator of the Article 19(1) fraction. The Glawe reasoning applies because the payout percentage is mandatory and predetermined. Where the organiser has free use of all sums received (Town and County Factors) it does not. For a gaming operator with mixed taxed and exempt activities, statutory minimum payouts come out of both the taxable amount and the denominator of the partial exemption fraction.

C-621/10 Balkan and Sea Properties and Provadinvest

Judgment · 26 April 2012 · Bulgaria

Open market value as the taxable amount for supplies between connected persons

The conditions in Article 80(1) are exhaustive. National legislation may not rely on that provision to make open market value the taxable amount outside the listed cases, in particular where the taxable person has a full right of deduction, since no evasion or avoidance risk arises there. Member States remain free to impose other anti-evasion obligations under Article 273. Article 80(1) may be relied on directly, and incompatible national provisions must be disapplied, leaving Article 73 to apply. Member States operating blanket connected-party valuation rules cannot apply them where both parties have full deduction rights.

C-594/10 van Laarhoven

Judgment · 16 February 2012 · Netherlands

Flat-rate taxation of private use of business cars

Article 6(2)(a) read with Article 11A(1)(c) of the Sixth Directive precludes legislation which allows immediate full deduction on mixed use cars but then taxes private use annually on a flat-rate basis that does not reflect, proportionally, the actual extent of private use. Flat-rate methods remain permissible because Member States retain a margin of discretion, provided the outcome is proportionate to actual private use and gives the taxable person no advantage over a final consumer. The national court must test the Dutch method against that standard. Relevant to any business allocating mixed use cars wholly to business assets and to advisers dealing with private use charges.

C-69/11 Connoisseur Belgium

Order · 9 December 2011 · Belgium

No VAT on amounts that could have been charged but were not

Ruling by order, the Court held that in circumstances such as those of the main proceedings VAT is not due on such amounts. The taxable amount is the consideration actually obtained by the supplier, not the consideration it might have obtained had it exercised a contractual entitlement. A charge that was never made forms no part of what was received in return for the supply. Short but pointed, and it settles an argument administrations occasionally run from the terms of a contract rather than from what was invoiced and paid.

C-106/10 Lidl & Companhia

Judgment · 28 July 2011 · Portugal

Vehicle tax in the taxable amount for VAT

A tax such as ISV, whose chargeable event is directly linked to the supply of a vehicle within its scope and which is paid by the vehicle's supplier, falls within "taxes, duties, levies and charges" in point (a) of the first paragraph of Article 78 and must be included in the taxable amount. The qualification is that the decisive point is that the supplier, not the purchaser, is the person liable, so Article 79(1)(c) cannot apply. The Court distinguished De Danske Bilimportorer, there being no direct legal link between ISV and registration. Confirms that national vehicle taxes borne by the supplier form part of the VAT base on the onward supply and on intra-Community acquisitions, so no repayment claims lie for the VAT on the tax element. Relevant to motor dealers, importers, fleet buyers and advisers reviewing invoicing of registration-type charges across Member States.

C-285/10 Campsa Estaciones de Servicio

Judgment · 9 June 2011 · Spain

Open market value as taxable amount for supplies between connected parties

The Sixth Directive did not allow that substitution. Where consideration is agreed and actually paid, the transaction is one effected for consideration and the taxable amount is that subjective consideration, however low and whatever the connection between the parties. The private use valuation rules apply only to transactions free of charge, and equal treatment does not require otherwise because the two are not comparable. A derogating national rule not notified and authorised under Article 27 cannot be enforced against a taxable person. Later authorisation does not cure past periods. Confirms that below market pricing between connected parties is not itself a valuation issue.

C-433/09 Commission v Austria

Judgment · 22 December 2010 · Austria

The Austrian standard consumption levy did not belong in the taxable amount

The Court finds the infringement established on that point. By including the standard consumption levy in the taxable amount of the VAT levied on the supply of a motor vehicle, Austria failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 78. The action was dismissed as to the remainder, and each party was ordered to bear its own costs. Part of the small group of judgments on registration and consumption levies in the taxable amount, with De Danske Bilimportorer and Commission v Poland.

C-53/09 Loyalty Management UKand Baxi Group

Judgment · 7 October 2010 · United Kingdom

Third party consideration in loyalty rewards schemes

Economic reality governs. Payments by the scheme operator to redeemers are third party consideration for the supply of goods or services to the customers. It is for the national court to check whether they also cover a separate service to the operator. Payments by the sponsor to an operator which itself supplies the rewards split. The purchase price of the rewards is third party consideration for the supply to customers, and the operator's margin is consideration for scheme management services to the sponsor. In a multi-party points scheme the reward element of the payments made by the operator and by sponsoring retailers and manufacturers is third party consideration, with no input tax deduction for the payer.

C-228/09 Commission v Poland

Judgment · 20 May 2010 · Poland

Poland could include its registration duty in the taxable amount for cars

The Court dismisses the action. Poland did not infringe those provisions by including the duty in the taxable amount. The duty is a charge borne in connection with the transaction rather than a sum paid in the name and for the account of the customer, so it falls within the taxes, duties, levies and charges that Article 78 requires to be included. The Commission was ordered to pay the costs. A useful contrast with De Danske Bilimportorer, where the Danish registration duty stayed outside the taxable amount.

C-311/09 Commission v Poland

Judgment · 6 May 2010 · Poland

Flat-rate VAT on foreign coach operators without deduction

The Court upheld the action. By applying that flat-rate charge Poland failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 73, 168 and 273 of the VAT Directive. The taxable amount must be the consideration actually received, and the right to deduct input tax incurred for the purposes of taxed transactions cannot be denied. The additional obligations a Member State may impose under Article 273 do not extend to displacing those two rules. A straightforward but firm statement that simplification cannot be bought at the price of the two structural elements of the system. Relevant to any national scheme that substitutes a lump sum or notional base for the real consideration, particularly where it applies only to non-established operators.

C-240/05 Eurodental

Judgment · 7 December 2006 · Luxembourg

Input tax on cross-border supplies of dental prostheses

The Court held that a transaction exempt within a Member State under Article 13A(1)(e) does not give rise to a right to deduct input VAT under Article 17(3)(b), even where it is an intra-Community transaction. The specific public interest exemption takes precedence over the general exemption for intra-Community trade. That conclusion applies regardless of the VAT system in the Member State of destination, including where that State still taxes such supplies under the transitional derogation in Article 28(3)(a). Exempt operators cannot recover input tax by pointing to the cross-border character of their output supplies.

C-412/03 Hotel Scandic Gåsabäck

Judgment · 20 January 2005 · Sweden

Taxable amount for staff meals supplied below cost

The Court held that those provisions preclude such a national rule. The deemed-supply rules cover only transactions effected free of charge. Where an actual consideration is paid there is a supply for consideration and the taxable amount is the subjective value actually received, even if below cost. Whether the price exceeds or falls short of cost is irrelevant. A Member State fearing symbolic prices must seek an Article 27 derogation. The employer's own cost is not a subsidy under Article 11A(1)(a), which presupposes three parties. Confirms that below-cost supplies to employees, canteen meals, staff shops, subsidised facilities, are taxed on the price actually charged, not on cost, absent an authorised derogation.

C-137/02 Faxworld

Judgment · 29 April 2004 · Germany

Input tax recovery by a pre-formation partnership

The Court held that the partnership is a taxable person. Status under Article 4 depends solely on that article and is unaffected by whether a Member State has used the Article 5(8) option. Although it made no taxable transactions of its own, unlike in Abbey National, the inputs were acquired for the purposes of the company's planned taxable transactions. Since the recipient is treated as successor to the transferor, the transferor may take the recipient's taxable transactions into account and deduct. Confirms that costs of a pre-incorporation vehicle do not fall into a VAT black hole where a no-supply transfer of a business intervenes.

C-231/94 Faaborg-Gelting Linien

Judgment · 2 May 1996 · Germany

Restaurant transactions, supply of goods or services

Restaurant transactions are supplies of services under Article 6(1), because they are characterised by a cluster of features and acts in which the provision of food is only one component and services predominate (cooking, serving, dining infrastructure, table service). They are deemed supplied where the supplier has established his business under Article 9(1). A catering point on a ship is not a fixed establishment, particularly where the operator's permanent establishment is an appropriate reference point. Take-away food, not coupled with services enhancing consumption on the spot, is different. The foundational authority on the goods/services borderline for catering, and the origin of the on-the-spot consumption versus take-away distinction still applied to fast food, kiosks and delivery.