VATcodexEU VAT case law · Court of Justice and General Court

Supply of services EU VAT case law

142 cases of the Court of Justice and the General Court of the European Union on this point of VAT law, from 1985 to 2026.

Search within this topicThe cases ↓

Provisions these cases interpret most

The 142 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-603/24 Stellantis Portugal

Judgment · 13 May 2026

Transfer pricing adjustments as consideration for a supply of services

Such an adjustment is not consideration for a supply of services for consideration, unless there is a legal relationship between the companies involving reciprocal obligations, the purchaser supplying services and the seller paying for them via the adjustment, creating a direct link. Here repair costs were only one parameter among several, adjustments could go either way, and full reimbursement was not assured, so any link was at most indirect. If instead the adjustment alters the purchase price, its effect on the taxable amount falls to be assessed nationally. Useful for groups operating limited-risk distributor models with year-end margin true-ups, and for the automotive sector in particular.

T-221/25 TUI Belgium

Judgment · 25 March 2026 · Belgium

Standstill clause and the taxation of travel agents' services for travel outside the EU

No express derogating provision is required. Member States may choose the legislative technique they consider appropriate, subject to legal certainty requiring clarity and precision as to the situations covered. Legislation which merely ceases to exempt, so that taxation follows implicitly, is an exercise of the standstill option. Removing an express derogation that had become redundant does not, of itself, make the new regime non-identical or based on a different logic, since the outcome and procedures are unchanged. The referring court must verify this. Tour operators and travel agents in Member States relying on Article 370 and Annex X, Part A, point 4 cannot found repayment claims on the mere absence of an express statutory derogation from the Article 309 exemption.

C-513/24 Oblastní nemocnice Kolín

Judgment · 19 March 2026 · Czechia

Regulatory equipment requirements and general costs

Such costs do not qualify as general costs on that basis alone. A statutory obligation to acquire goods or services is not in itself enough to establish a direct and immediate link with taxable output transactions or with the taxable person's economic activity as a whole. Only the objective relationship counts, though the obligation is one relevant circumstance. Each item must be assessed separately by reference to its actual use and, in particular, its intended allocation. Equipment allocated exclusively to exempt care gives no deduction. Equipment also serving taxable supplies gives a pro rata deduction. Hospitals, clinics, laboratories and other regulated operators with mixed exempt and taxable activity cannot claim a blanket residual deduction on licensing related infrastructure by pointing to the regulatory rulebook.

T-575/24 Digipolis

Judgment · 25 February 2026 · Belgium

VAT status of an intermunicipal commissioning association

Such an association is a taxable person on its supplies to members, with no distinction by reference to members' VAT status, provided the supplies are for consideration and the association independently carries on an economic activity, matters for the national court. Cost-covering, pre-set lump sum contributions do not break the direct link. Article 13(1) does not shelter it. Telematics is telecommunications within Annex I and not negligible, and non-taxation could distort competition. The "emanation" theory cannot override that status. The Belgian "emanation" tolerance for commissioning associations and intermunicipal structures is incompatible with the Directive where the entity has its own legal personality, organs, staff, assets and risk.

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-379/24 Agrupació de Neteja Sanitaria

Judgment · 22 January 2026 · Spain

Cost sharing groups, cleaning services as "directly necessary" supplies

Article 132(1)(f) precludes an exclusivity requirement of that kind. It suffices that the services are directly necessary for the members' exempt activity. They need not be specific or an essential contribution, Article 134(a) not applying to Article 132(1)(f). General services such as cleaning can be directly necessary in the medical and education sectors. Nor may non-exclusivity be equated in principle with distortion of competition. Member States may adopt manageable rules under Article 131, but not redefine the exemption's content, and abuse cannot rest on an irrebuttable presumption. Spanish practice under Article 20(1)(6) of Law 37/1992, which conditions exemption on direct and exclusive use, cannot stand in so far as it excludes generic services.

C-744/23 Zlakov

Judgment · 23 October 2025 · Bulgaria

Pro bono representation and fees paid by the losing party

Court representation supplied free of charge is nonetheless a supply for consideration under Article 2(1)(c) where national law obliges the losing party, when ordered to pay the costs, to pay the lawyer fees fixed by that legislation. The direct link rests on both the engagement contract and the statute. Payment by a third party rather than the client is irrelevant, and uncertainty as to the outcome of the litigation does not break the link. Articles 26(1)(b), 28 and 75 do not apply. Where a statutory costs award goes directly to the lawyer under a pro bono or conditional arrangement, the awarded fee is taxable consideration and not an exempt or out-of-scope recovery, so VAT falls due on it.

C-232/24 Kosmiro

Judgment · 23 October 2025 · Finland

VAT treatment of factoring fees and commissions

Both products are supplies of services for consideration and both fall within "debt collection" in Article 135(1)(d). The commission and arrangement fees are consideration for a single, indivisible taxable debt collection service. There is no separate exempt credit supply, since in trade factoring the funds are the price of the debts and in invoice factoring the financing is merely the corollary of collection. Article 135(1)(d)'s debt collection exception is unconditional and precise, so it has direct effect against the State. Factors and their advisers can no longer split factoring fees between taxable collection and exempt financing where the factor also runs the recovery.

C-101/24 Xyrality

Judgment · 9 October 2025 · Germany

App store as deemed supplier of in-app purchases

Article 28 is not excluded solely because order confirmations, received only after the purchase is concluded, identify the developer and state its national VAT rate. What matters is the powers the intermediary enjoys in the supply. Article 9a of the Implementing Regulation, though inapplicable before 01-01-2015, clarifies the same concept. The fictitious supply to the platform is located under Article 44. Article 203 does not apply where the customers are non-taxable persons, so there is no deduction risk. Relevant to app developers, games studios, content providers and marketplace operators reviewing pre-2015 positions and any open assessments.

C-535/24 Svilosa

Judgment · 2 October 2025 · Bulgaria

Debt recovery actions taken by a creditor without a mandate

Such recovery actions are neither a supply of services for consideration nor deemed to be one. There was no legal relationship with the debtor involving reciprocal performance relating to those actions, and sums recovered were not consideration. Article 26(1)(b) does not apply because the actions served the creditor's own business. Any benefit to the debtor is only an indirect consequence. National civil law characterisations (agency without mandate, indirect claims) do not alter the EU concepts. Useful for lenders, group treasury functions and holding companies that fund litigation or enforcement in their own interest where a debtor also benefits.

C-726/23 Arcomet Towercranes

Judgment · 4 September 2025 · Romania

Transfer pricing adjustments as consideration for intra-group services

Contractually detailed intra-group services remunerated by reference to the margin above 2.74%, calculated on an OECD-recommended method, are consideration for a supply of services for consideration. The remuneration is variable but neither voluntary nor uncertain, being fixed in advance on precise criteria. The authority may require evidence beyond the invoice that the services were actually supplied and used for taxed output transactions, provided it is necessary and proportionate. It may not require proof that the services were necessary or economically appropriate. A group treating a year-end transfer pricing true-up as a pure profit adjustment outside VAT cannot maintain that position where the payment is tied to identified services under an intra-group agreement. Relevant to transfer pricing and indirect tax teams in multinational groups, and to advisers handling Romanian and other reverse-charge intra-group management fee audits.

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-573/22 Foreningen C and Others

Judgment · 19 December 2024 · Denmark

VAT on the public broadcasting licence fee under the standstill derogation

The Court answered all three questions in the Member State's favour. Article 370 permits continued taxation regardless of whether the activity is a supply for consideration, applying the GIS reasoning on Article 378(1) by analogy. Extending the fee to smartphones and computers merely reflects technological development and does not alter the chargeable event. Financing other bodies is acceptable provided the activities come within the remit of the public broadcasting bodies. The qualification is that the taxation arrangements in force on 01-01-1978 must remain essentially unchanged. Confirms that Article 370 standstill derogations operate outside the harmonised scope, so taxpayers cannot attack them by showing there is no supply for consideration.

C-622/23 rhtb

Judgment · 28 November 2024 · Austria

VAT treatment of sums due on early termination of a construction contract

The Court held that the amount contractually due following termination by the customer of a validly concluded, VAT-taxable services contract which the supplier had begun performing and was prepared to complete is remuneration for a supply for consideration. The consideration is the customer's right to have the contract performed, and the sum equals the agreed price less costs saved, so it is not fixed compensation for loss. Article 73 was not answered, no reasons for interpreting it having been given. Termination payments computed as contract price less costs saved should be treated as taxable consideration, not as damages, where the supplier had started work and remained willing to finish. Relevant to construction, engineering and long term services contracts, and to anyone drafting or invoicing withdrawal and cancellation clauses.

C-184/23 Finanzamt T II

Judgment · 11 July 2024 · Germany

Intra-group supplies for consideration where the recipient cannot deduct

Services supplied for consideration between members of the same group treated by a Member State as a single taxable person are not subject to VAT, even where the recipient cannot deduct the input VAT. A supplier inside the group cannot be treated individually as a separate taxable person, so the independence test in Article 4(1) is not reached. The "risk of tax losses" condition from the December 2022 judgments concerns only the designation of the controlling company as single taxable person, not the taxation of internal supplies. Confirmation, on the Sixth Directive and by extension Article 11 of Directive 2006/112, that intra-group supplies remain outside VAT regardless of the recipient's deduction position.

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-179/23 Credidam

Judgment · 4 July 2024 · Romania

VAT on management fees deducted by a collective rights management organisation

The Court held that such management activity is a supply of services for consideration. National law creates a legal relationship with reciprocal performance. The fee is due only if the management services are performed and is their actual consideration. It is irrelevant that the service and fee are prescribed by statute (Article 25(c)) or that the organisation is non profit. Article 28 does not apply because the rightholders supply nothing. The non taxable underlying remuneration cannot be taken into account, by analogy or as a principal supply, to untax the fee. Collective management organisations across the EU must account for VAT on management fees withheld from rightholders, even where the pooled remuneration collected (notably private copying and other statutory levies after SAWP) sits outside VAT.

C-533/22 Adient

Judgment · 13 June 2024 · Romania

Fixed establishment through a group toll manufacturer

No fixed establishment arises solely from group membership or from a services contract between the two companies. For place of supply purposes the focus is on resources for receiving services, so a structure intervening in downstream supplies of the manufactured goods is irrelevant, as is where those goods are sold. There is no fixed establishment where the recipient's human and technical resources are not distinct from those used by the supplier, or where they perform only preparatory or auxiliary activities. Confirms and tightens Berlin Chemie and Cabot Plastics for toll manufacturing and contract processing structures, especially intra-group ones. Relevant to automotive and manufacturing groups and their advisers.

C-696/22 C (Court-appointed administrators and liquidators)

Judgment · 13 June 2024 · Romania

Chargeability on continuous services and proof of the link for input deduction

Such continuous services fall within Article 64(1) where they give rise to successive statements of account or payments, so VAT becomes chargeable on expiry of each period irrespective of non-payment. Article 90(1) governs non-payment. Increased turnover or volume of taxable transactions is irrelevant to the deduction link. The objective content, actual use and exclusive reason for the purchase decide. A hearing breach requires annulment only if the outcome might have differed, suspension of enforcement being irrelevant. Suppliers billing periodically, insolvency practitioners, professional firms and any provider with milestone or periodic fee arrangements, cannot defer chargeability by making payment conditional on the customer's cash position.

C-68/23 Finanzamt O (Single-purpose vouchers)

Judgment · 18 April 2024 · Germany

Single-purpose or multi-purpose vouchers in a cross-border distribution chain

Classification turns solely on the Article 30a(2) conditions: the place of supply to end consumers and the VAT due must be known at issue. Transfers between taxable persons acting in their own name and established in other Member States are irrelevant to that classification. Abusive circumvention of the conditions of use is also disregarded. If the cards are multi-purpose vouchers, resale may nonetheless be taxable as a distribution or promotion service supplied to the person who actually provides the digital content. Cross-border distributors of prepaid cards and codes for digital content cannot rely on their own position in a foreign supply chain, or on customers falsifying residence data, to avoid single-purpose treatment.

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-288/22 Administration de l’Enregistrement, des Domaines et de la TVA (VAT – Member of a board of directors)

Judgment · 21 December 2023 · Luxembourg

VAT status of a company director

There is an economic activity where services are supplied to the company for consideration, provided the activity is on a continuing basis (a term of up to six years suffices) and the method of fixing remuneration is foreseeable. Profit-linked fees require that fees can also be paid in loss-making years. However, the activity is not carried out independently where the director, though free to organise his work, receiving his own emoluments, acting in his own name and outside any employer-employee relationship, does not act on his own behalf or under his own responsibility and bears no economic risk. Independence, not economic activity, is the decisive test for directors' fees.

C-532/22 Westside Unicat

Judgment · 23 November 2023 · Romania

Place of supply of content supplied to a streaming platform operator

Article 53 does not apply. That rule covers only services downstream of organising the presentation, namely marketing the right of admission to the event to customers, and ancillary services supplied separately to attendees. Creating and supplying the digital content to the platform operator is an input needed for that operator's own streaming, not the granting of access. Owning and operating the recording equipment does not make the studio the grantor of admission. The earlier Geelen case-law on the former Article 52(a) does not carry over. Second question not answered. Studios, production houses and content creators supplying filmed or live content to platform operators fall back on the general rules in Articles 44 and 45, so B2B supplies are taxed where the customer is established rather than where filming occurs. Relevant to adult entertainment, webcam and live streaming supply chains, and more broadly to any content producer invoicing a non-EU or other foreign platform.

C-249/22 GIS

Judgment · 26 October 2023 · Austria

VAT on the Austrian public broadcasting fee under the accession derogation

Austria may charge VAT on the programme fee, irrespective of whether the broadcasting activity amounts to a supply of services for consideration under Article 2(1)(c). The Article 378(1) derogation permits Austria only to continue an existing tax, not to introduce a new one, so the arrangements must have remained essentially unchanged since accession. The 2011 amendment extending liability to those within the terrestrial area lacking a receiver module merely reflected technological change and did not alter the chargeable event. Broadcasting fees in Member States enjoying an accession or Article 370/378 derogation cannot be attacked simply by invoking Cesky rozhlas.

C-344/22 Gemeinde A

Judgment · 13 July 2023 · Germany

Spa tax and the direct link requirement

The municipality does not make a supply of services for consideration. There is no reciprocal legal relationship. Liability to the spa tax attaches to the stay in the municipal territory, whatever its purpose, not to any use of the facilities, and those paying enjoy no advantage over residents and day visitors who use the same freely and gratuitously accessible facilities. Absent a direct link, the payment is not consideration. The second question on distortions of competition under Article 13(1) therefore did not need to be answered. Public bodies funding open-access infrastructure from a residence-based or stay-based levy cannot treat that levy as taxable turnover, and so cannot recover input VAT on the related construction and maintenance costs. Relevant to advisers to municipalities, tourism and leisure authorities, and operators of parks, footpaths and similar facilities financed by local charges.

C-232/22 Cabot Plastics Belgium

Judgment · 29 June 2023 · Belgium

Fixed establishment created by an exclusive toll manufacturer

No fixed establishment, absent a suitable structure in human and technical resources of the recipient's own. Exclusivity, group membership and long duration are relevant but not decisive. The provider remains responsible for its resources and bears its own risk, so they do not become the customer's. The same resources cannot both supply and receive the services. Services received must be distinguished from the principal's own onward sales. Ancillary services facilitating those sales are irrelevant. Confirms and extends Berlin Chemie to non-EU principals and to toll manufacturing structures. Relevant to chemicals, pharmaceuticals and contract manufacturing groups using a principal company outside the EU, and to tollers exposed as the party assessed.

C-620/21 MOMTRADE RUSE

Judgment · 11 May 2023 · Bulgaria

Cross-border social care and the welfare exemption, which Member State's law applies

The exemption is not confined to services performed in the supplier's Member State, and recourse to an intermediary abroad is irrelevant, that being a separate supply. Both conditions, the nature of the services and recognition as a body devoted to social wellbeing, fall to be assessed under the law of the Member State of taxation, here the State of establishment, transposing the Directive. Registration with a national public body suffices only if it involves a prior determination by the competent authorities of the body's social wellbeing. Providers of home and personal care established in one Member State serving private clients elsewhere in the EU may claim the exemption in their own State and need not obtain confirmation from the State where the care is delivered.

C-282/22 Dyrektor Krajowej Informacji Skarbowej

Judgment · 20 April 2023 · Poland

Electric vehicle recharging as a supply of goods

It is a supply of goods. The transfer of electricity is the characteristic and predominant element. Access to the charging devices is the minimal service necessarily accompanying the marketing of the goods and is disregarded, while technical support and the IT applications are ancillary. Pricing by reference to recharging time, or wholly by duration, still reflects the unit price of the electricity, and a marginally higher price for fast charging does not make speed predominant. Directive 2014/94's reference to "recharging services" is irrelevant to VAT classification. Public recharging is a supply of goods, with the consequences that follow for charge point operators and e-mobility providers on place of supply, rates, invoicing and any reduced rate or exemption applied to electricity in the Member State concerned.

C-616/21 Gmina L.

Judgment · 30 March 2023 · Poland

Municipal asbestos removal financed by public subsidy, no economic activity

The Court held that such an activity does not constitute a supply of services subject to VAT. Even if a third party subsidy can be consideration, so that a direct link may exist, the municipality does not carry out an economic activity. It employs no staff, seeks no customers, the operation is not recurrent, residents pay nothing and its organisational costs are unreimbursed, so it bears only risk of loss with no profit prospect. Article 13(1) therefore needed no consideration. Article 28 (commission agent) did not apply absent a mandate. Confirms the Gemeente Borsele line for local authorities running one off, grant funded schemes for residents.

C-695/20 Fenix International

Judgment · 28 February 2023 · United Kingdom

Validity of the electronic services deemed supplier presumption

Article 9a(1) is valid. It merely clarifies when the Article 28 condition of acting in one's own name but on behalf of another is met for electronically supplied services, and does not alter that provision's normative content. The third subparagraph, making the presumption irrebuttable where the taxable person authorises the charge or delivery or sets the general terms, reflects economic and commercial reality. Contractual designation of another supplier cannot override it. Awareness by the final customer of the agency does not itself exclude Article 28. Platforms, app stores, marketplaces and portals intermediating digital services cannot contract out of deemed supplier status where they authorise the charge to the customer or the delivery, or set the general terms and conditions.

C-713/21 Finanzamt X (Supplies of the owner of a stable)

Judgment · 9 February 2023 · Germany

Stabling and training paid for with half the prize money

The Court held that this is a supply of services for consideration within Article 2(1)(c). There is a direct link between the single supply of stabling, training and competition entry and the remuneration, which is the assignment of half the claim to any prize money. The fact that the remuneration depends on the horses' results does not break that link, because what is agreed in return for the supply is the share of the claim itself. The distinction to hold on to is the one drawn against Bastova. Relevant to any success-based or contingent fee structure.

C-289/22 A.T.S. 2003

Order · 9 January 2023 · Hungary

Deduction refused for fraud, regulatory breaches up the chain and the taxable person's duty of care

By reasoned order under Article 99. Cost reduction is legitimate because refusal requires a wholly artificial arrangement whose sole or essential aim is a tax advantage contrary to the Directive. A breach of national sector rules is not itself proof of fraud, but may be one indication in an overall assessment. The authority must characterise the fraud and prove participation or knowledge, though not identify every perpetrator. Taxable persons need not verify upstream compliance, unless indications of irregularity call for greater care.

C-269/20 Finanzamt T (Internal supplies within a VAT group)

Judgment · 1 December 2022 · Germany

Designation of the controlling company as the single taxable person of a VAT group

Article 4(4), second subparagraph, does not preclude a Member State from designating the controlling company, rather than the group itself, as the single taxable person, provided that company can impose its will on the other members and there is no risk of tax losses. Internal supplies made by a group member for the single taxable person's public authority activities are not taxable under Article 6(2)(b). Non-economic activities are not "purposes other than those of the business", and here the services were in any event paid for.

C-607/20 GE Aircraft Engine Services

Judgment · 17 November 2022 · United Kingdom

Retail vouchers awarded free of charge to employees under a reward scheme

The free award of retail vouchers to employees under a programme designed to recognise and reward the most deserving and high-performing staff falls outside Article 26(1)(b). The scheme was dictated by the proper conduct of the business and the pursuit of profit through improved employee motivation and performance. The personal advantage to employees was merely incidental. Employees could not be certain of receiving vouchers, awards resting on strictly professional criteria applied by colleagues. Fiscal neutrality is preserved because the retailers account for output VAT on redemption. Employers running performance-based recognition schemes funded with third-party retail vouchers need not account for deemed output tax on the award, provided the scheme is genuinely driven by business objectives and any private benefit is incidental. Relevant to HR, reward and employment tax advisers, and to groups recharging vouchers between entities.

C-641/21 Climate Corporation Emissions Trading

Judgment · 27 October 2022 · Austria

Place of supply of services cannot be shifted because of fraud

The authorities of the supplier's Member State may not relocate the place of supply on that ground. The place of supply rules delimit fiscal competence between Member States and cannot be set aside on fraud grounds. The Italmoda line, refusing a right such as exemption for an intra-Community supply, does not apply by analogy. Intra-Community supplies involve shared competence between two Member States, whereas for cross-border services only one Member State has competence. Member States remain free to act under Article 273, including inspections and penalties against those responsible. Relevant to anyone advising on cross-border B2B services caught in fraud chains, notably emission allowance, telecoms and other intangibles traders.

C-250/21 O. Fundusz Inwestycyjny Zamknięty reprezentowany przez O

Judgment · 6 October 2022 · Poland

Sub-participation agreements as the granting of credit

The Court held that the arrangement is a supply for consideration and falls within the concept of granting of credit in Article 135(1)(b). The only essential features are the provision of capital and remuneration, whatever form the remuneration takes. That the receivables remain in the originator's assets, that the source of repayment is identified, that no guarantees are given and that there is no recourse against the originator do not alter that classification, credit risk being inherent in any grant of credit. Sub-participation and similar synthetic funding structures in securitisation should be treated as exempt financial services rather than standard-rated, which removes an output tax cost for originators but restricts input tax recovery for sub-participants. Relevant to securitisation funds, banks, non-bank lenders and their advisers, and to anyone structuring non-recourse funding against a defined pool of receivables.

C-294/21 Navitours

Judgment · 1 August 2022 · Luxembourg

Taxation of passenger transport in a shared-sovereignty territory

Sightseeing cruises moving passengers over non-negligible distances are transport services, even if circular and touristic. The Directive 2006/123 case law on "services in the field of transport" does not transpose. The condominium is within the territory of both Member States, so each may tax. The Member State concerned must tax provided the other has not already done so. Taxation by one precludes taxation by the other, unless they agree another allocation avoiding double taxation and non-taxation. Confirms that no Member State may leave a shared or disputed border territory as a de facto VAT-free zone pending an intergovernmental agreement.

C-596/20 DuoDecad

Judgment · 16 June 2022 · Hungary

Identifying the recipient of technical support services and the limits of the Court's jurisdiction

The Court declined jurisdiction. WebMindLicenses (C-419/14) already provides the interpretative criteria for deciding whether a licence agreement is a wholly artificial arrangement. The referring court was in substance asking the Court to assess the facts and apply the law itself, which Article 267 TFEU does not permit. Double taxation of the same transaction in two Member States permits, and may oblige, a reference on interpretation, but not on the facts. The national court must also consider whether the support contract itself is abusive. A caution for advisers relying on divergent treatment between Member States as a route to Luxembourg.

C-637/20 DSAB Destination Stockholm

Judgment · 28 April 2022 · Sweden

City tourist card as a multi-purpose voucher

The Court held that such a card may be a voucher. The two conditions in Article 30a(1), an obligation to accept it as consideration and identification of the services or potential suppliers in the instrument or related documentation, are cumulative and are the only test. Validity period and whether all services can actually be used are irrelevant. Since the VAT due is not known on issue, the card is a multi-purpose voucher, taxed under Articles 30b(2) and 73a. Verification of the two conditions is left to the national court. Issuers of city cards, leisure passes, hotel and attraction bundles and similar stored-value instruments now have a clear test. Relevant to tourism, transport and marketing platform operators.

C-333/20 Berlin Chemie A. Menarini

Judgment · 7 April 2022 · Romania

Whether a subsidiary supplying marketing services creates a fixed establishment of its parent

No fixed establishment arises merely because a company owns a subsidiary in another Member State which makes human and technical resources available to it under contracts for marketing, regulatory, advertising and representation services supplied exclusively to it, even if those services directly influence sales volumes. Ownership of resources is not required, but the parent must be able to dispose of them as if its own. Decisively, the same resources cannot both supply and receive the same services. Useful for groups using local service or support subsidiaries, notably pharmaceutical and consumer goods structures with promotional, regulatory and order taking functions.

C-605/20 Suzlon Wind Energy Portugal

Judgment · 24 February 2022 · Portugal

Warranty repair costs recharged within a group, supply of services for consideration

Such transactions are a supply of services for consideration. The contractual framework identified supplier, customer and the nature of the services, the debit notes were booked as remuneration, and neither the absence of any profit margin nor the existence of a warranty on the goods alters that. The Court distinguished the position where the taxable person acts in the name and on behalf of another, using a suspense account under Article 79(c), not deducting input VAT and invoicing in the principal's name. Verification is for the national court. Relevant to any group recharging warranty rectification costs to a manufacturer or parent, in manufacturing, energy and equipment supply chains.

C-90/20 Apcoa Parking Danmark

Judgment · 20 January 2022 · Denmark

VAT treatment of parking control fees

The fees are consideration for a supply of services and are subject to VAT. There is reciprocal performance and a direct link. The motorist actually had the benefit of a parking space, the fee reflects the higher operating cost of non-compliant parking, and the two supplies are interdependent. That the amount is predetermined, disproportionate to the service's value, or classified as a penalty in national law is irrelevant. Characterisation is a question of EU law, subject to the referring court's verification of economic reality. Car park operators, and shopping centres, hospitals, hotels and retail sites that outsource enforcement, must account for VAT on penalty-style control fees where the space was in fact used.

C-334/20 Amper Metal

Judgment · 25 November 2021 · Hungary

Deduction of VAT on advertising services said to be overpriced and ineffective

Deduction is available where the advertising is a supply subject to VAT under Article 2 and has a direct and immediate link with taxable output transactions or with the taxable person's economic activity as a whole, as general costs. Neither an excessive price against an authority's reference value nor the absence of any turnover increase is relevant. Article 80 does not apply between independent parties. The national court must still verify the link, and whether the spending is entertainment expenditure outside strictly business expenditure under Article 176. Tax authorities cannot use profitability, economic rationality or benchmark pricing to deny deduction on arm's length purchases.

C-324/20 X-Beteiligungsgesellschaft (VAT – Successive payments)

Judgment · 28 October 2021 · Germany

Chargeability on a one-off service paid in instalments

Article 64(1) does not cover a one-time supply paid in instalments. It applies only where the nature of the service itself justifies periodic payment, that is, continuous or recurrent supplies performed over defined periods where the completion date is not unambiguous. Article 90(1) does not assist. An instalment not yet fallen due is not non-payment, since the agreed consideration is unchanged. Pre-financing the VAT does not alter that. The supplier owes output tax regardless of receipt. Relevant to anyone structuring one-off services (brokerage, corporate finance, agency, consultancy) with deferred or staged fee payments.

C-21/20 Balgarska natsionalna televizia

Judgment · 16 September 2021 · Bulgaria

Public broadcasting funded by State subsidy and the scope of deduction

The activity is not a supply for consideration. There is no legal relationship of reciprocal performance with viewers and no direct link between the services and the subsidy, which is set per programme hour regardless of viewership. Le Rayon d'Or is distinguished. The exemption question therefore falls away. Under Article 168, input VAT is deductible on purchases used for activities giving rise to deduction and not deductible on purchases used for out-of-scope activities. The method of financing is irrelevant. Member States set the apportionment method, respecting proportionality. Public broadcasters and comparable subsidy-funded bodies must treat free-to-air public service output as outside the scope of VAT, not exempt, and exclude it from the Articles 173 to 175 pro rata. Relevant to advisers to public bodies, cultural and media organisations and any taxable person with substantial grant funding alongside taxable supplies.

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-931/19 Titanium

Judgment · 3 June 2021 · Austria

Let property without own staff is not a fixed establishment

A let property without staff of the owner's own is not a fixed establishment. A fixed establishment requires a sufficient degree of permanence and a structure adequate in human and technical resources to supply the services independently. A structure with no staff of its own cannot qualify. A property whose owner has no own staff for the letting is not a fixed establishment under Article 43, or Articles 44 and 45 as amended. Management tasks contracted out, with the owner retaining all important letting decisions, do not supply the missing human resource. Non-established landlords holding a single let property in another Member State cannot be treated as locally established merely by owning it, so supplies to business tenants fall to be handled by the recipient where the Member State applies Article 194 or Article 196. Relevant to real estate funds and offshore property holding vehicles, and to their tenants, for whom the question is whether reverse charge obligations were missed.

C-846/19 Administration de l'Enregistrement, des Domaines et de la TVA

Judgment · 15 April 2021 · Luxembourg

Court-appointed guardianship services by a lawyer, economic activity and the welfare exemption

Such activity is economic where supplied for consideration, income is continuing and the overall remuneration is set on criteria intended to cover the supplier's operating costs. Lump sums, judicial appointment and third-party (State) payment are irrelevant. Protection of such adults in civil matters is closely linked to welfare work, but general legal, financial or advisory services are not. Lawyer status is not an a priori bar to recognition as devoted to social wellbeing. A court must grant it only if the Member State exceeded its discretion. Legitimate expectations do not bar assessment. Fees are treated as VAT-inclusive. Relevant to lawyers, social workers, associations and other professionals acting as court-appointed guardians, curators or deputies, and to their advisers.

C-907/19 Q-GmbH (Special risk insurance)

Judgment · 25 March 2021 · Germany

Licensing an insurance product to an insurer and the insurance exemption

The exemption does not apply. Granting a licence to use an insurance product is neither an insurance transaction (no contractual link with the insured, no risk borne) nor a service performed by an insurance broker or agent, as the licensor is not linked to the insured and the activity does not cover the essential aspects of an agent's work. If that licence is the principal supply, the whole single supply is taxable. Whether a single supply exists, however, is for the national court. The Court doubted it. Insurance product designers, MGAs and technology providers licensing policy wordings or platforms to insurers cannot shelter the licence fee behind an accessory mediation role.

C-501/19 UCMR - ADA

Judgment · 21 January 2021 · Romania

VAT treatment of public performance royalties collected by a collective management organisation

The Court answers both questions in the affirmative. There is a legal relationship of reciprocal performance and a direct link between the licence and the royalty. SAWP (fair compensation levies fixed by law) is distinguished. The society falls within Article 28, so it is deemed to receive and then supply the services. It must invoice the end user in its own name with VAT, and right holders who are taxable persons must invoice the society with VAT. Mandatory collective management and representation of non-members do not alter this, since the management method does not differ by category of holder. Collecting societies in Member States with mandatory or voluntary collective management must treat royalty collection as a chain of two taxable supplies rather than a mere transfer of funds, issuing VAT invoices to venues, promoters, broadcasters and other users, and receiving VAT invoices from right holders registered for VAT.

C-288/19 Finanzamt Saarbrücken

Judgment · 20 January 2021 · Germany

Company cars provided to employees and the place of long-term hiring of means of transport

Article 56(2), first subparagraph, does not apply where there is no supply of services for consideration under Article 2(1)(c). Provision free of charge, even if treated as a supply under Article 26(1)(a), is not a "hiring". Rent must be payable in money, and a benefit in kind taxed for income tax purposes will not do. Article 56(2) does apply where the employee pays rent for an agreed period exceeding 30 days and enjoys a permanent right of private use excluding others. Employers with cross-border workforces must distinguish cars given free of charge from those provided against a real monetary contribution, typically a salary deduction. Relevant to employee benefit and company car schemes, and to advisers reviewing benefit-in-kind valuations used as a VAT proxy.

C-657/19 Finanzamt D

Judgment · 8 October 2020 · Germany

Social welfare exemption for subcontracted care assessment reports

The Court held that such reports are closely linked to welfare and social security work provided they are essential to the proper implementation of transactions in that sector. The exemption does not depend on the services being supplied directly to the person reliant on care. However, Article 132(1)(g) does not preclude refusing recognition as a body devoted to social wellbeing where the expert is only a subcontractor of a recognised body, costs are borne indirectly on a flat-rate basis, and the option of contracting directly with the fund was not used.

C-528/19 Mitteldeutsche Hartstein-Industrie

Judgment · 16 September 2020 · Germany

Input tax on infrastructure works carried out for a municipality

Deduction is available where the road serves both the taxable person's economic activity and the public, provided the works did not exceed what was objectively necessary for that activity and their cost is reflected in the price of the taxable output transactions. Excess works break the link in part. A unilateral operating authorisation is not consideration but a condition sine qua non, so the works are not made for consideration. Nor are they a deemed supply under Article 5(6), given the actual end-use benefits the taxable person.

C-215/19 Veronsaajien oikeudenvalvontayksikkö (Computing centre services)

Judgment · 2 July 2020 · Finland

VAT treatment of colocation centre services

Such services are neither exempt letting nor services connected with immovable property, subject to verification by the national court. The supplier does not passively make space available with a right to occupy it as owner, and the customers cannot control or restrict access to the relevant part of the building, so there is no right of exclusive use. The cabinets themselves are not immovable property. They are not an integral part of the building and, being merely bolted down and removable, are not permanently installed. Data centre, hosting and colocation providers can normally treat these supplies as taxable under the general B2B rule in Article 44, accounting at the customer's place of establishment rather than registering where the servers sit. Relevant to telecoms and IT operators, and to advisers reviewing cross-border hosting contracts and access arrangements.

C-43/19 Vodafone Portugal

Judgment · 11 June 2020 · Portugal

Early termination charges under minimum tie-in contracts

Such amounts are remuneration for a supply of services for consideration. The consideration is the customer's right to have the operator perform the contract, whether or not the right is exercised, and the charge forms part of the price agreed for that performance, securing the operator a minimum contractual return. It is irrelevant that it falls short of the income the operator would otherwise have received, and it is neither a statutory levy nor compensation for damage, given that national law forbids charging indemnities. MEO now extends to termination charges built on recovery of costs and promotional benefits, not just to charges mirroring the remaining instalments.

C-242/19 CHEP Equipment Pooling

Judgment · 11 June 2020 · Romania

Cross-border refund where the claimant should have been VAT registered

The derogation applies only where two cumulative conditions are met: the use of the goods in the destination Member State for the service supplied is temporary, and the goods were dispatched from the Member State where the supplier is established. Goods sent from other Member States, or used for an indefinite or extended period, fall outside it. Separately, refunds cannot be refused merely because the claimant is or should be VAT identified in the refund State. Only the cumulative conditions in Article 3 of Directive 2008/9 matter. Relevant to pooling, leasing and equipment hire structures moving assets around the EU, and to anyone facing a refund refusal grounded in national registration requirements.

C-547/18 Dong Yang Electronics

Judgment · 7 May 2020 · Poland

Whether a subsidiary is a fixed establishment of its foreign parent

A supplier may not infer a fixed establishment from the mere existence of a subsidiary, and is not required to inquire into the contractual relationships between parent and subsidiary. Legal status is not decisive. A subsidiary can be a fixed establishment, but only where the substantive conditions in Article 11 are met, assessed against economic and commercial reality. The Free Trade Agreement reservation restricting Korean investors to Polish corporate forms does not affect that interpretation. Suppliers dealing with EU subsidiaries of third country groups can rely on the Article 22 sequence. Relevant to toll manufacturing and contract processing arrangements.

C-707/18 Amărăşti Land Investment

Judgment · 19 December 2019 · Romania

Land registration costs borne by the purchaser as a deemed supply to the vendor

The Directive does not prevent the parties from agreeing that the purchaser bears some or all of the administrative costs, but such a clause is not decisive for the purchaser's right of deduction. Because first registration and entry of the proprietor are a statutory obligation of the vendor, a purchaser acting in its own name who performs those steps acts on behalf of the vendor and is deemed under Article 28 to have supplied the services to the vendor, even though the price excludes the value of the land-registration work and nothing was re-invoiced. Purchasers of unregistered immovable property who absorb the vendor's registration, notarial and surveying costs cannot simply treat the input VAT as their own investment expenditure.

C-568/17 Geelen

Judgment · 8 May 2019 · Netherlands

Place of supply of live interactive webcam entertainment

The complex supply of organising and offering the sessions is an entertainment activity, its principal objective being entertainment. No physical presence of recipients, and no single location of receipt, is required. It is physically carried out where the supplier has established his business or the fixed establishment from which the services are supplied, here the Netherlands. The electronically supplied services rule did not apply because all recipients were in the supplier's own Member State, so the Court did not classify the supply. Confirms that the entertainment rule is not confined to events at an identifiable venue, and that for remotely delivered interactive content the organiser's own establishment can be the place of physical performance, even where the performers are in a third country.

C-224/18 Budimex

Judgment · 2 May 2019 · Poland

Time of supply of construction works and formal acceptance by the client

Article 66, first paragraph, point (c) does not preclude treating formal acceptance as the time of supply. But only if the acceptance formality was agreed in the contract on terms reflecting the economic and commercial realities of the sector, and if it constitutes the actual completion of the service and determines the consideration due, a matter for the national court. Other formalities, such as a breakdown of expenses or a final payment certificate, are not decisive. Relevant to contractors, engineering and installation businesses and their advisers in Member States that time chargeability by reference to the date of supply plus an invoicing deadline.

C-647/17 Srf konsulterna

Judgment · 13 March 2019 · Sweden

Place of supply of admission to educational seminars

Article 53 covers such courses, so VAT is due where the seminars actually take place. Admission to a paid seminar necessarily includes attending and participating in it, so no distinction can be drawn between a right to enter a place and a right to participate. Advance registration and payment are irrelevant. Article 53 is not a narrowly construed exception, and the administrative burden recognised in recital 6 of Directive 2008/8 cannot displace the wording. Training providers, professional bodies and conference organisers holding multi-day B2B events abroad must register or account for VAT in the country where the event physically takes place, even where all delegates are established elsewhere.

C-410/17 A

Judgment · 10 January 2019 · Finland

Demolition and dismantling contracts as barter transactions

Each contract can comprise two reciprocal supplies. The demolition contract involves a supply of services plus a supply of scrap metal, provided the demolition company attributes a value to the scrap that it factors into its quoted price. The scrap supply is taxable only if made by a taxable person acting as such. The dismantling purchase contract involves a supply of goods plus, where the dismantling and disposal specifically meet the seller's needs, a supply of services valued at the price reduction applied. Non-disclosure and absence of agreed figures are irrelevant. For demolition, dismantling and recycling operators and their scrap suppliers, what decides the point is whether the price quoted was reduced to reflect materials recovered or removal costs absorbed.

C-51/18 Commission v Austria

Judgment · 19 December 2018 · Austria

VAT treatment of the artist's resale royalty

The Court held that Austria infringed Article 2(1) by taxing the royalty. The legal relationship on a resale exists only between seller and buyer. The artist cannot intervene or prevent it and so supplies nothing, the royalty being a statutory entitlement to share in the economic success of the work. Fiscal neutrality does not require alignment with royalties for successive exploitation of other works, whose situation differs. Nor does the royalty alter the taxable amount of the first sale. Resale royalties collected for artists must be treated as outside the scope of VAT.

C-17/18 Mailat

Judgment · 19 December 2018 · Romania

Letting a fully equipped business as a transfer of a going concern

Not a transfer of a totality of assets. The items necessary to carry on the activity were merely let, with no transfer of related property rights, so the lessee could never dispose of them. Continuation under the same name is irrelevant. The contract is a single supply in which the letting of the immovable property is the principal element, the equipment and inventory being ancillary, and it therefore falls within the Article 135(1)(l) exemption. Landlords letting equipped commercial premises (restaurants, hotels, care and leisure operators) cannot rely on Article 19 to avoid adjusting input VAT recovered on works, fixtures and inventory.

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-495/17 Cartrans Spedition

Judgment · 8 November 2018 · Romania

Proving export for the exemption of transport services, TIR carnet versus customs declaration

Making the exemption conditional on a customs export declaration is precluded. Actual export remains a substantive condition, but the export declaration is a formality that generally falls on the exporter, not the carrier or intermediary. Authorities must assess all available information and decide whether export can be inferred with a sufficiently high degree of probability. A certified TIR carnet must be duly taken into account unless there are specific reasons to doubt its authenticity or reliability. Hauliers, freight forwarders and transport intermediaries facing assessments for want of an export declaration now have a clear basis to rely on TIR carnets, CMR notes and other transport documentation.

C-153/17 Volkswagen Financial Services (UK)

Judgment · 18 October 2018 · United Kingdom

Residual input tax on vehicle hire purchase, apportionment method

General costs actually incurred, at least in part, for the taxable vehicle supplies are cost components of those supplies for VAT purposes, even though the taxable person passed them on only in the exempt interest. The commercial result is irrelevant. A special method which disregards an actual and non-negligible allocation of overheads to taxable supplies cannot be more precise than the turnover key and is therefore not permitted. Banco Mais is confined to its own circumstances. Relevant to lessors, hire purchase providers and captive finance companies with agreed special methods, and to tax authorities imposing use based apportionment.

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-182/17 Nagyszénás Településszolgáltatási Nonprofit Kft.

Judgment · 22 February 2018 · Hungary

A municipal company performing public tasks under contract is taxable

The Court holds, subject to verification by the referring court, that the activity is a supply of services for consideration and subject to VAT. Subject to findings of fact and of national law, it does not fall within Article 13(1) where it constitutes an economic activity within the meaning of Article 9(1). Ownership by the municipality and the public character of the tasks do not of themselves make the company a body governed by public law acting as a public authority. The practical companion to Saudacor.

C-273/16 Federal Express Europe

Judgment · 4 October 2017 · Italy

Exemption of transport services ancillary to exempt imports

Such national legislation is precluded. Where transport costs are included in the taxable amount under Article 86(1)(b), the ancillary supply follows the tax treatment of the import and is exempt under Article 144, even if no VAT was in fact levied at the customs stage. The exemption serves technical simplification, not the avoidance of double taxation. The extra Italian condition would deprive it of effect for consignments of negligible value or of a non-commercial character. Confirms that a carrier or express operator handling a low-value or non-commercial consignment charges no VAT on transport already included in the import taxable amount, whatever the import VAT position.

C-326/15 DNB Banka

Judgment · 21 September 2017 · Latvia

Cost sharing exemption confined to public interest activities

The exemption applies only to independent groups whose members carry on activities in the public interest listed in Article 132. Services to members active in financial services, exempt under Article 135 but not in the public interest, fall outside it. The remaining questions therefore need no answer. Crucially, the authorities cannot rely on the Directive against taxpayers. Closed periods cannot be reopened, and for open periods this reading cannot be invoked to withdraw the exemption from groups of credit institutions. Banks, insurers and other financial services groups can no longer build cost sharing structures on Article 132(1)(f), whether domestic or cross-border.

C-605/15 Aviva

Judgment · 21 September 2017 · Poland

Cost sharing groups confined to public interest activities

The exemption in Article 132(1)(f) covers only independent groups of persons whose members carry on an activity in the public interest referred to in Article 132. Insurance is not such an activity, so services supplied by a grouping of insurers are not exempt. The Court added that national authorities cannot reopen definitively closed periods, cannot rely on the Directive directly against taxpayers for open periods, and that national law must be interpreted consistently with legal certainty and not contra legem. Cost sharing structures in insurance, reinsurance and, by the same logic, other Article 135 financial sectors lose access to the exemption.

C-288/16 L.Č.

Judgment · 29 June 2017 · Latvia

Exemption for transport services subcontracted to another carrier

The exemption does not apply where the transport services relating to the movement of goods to a third country are not supplied directly to the consignor or the consignee. A direct connection requires two things: the service must by its subject matter contribute to the actual performance of the export or import, and it must be supplied directly to the exporter, importer or consignee. Being necessary to the export is not enough. A broad reading would conflict with the straightforward application of exemptions under Article 131. Subcontracted haulage in export and transit chains is taxable at the standard rate when invoiced to the principal carrier or freight forwarder rather than to the consignor, consignee, exporter or importer.

C-33/16 A

Judgment · 4 May 2017 · Finland

Exemption for cargo handling supplied through subcontractors

Cargo handling meets the direct needs of the cargo, and of the vessel, since carrying cargo is a usual form of operating a high seas vessel. The exemption is not limited to the last link in the chain. It also covers a subcontractor's supply re-invoiced to a forwarder or transporter, and supplies to the cargo holder. Elmeka's end of chain restriction is confined to services capable of diversion (fuel transport), where monitoring would be needed. Here the qualifying use is fixed by the type of vessel when the service is agreed. Port operators, stevedores, terminals, freight forwarders and their subcontractors can apply the Article 148(d) exemption at every level of the handling chain, so long as the vessel qualifies under Article 148(a).

C-37/16 SAWP

Judgment · 18 January 2017 · Poland

Private copying levies are outside the scope of VAT

No supply of services within the Directive. There is no legal relationship involving reciprocal performance. The obligation to pay arises from national law, which also sets the amount, and the fee funds fair compensation linked to the harm caused by unauthorised reproduction rather than being direct consideration for an identifiable service. Whether an assignment of intangible property under Article 25(a) exists was left open, since such a transaction would fall outside the Directive anyway. The second question fell away. Statutory private copying and reprography levies carry no VAT for collecting societies or rightholders in the music, audiovisual, publishing and reprographic sectors, and no invoices with VAT are required either from the society to producers and importers or from rightholders to the society.

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-432/15 Baštová

Judgment · 10 November 2016 · Czechia

Race prize money, deduction and the reduced rate for sporting facilities

No supply for consideration where only placed horses receive a prize, even a prize fixed in advance, because the payment is uncertain. There is a supply for consideration where the organiser pays remuneration for participation regardless of placing. Input VAT on racing one's own horses is deductible as general costs only where the horses are actually intended for sale or racing objectively promotes the business. Prize money then stays outside the taxable amount. The reduced rate cannot apply where training is a main or equal-status component. Relevant to racing stables, breeders and equestrian centres, and by analogy to other prize-based sporting participation.

C-516/14 Barlis 06 - Investimentos Imobiliários e Turísticos

Judgment · 15 September 2016 · Portugal

Invoice descriptions and refusal of deduction

"Legal services rendered from [a date] until the present date" does not a priori meet Article 226(6). Wording without any start date fails both points 6 and 7, since for supplies giving rise to successive statements of account the period must appear. Verification is for the national court. Deduction cannot be refused solely on those formal defects where the authorities have all the information to check the substantive conditions. They must consider additional information supplied, and may still impose proportionate penalties. Relevant to anyone facing deduction denials based on thin invoice narratives, and to professional firms billing periodic fees.

C-543/14 Ordre des barreaux francophones et germanophone and Others

Judgment · 28 July 2016 · Belgium

VAT on lawyers' services and access to justice

Nothing affects the validity of those provisions. Article 47 does not confer a right to exemption for clients deemed to have sufficient resources. VAT can be challenged only if the cost is an insurmountable obstacle, and equality of arms does not require parties to bear equal financial costs. Aarhus Article 9(4) and (5) are not unconditional and sufficiently precise, so cannot be relied on. Legal aid work is not exempt. Lawyers are not bodies recognised as devoted to social wellbeing, such work being voluntary and one objective among many. Confirms that Member States abandoning the Article 371 grandfathered exemption for lawyers face no fundamental rights obstacle, and closes off exemption for court-appointed or legal aid work under Article 132(1)(g), consistent with the earlier refusal of a reduced rate. Relevant to law firms and their advisers in any Member State reviewing legal aid billing, and to publicly funded panel work generally.

C-11/15 Český rozhlas

Judgment · 22 June 2016 · Czechia

Public broadcasting funded by a statutory licence fee is outside the scope of VAT

Such broadcasting is not a supply for consideration and falls outside the Directive. There is no legal relationship involving reciprocal performance and no direct link. Liability for the fee follows mere possession of a receiver, whatever its use, and access to the broadcasts is free and not conditional on payment. A statutory triangular arrangement between the State, the broadcaster and fee payers does not change that, and Article 13A(1)(q) cannot widen the scope set by Article 2. Public broadcasters and other bodies funded by statutory levies must treat that funding as outside the scope rather than exempt, which affects how the deduction fraction is built and can restrict input tax on non-economic activity, the opposite of what the broadcaster sought here. Relevant to broadcasting, cultural and other publicly financed entities with mixed commercial income.

C-263/15 Lajvér

Judgment · 2 June 2016 · Hungary

Economic activity of a non-profit company charging modest operating fees

It is an economic activity because neither non-profit status, the ancillary character of the activity, nor public funding matters, provided the fee is charged over a period long enough to constitute income on a continuing basis (eight years suffices). The operation is a supply of services for consideration despite the statutory maintenance obligation and the modest, below cost level of the fee. The national court must still verify the direct link, in particular that the fee is not only partial remuneration and that the arrangement is not wholly artificial. Confirms that non-profit and publicly subsidised entities operating infrastructure for fees are taxable persons with input tax rights, and that below cost or regulated pricing does not itself break the direct link. Relevant to municipal and quasi-public vehicles, water, drainage and road maintenance bodies, and to advisers on EU funded projects where authorities challenge deduction.

C-22/15 Commission v Netherlands

Judgment · 25 February 2016 · Netherlands

Dutch exemption for berths and boat storage went beyond the sporting exemption

The Court upholds both complaints. Exempting the hiring of berths and storage sites for boating or leisure activities that cannot be equated with the practice of sport or physical education goes beyond Article 132(1)(m), and confining the exemption in genuine sporting cases to associations without employees is an unauthorised restriction. The Netherlands was ordered to pay the costs. The judgment cuts both ways, and that is what makes it useful.

C-335/14 Les Jardins de Jouvence

Judgment · 21 January 2016 · Belgium

Welfare exemption for a profit-making serviced residence for the elderly

The provision of dwellings adapted for elderly persons can be exempt, subject to the national court verifying charitable recognition. Other services are exempt only where national legislation obliges serviced residences to offer them for the support and care of the elderly and they correspond to services old people's homes must provide. Optional extras not so required (for example hairdressing and beauty services) are not essential and fall outside. Absence of public subsidy or social security funding is irrelevant. Operators of assisted-living and serviced residences, including commercial ones, cannot rely on a lack of public funding to stay taxable and preserve input VAT recovery on construction.

C-250/14 Air France-KLMand Hop!Brit-Air

Judgment · 23 December 2015 · France

VAT on unused air tickets and no-show revenue

The Court held that the retained price is remuneration, not indemnity. The consideration is the passenger's right to performance of the transport obligations, which the airline supplies by putting the passenger in a position to claim it, whether or not the flight is taken. Because the service is clearly identified when the ticket is bought, VAT is chargeable on receipt of payment, including where a third party collects in its own name but on the airline's behalf. The franchise lump sum is taxable consideration for the unused tickets, no harm having been suffered. Airlines and other transport operators selling non-refundable or expiring tickets cannot treat no-show revenue as outside scope compensation.

C-264/14 Hedqvist

Judgment · 22 October 2015 · Sweden

VAT treatment of bitcoin exchange transactions

The exchange transactions are supplies of services for consideration. Bitcoin is not tangible property, having no purpose other than to serve as a means of payment, and the margin is direct consideration. They are exempt under Article 135(1)(e), which is not confined to legal tender but extends to non-traditional currencies accepted by the parties as an alternative to legal tender with no purpose other than as a means of payment. Articles 135(1)(d) and (f) do not apply. Bitcoin is neither an instrument transferring money nor a security.

C-463/14 Asparuhovo Lake Investment Company

Judgment · 3 September 2015 · Bulgaria

Retainer contracts as a supply of services and when tax becomes chargeable

Article 24(1) covers subscription contracts for consulting services, including legal, commercial and financial advice, where the supplier agrees to be available for the contract term. Availability itself is the service, so no link to identified advice at a specific time need be shown. The exclusivity commitment is merely a clause of that contract, so Article 25(b) need not be considered. The chargeable event and chargeability arise on expiry of each payment period, whether or not advice was actually given. Legitimacy of the contract remains for the national court. Confirms Kennemer Golf and Le Rayon d'Or for professional retainers. Relevant to law firms, accountants, IT security and consultancy providers billing on retainer, and to their corporate clients, particularly in intra-group arrangements.

C-584/13 Mapfre asistencia and Mapfre warranty

Judgment · 16 July 2015 · France

Extended warranties on second-hand cars as insurance transactions

Such a warranty constitutes an exempt insurance transaction. The provider undertakes, against a premium certain but limited, to relieve the purchaser of uncertain repair costs, and the requisite legal relationship exists whether the contract is concluded directly, through the dealer as intermediary or by assignment. How the provider prices or manages the risk is irrelevant. The warranty and the vehicle sale are in principle distinct and independent supplies. Both characterisations are left to the referring court on the facts. Relevant to motor retail, extended warranty and breakdown cover providers, and to administrators structuring cover as "after-sales service" outsourced by dealers.

C-144/14 Cabinet Medical Veterinar Dr. Tomoiagă Andrei

Judgment · 9 July 2015 · Romania

Retroactive VAT assessment on veterinary services and duty to register a taxable person of the authority's own motion

Article 273 does not require registration of a taxable person's own motion on the basis of non-VAT returns. It is for the taxable person to declare commencement of activity under Article 213(1), and Member States retain discretion. Legal certainty and legitimate expectations do not preclude assessment within the limitation period, provided the rules are clear (removal from the exemption list suffices, VAT being of general application) and the authority's practice gave no precise assurances. Verification is for the national court. Confirms that a Member State's failure to police registration does not transfer the registration burden to the tax authority. Relevant to advisers dealing with retrospective assessments in newer Member States and with professions whose exempt status changed on accession.

C-97/14 SMK

Judgment · 30 April 2015 · Hungary

Place of supply of contract work on goods and the requirement that the goods leave

Article 55 applies only if two cumulative conditions are met: the recipient is identified for VAT in another Member State, and the goods are dispatched or transported out of the Member State of physical performance. The dispatch condition must be assessed by reference to the facts of the processing transaction alone, before any other transaction concerning the goods. Where the goods moved only after a later sale, Article 55 does not apply and Article 52(c) governs. The recipient's dual identification was irrelevant. Relevant to toll manufacturers, contract assemblers and processing businesses, and to advisers reviewing periods before 01-01-2010 or open assessments.

C-42/14 Wojskowa Agencja Mieszkaniowa w Warszawie

Judgment · 16 April 2015 · Poland

Utilities and service charges recharged by a landlord to tenants

Where the landlord contracts with the suppliers and simply passes on the costs, he is treated as making those supplies to the tenant. Auto Lease Holland does not apply. Such supplies are in principle distinct and independent from the letting, assessed separately, unless the elements are so closely linked as to form a single indivisible economic supply which it would be artificial to split. Individual meters, consumption-based and separately itemised billing, and tenant choice of supplier point to separate supplies. National courts must assess the contract. Relevant to landlords, property managers and their advisers who recharge utilities and waste services.

C-55/14 Régie communale autonome du stade Luc Varenne

Judgment · 22 January 2015 · Belgium

Making a football stadium available, letting or taxable service

As a general rule, no. Such an arrangement is not a letting of immovable property. The characteristic supply is the provision of access to sporting facilities in a usable condition, supported by the owner's active role (permanent on-site caretaking) and the 80% weighting of the services. The Court left the fact finding to the national court, which must assess whether all the services are genuinely necessary for football use and whether the enjoyment is merely occasional and temporary. Relevant to stadium, arena and sports facility operators, municipalities and their autonomous corporations, and anyone structuring facility use agreements with clubs.

C-7/13 Skandia America (USA), filial Sverige

Judgment · 17 September 2014 · Sweden

Services from a third country head office to a branch inside a VAT group

Such supplies are taxable. The branch itself is not an independent taxable person, but by joining a VAT group it ceases to be identifiable separately. The services are treated as supplied to the group, which is a taxable person distinct from the head office. Since the services fall within Article 56 and the supplier is established in a third country, the VAT group as purchaser is liable for the VAT under Article 196. Grouping a branch changes the VAT analysis of internal cost allocations from head office.

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-495/12 Bridport and West Dorset Golf Club

Judgment · 19 December 2013 · United Kingdom

Sports exemption and green fees charged to non-members

Access to the course is closely linked to sport and, if supplied by a non-profit-making body, is exempt whether the player is a member or not. Article 134(b) does not exclude green fees. "Additional income" cannot be read so as to restrict the exemption by reference to the recipient's membership status, a criterion deliberately omitted from Article 132(1)(m). Article 133(d) does not permit a general measure of that kind, since it cannot eliminate competitive differences flowing from the exemption itself. Non-profit sports clubs charging visitors for access, golf, tennis, squash and similar, cannot be taxed on those charges merely because the payer is not a member.

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-124/12 AES-3C Maritza East 1

Judgment · 18 July 2013 · Bulgaria

Deduction on costs for hired-in staff and the standstill clause

Deduction cannot be refused merely because the workers are employed by another entity. The link required by Article 168(a) is purely economic, and the legal relationship with the persons working in the undertaking is irrelevant, provided the costs have a direct and immediate link with the taxable person's general costs. The standstill clause does not permit a new exclusion for supplies free of charge introduced on accession. The national court must read domestic law consistently or disapply it. Relevant to any business operating with hired-in, agency or seconded personnel, particularly industrial sites where transport, PPE and workwear are legally required.

C-155/12 RR Donnelley Global Turnkey Solutions Poland

Judgment · 27 June 2013 · Poland

Place of supply of complex warehousing services

Such a complex storage service falls within Article 47 only where storage is the principal service of a single transaction and the recipient is given a right to use all or part of expressly specified immovable property. Absent that, for example where customers have no right of access to the part of the warehouse holding their goods, or the property is not a central and essential element, Article 44 applies. Repackaging is a separate principal supply where not necessary for better storage. For warehousing and third-party logistics operators, and their customers abroad, the contract turns on whether a right of use over identified space is granted.

C-653/11 Newey

Judgment · 20 June 2013 · United Kingdom

Weight of contractual terms in identifying supplier and recipient

Contractual terms are a factor to be taken into account, since they normally reflect economic and commercial reality and legal certainty requires it, but they are not decisive in identifying supplier and recipient. They may be disregarded where they do not reflect economic and commercial reality but constitute a wholly artificial arrangement set up with the sole aim of obtaining a tax advantage. Whether that is so here, and whether the broker was the real supplier and real recipient, is for the national court. Confirms that tax authorities may look behind contracts where the paperwork is artificial, but only on that footing.

C-18/12 Žamberk

Judgment · 21 February 2013 · Czechia

Sports exemption for access to a municipal aquatic park

The Court answers both questions in the affirmative. The exemption is not confined to particular sports, levels of play, or organised or systematic participation, provided the activity is not engaged in purely for rest and amusement. Mixed-use access may be a single complex supply closely linked to sport where the predominant element, judged objectively from the typical consumer's viewpoint and from the park's design, is sporting rather than recreational. The intentions of individual visitors are irrelevant. Classification is for the national court. Relevant to municipalities, non-profit trusts and clubs operating leisure centres, lidos and mixed sport and leisure complexes, where a single all-inclusive ticket points to one composite supply.

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-392/11 Field Fisher Waterhouse

Judgment · 27 September 2012 · United Kingdom

Service charges under a commercial lease as part of a single exempt supply

The letting and the linked services may constitute a single supply for VAT purposes. A termination right for non-payment of the service charges supports that view but is not decisive. The fact that a third party could in principle supply the services does not prevent a single supply. Inclusion in the lease is likewise not decisive. Services which objectively could not be indivisible from or ancillary to the letting remain separate. Where some services are independent and taxable, an overall charge must be apportioned. Classification is for the national court. Landlords and tenants of commercial property, and their advisers, cannot treat service charges as automatically taxable merely because the services could have been bought from a third party, nor as automatically exempt because they sit in the lease.

C-520/10 Lebara

Judgment · 3 May 2012 · United Kingdom

Single supply on sale of prepaid phonecards to distributors

The Court held there is a single supply of telecommunications services for consideration, made to the distributor, since the operator receives only one actual payment and the reciprocal legal relationship exists with the distributor, not the end user. No second taxable supply arises when the end user makes calls. This turns on the distributor reselling in its own name and on its own behalf, at a price the operator does not control or know, with no refund right for unused credit. Relevant to telecoms operators, prepaid card issuers and their distributors selling through independent resellers.

C-225/11 Able UK

Judgment · 26 April 2012 · United Kingdom

Scope of the NATO forces exemption

The exemption applies only cumulatively. The services must be supplied for staff of the other State's armed forces taking part in the common defence effort, or for the civilian staff accompanying them, and those forces must be stationed in or visiting the Member State where the supply takes place. The comma in some language versions is not decisive. The qualification governs the provision as a whole, and exemptions are construed strictly. Supplies to forces in their own Member State remain taxable. Suppliers of goods or services to foreign NATO forces cannot rely on the customer's status alone.

C-436/10 BLM

Judgment · 29 March 2012 · Belgium

Private use of company property by staff and the letting exemption

The Court held that those provisions preclude such national legislation where the characteristics of a letting are absent. Seeling is not confined to natural persons. Article 6(2)(a) expressly covers use by a taxable person's staff and draws no distinction by legal form. Without rent, an agreed duration of enjoyment, a right of occupation and the exclusion of third parties, there is no exempt letting. It remains for the national court to verify whether a letting exists on the facts. Member States cannot deny deduction on mixed use immovable property held by companies by recharacterising rent free occupation by directors or employees as an exempt letting. Relevant to corporate property holdings, family companies granting usufructs, and advisers handling director accommodation.

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-118/11 Eon Aset Menidjmunt

Judgment · 16 February 2012 · Bulgaria

Deduction on leased and finance-leased cars used for home to work travel

For an ordinary lease (a supply of services), deduction requires a direct and immediate link with the economic activity, assessed at the expiry of the period to which each payment relates. Where a finance lease transfers substantially all risks and rewards, or ownership at the end, it is the acquisition of capital goods. If allocated wholly to business assets, input VAT is fully and immediately deductible, with private or staff use taxed under Article 26(1). Such national exclusions are permissible, but not where capital goods are allocated to the business. Relevant to fleet operators, leasing companies and advisers handling company car deductions.

C-117/11 Purple Parking and Airparks Services

Order · 19 January 2012 · United Kingdom

Off-airport parking with a transfer bus as a single supply of parking

Ruling by reasoned order, the Court held that in circumstances such as those in the main proceedings the parking and the transfer form a single, complex supply of services in which the parking is predominant. The transport is not an end in itself for the customer but the means of better enjoying the parking, so it follows the treatment of the parking service and cannot be carved out to attract the zero rate applicable to passenger transport. A clean application of the single-supply doctrine to a pricing structure built around a favourable rate.

C-93/10 GFKL Financial Services

Judgment · 27 October 2011 · Germany

Purchase of defaulted debts below face value, no supply for consideration

No supply of services for consideration and no economic activity, where the difference between face value and purchase price reflects the actual economic value of the debts at the time of assignment. The purchaser receives no consideration from the assignor. The discount reflects the doubtful nature of the debts and increased default risk, not remuneration. That distinguishes the case from true factoring, where the factor retains a factoring commission and a del credere fee. The exemption and taxable amount questions did not need answering. Confirms that outright purchases of distressed loan portfolios priced at market value fall outside VAT altogether, so no output tax on a notional recovery service and no debate about exemption. Relevant to banks disposing of non-performing loans, debt purchasers and securitisation vehicles, and to their advisers structuring pricing documentation.

C-504/10 Tanoarch

Judgment · 27 October 2011 · Slovakia

Deduction on assignment of a co-ownership share in an unpatented invention

A taxable person may in principle deduct input VAT on such an assignment, provided national law permits a co-inventor to assign his share. That question of national law is for the referring court. Lack of patent registration does not prevent the transaction being an economic activity, and the parties' intention to obtain a tax advantage is irrelevant to that classification. Whether the arrangement amounts to abuse of rights is a factual assessment for the national court on all the circumstances. Confirms that intangible rights transactions are judged objectively. Relevant to IP holding structures, research consortia and advisers handling deals in patent rights before grant.

C-464/10 Henfling and Others

Judgment · 14 July 2011 · Belgium

Commission agents collecting bets and the gambling exemption

The Court held that the Article 6(4) fiction is general and extends to exemptions, so where an operator acts in his own name but on behalf of a bet-taking undertaking in collecting exempt bets, the principal is deemed to supply exempt bets to that operator. That applies only if the operator genuinely acts in his own name on the facts. National provisions extending the fiction beyond Article 6(4) criteria are irrelevant, distinguishing United Utilities call centre services. Confirms that the undisclosed agent fiction reclassifies the intermediary's remuneration as an exempt betting supply received from the principal, rather than a taxable intermediary service. Relevant to gambling and lottery networks using retail outlets, and more broadly to any exempt sector using commission agents, since the reasoning is not specific to betting.

C-497/09 Bog and Others

Judgment · 10 March 2011 · Germany

Hot food to go, supply of goods or supply of services

Sales from snack stalls, mobile snack bars and cinema foyers are supplies of goods where a qualitative assessment shows the service elements are not predominant: standardised cooking not done to individual order, plus rudimentary eating facilities requiring negligible human intervention, does not tip the balance, and it is immaterial whether customers use them. Party catering is a supply of services, unless the caterer merely delivers standard meals without additional service elements or other circumstances make the food predominant. "Foodstuffs" in Annex H covers food prepared for immediate consumption. The dividing line is qualitative, judged from the typical consumer's viewpoint, and turns on whether preparation is standardised and whether the facilities require real human intervention.

C-270/09 MacDonald Resorts

Judgment · 16 December 2010 · United Kingdom

Timeshare points schemes, when the supply occurs and where

The supply must be classified at the moment the customer converts his rights into an actual service, not when the Points Rights are bought: the elements needed for tax to become chargeable are not then known, so the prepayment rule does not apply. On conversion into hotel accommodation or temporary use of a property, the supply is connected with immovable property and taxable where the hotel or property is situated. Conversion into a right to occupy is a letting, but Member States may exclude it from exemption. Operators of points based holiday clubs, timeshare exchange businesses and resort groups must account for VAT by reference to each redemption, at the location of the property or hotel used, rather than at establishment on sale of the points entitlement.

C-276/09 Everything Everywhere

Judgment · 2 December 2010 · United Kingdom

Payment handling charges as ancillary to the principal supply

The charges are not consideration for a distinct and independent supply. Handling the payment is ancillary to the principal supply of telecommunications services. Enabling customers to choose a convenient payment method is not an aim in itself and offers nothing independent of the telephone service. Seeking and processing payment is intrinsic to any supply for consideration. Separate contractual pricing and separate invoicing are not decisive. The exemption questions therefore did not need to be answered. Confirms that payment handling fees charged by a supplier to its own customers follow the tax treatment of the main supply, whatever the payment channel.

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-40/09 Astra Zeneca UK

Judgment · 29 July 2010 · United Kingdom

Retail vouchers given to employees under salary sacrifice

The Court held that an employer which acquired the vouchers at a VAT inclusive price and provides them to employees in exchange for their giving up part of their cash remuneration makes a supply of services for consideration under Article 2(1). The vouchers confer only a future, indeterminate right to goods or services, so they are services, not goods. The forgone salary is the direct, monetary consideration. The second and third questions were not answered. Employers running salary sacrifice or flexible benefits schemes involving retail vouchers must account for output tax on the amount of salary forgone, with the corresponding input tax on voucher purchase deductible. Relevant to HR and reward advisers, retailers issuing single purpose and multi purpose vouchers, and employers across sectors operating benefit funds.

C-381/09 Curia

Order · 7 July 2010 · Italy

VAT treatment of unlawful lending at exorbitant rates

The Court held that exorbitant lending falls within the scope of the Sixth Directive notwithstanding its illegality under national criminal law. Article 13B(d)(1) must be interpreted as meaning that a Member State cannot impose VAT on that activity where the corresponding lawful activity, money lending at rates of interest that are not excessive, is itself exempt from VAT. Confirms that criminal illegality under domestic law does not, by itself, take a supply outside the VAT system, nor does it disapply an exemption where a lawful equivalent transaction exists and is exempt. Relevant to advisers handling assessments raised alongside criminal proceedings, and to lenders and informal finance providers facing VAT demands on interest.

C-237/09 De Fruytier

Judgment · 3 June 2010 · Belgium

Transport of human organs and the exemption for supplies of organs, blood and milk

The exemption does not apply. Supply of goods is an autonomous EU concept requiring transfer of the power to dispose of tangible property as owner. A carrier who merely moves organs and samples physically from one place to another for hospitals and laboratories confers no such power and makes a supply of services. The national prohibition on trading in organs, and the Oviedo Convention (unsigned by the EU, ratified by only a small majority of Member States), do not deprive the exemption of effect, since such transactions may be lawful elsewhere. Medical logistics operators, courier businesses and laboratory transport providers cannot rely on the organs, blood and milk exemption.

C-88/09 Graphic Procédé

Judgment · 11 February 2010 · France

Reprography, supply of goods or supply of services

Reprography is a single indissociable economic operation and has the characteristics of a supply of goods where it is confined to reproducing documents on media (paper) with transfer of the right to dispose of those media, collation and binding being merely ancillary. It is a supply of services where accompanying services (advice, adaptation, modification or alteration of the original) are predominant, judged by their importance to the customer, time taken, extent of processing and share of total cost, so as to be an end in themselves. Print shops, copy bureaux and document reproduction providers must characterise output by reference to the substance of what the customer buys, not by contract label.

C-37/08 RCI Europe

Judgment · 3 September 2009 · United Kingdom

Place of supply of timeshare exchange services

All three fee streams are consideration for a single service of facilitating exchange, and that service is sufficiently directly connected with immovable property. The place of supply is where the property over which the member concerned holds the timeshare right is situated, not where the operator is established. Where the operator buys in weeks from third parties to top up the pool, it receives nothing from those third parties and is not liable to VAT on that transaction. Timeshare exchange clubs and holiday ownership operators must localise membership, subscription and exchange fee income by reference to the location of each member's own timeshare property, not their own establishment.

C-377/08 EGN

Judgment · 2 July 2009 · Italy

Input VAT recovery on cross-border telecommunications supplies

The Court held that such supplies are "carried out abroad" within Article 17(3)(a), so the supplier may deduct or be refunded input VAT in its own Member State provided the same services would have generated a right of deduction had they been supplied domestically. For 1999 the shift of place of supply to the customer's establishment derived not from Article 9(2)(e) itself but from Council Decision 97/207 authorising Italy to derogate. Directive 1999/59 only applied from a later date. Confirms that a deemed foreign place of supply is enough to trigger recovery under Article 17(3)(a).

C-1/08 Athesia Druck

Judgment · 19 February 2009 · Italy

Place of supply of advertising services and the role of the fiscal representative

In principle the place is the recipient's establishment, even where that recipient is only an intermediate customer and not the final advertiser. A Member State may however use Article 9(3)(b) to bring the supply onshore where the advertising messages are broadcast from its territory. That option covers only the supply made by the Community provider to the (final or intermediate) recipient, not the onward supplies made by the non-Community intermediary to its own clients. Appointing a fiscal representative is in itself irrelevant to taxability, and taxation does not bar a Thirteenth Directive refund. Relevant to media agencies and advertising intermediaries buying space in one Member State for non-EU principals, and to their fiscal representatives.

C-371/07 Danfoss and AstraZeneca

Judgment · 11 December 2008 · Denmark

Free canteen meals for staff and business contacts, deduction and deemed supplies

The standstill clause does not permit the exclusion. An administrative practice granting full deduction in exchange for taxation at cost price precludes the authorities from later widening the exclusion. On Article 6(2), the Court distinguished two cases. Meals for business contacts at on-site meetings fall outside it where objective evidence shows strictly business purposes. Meals for staff are in principle caught, unless the needs of the business, such as ensuring meetings run smoothly and without interruption, require the employer to provide them. Both assessments are for the national court. Confirms that administrative practices, not just legislation, fix the scope of a standstill exclusion, so a Member State that has allowed deduction cannot later reinstate a wider restriction. Relevant to any business operating a staff canteen or providing hospitality on its premises.

C-434/05 Horizon College

Judgment · 14 June 2007 · Netherlands

Secondment of teachers between educational establishments

Such secondment is not "education" because educational activity comprises the organisational framework as well as the teacher/pupil relationship, and the status of the seconding body is irrelevant. It may, however, be exempt as closely related to education if both supplier and recipient are qualifying bodies, the placement is essential, in that equivalent teaching quality could not otherwise be assured, for example through commercial agencies, and its basic purpose is not additional income in direct competition with taxable enterprises. Cost-only recharge does not itself prove absence of such purpose. Schools, colleges, universities and public sector educational bodies that lend staff to each other cannot treat those charges as exempt education.

C-72/05 Wollny

Judgment · 14 September 2006 · Germany

Taxable amount for private use of a building held wholly in business assets

Article 11A(1)(c) does not preclude fixing the taxable amount at a portion of the acquisition or construction costs determined by reference to the length of the Article 20 adjustment period. Member States have a margin of discretion, provided the aims of Article 6(2), equal treatment with final consumers and correspondence between input deduction and output tax, are respected. Enkler's reference to depreciation does not confine them to national depreciation rules. Land acquisition costs must be included where that acquisition bore VAT which was deducted. Confirms Member States may accelerate the output charge on private use of mixed use immovable property by aligning it with the adjustment period rather than slower depreciation rates, reducing the cash-flow benefit of full allocation to business assets and limiting untaxed final consumption on a later VAT free disposal. Relevant to owner occupiers, professionals and family businesses constructing mixed use buildings, and to advisers modelling the cost of full allocation.

C-166/05 Heger

Judgment · 7 September 2006 · Austria

Fishing permits as services connected with immovable property

Such a transfer is a supply of services connected with immovable property. Absent use of the Article 5(3) option, the transfer of fishing rights is a supply of services, not goods. A permanently delimited area of land, including one covered by water, is immovable property. Article 9(2)(a) is not a narrow exception to Article 9(1), but it requires a sufficiently direct connection. Here the specific stretch of water is a central and essential element of the supply and the place of consumption. Relevant to anyone selling rights of use over defined land or water.

C-41/04 Levob Verzekeringen and OV Bank

Judgment · 27 October 2005 · Netherlands

Standard software plus customisation as a single supply of services

Elements so closely linked that they objectively form a whole transaction which it would be artificial to split are one single supply, and that is so here. The economic purpose was functional software customised to the customer's needs, and separate contractual prices are not decisive. The single supply is a supply of services where the customisation, judged by its extent, cost and duration, is neither minor nor ancillary but of decisive importance for use of the software. Such a service falls under Article 9(2)(e), third indent. The leading authority on artificial splitting, applied outside the insurance and catering contexts.

C-442/01 KapHag

Judgment · 26 June 2003 · Germany

Admission of a partner in return for a cash contribution

A partnership which admits a partner in return for a cash contribution makes no supply of services for consideration to that person. The mere acquisition and holding of shares or interests is not an economic activity, and the same follows for their transfer. It is irrelevant whether the admission is characterised as an act of the partnership or of the existing partners. The second question therefore did not need answering. The intake of new capital by a partnership falls outside VAT altogether rather than being an exempt financial transaction, so tax authorities cannot use the share exemption to block deduction of set-up costs such as legal and structuring fees. Relevant to closed property funds and other partnership vehicles raising capital from investors, and to advisers on fund formation costs.

C-287/00 Commission v Germany

Judgment · 20 June 2002 · Germany

Contract research by State universities is not closely related to education

The Court declared an infringement of Article 2. An exemption not provided for or authorised by the directive is a breach of that article. Services closely related to university education need not be construed especially strictly, but the concept covers only what is necessary to avoid increasing the cost of education. Contract research for consideration, however useful, is not essential to teaching students for professional life, so it falls outside Article 13(A)(1)(i). Simplification arguments cannot widen an exemption. Universities, research institutes and other public-law bodies supplying commissioned research for consideration are taxable persons on that activity, with the corresponding input tax recovery.

C-276/97 Commission v France

Judgment · 12 September 2000 · France

VAT on motorway tolls and the public bodies exclusion

Providing road access for a toll is an economic activity and a supply for consideration, there being a direct link between the toll and the use of the road. France infringed Articles 2 and 4 only where the service is not supplied by a body governed by public law. The Commission failed to show that public bodies were not operating under a special legal regime, and its distortion of competition argument was inadmissible. Own resources plus interest are due, but recovery is limited by analogy with Article 9(2) of Regulation No 1553/89 to the 1993 budgetary year onwards. Tolling and infrastructure concessions are within the scope of VAT where the operator is a private or quasi-public entity, even if its functions are conferred by law and exercised under public law prerogatives. Relevant to road, tunnel and bridge concessionaires and their advisers.

C-358/97 Commission v Ireland

Judgment · 12 September 2000 · Ireland

VAT on road and bridge tolls charged by private operators

Providing road access for a toll is an economic activity and a supply for consideration. There is a direct link between the road use and the toll. Article 4(5) requires both action as a public authority and a body governed by public law. The Irish operators were private-law traders, so it did not apply. Article 13B(b) did not cover the tolls because the parties agreed no duration of enjoyment, an essential element of letting. Own resources recoverable only from the 1994 budgetary year, by analogy with the four-year correction rule. Confirms that infrastructure charges levied by concessionaires and other private operators are taxable, whatever the statutory framework or public interest character of the activity.

C-359/97 Commission v United Kingdom

Judgment · 12 September 2000 · United Kingdom

VAT treatment of road and bridge tolls

Tolling is an economic activity and a supply of services for consideration, there being a direct link between access and the toll. The Article 4(5) exclusion cannot apply where the operator is a private law trader, and the Commission had not shown that public bodies operated on the same terms as private traders. No letting exemption: the parties agree no duration of enjoyment, an essential element of a letting. Own resources recoverable only from the 1994 budgetary year, by analogy with the four year correction rule. Confirms that toll charges for road and bridge access are taxable supplies unless made by a body governed by public law under a special legal regime, so concession structures matter.

C-408/97 Commission v Netherlands

Judgment · 12 September 2000 · Netherlands

Road tolls charged by public bodies and the public authority exclusion

The Court confirmed that providing road access for a toll is an economic activity and a supply of services for consideration, there being a direct link between access and the toll. However, it rejected the Commission's narrow reading of Article 4(5). Activities pursued "as public authorities" are those carried out under the special legal regime applicable to public bodies, not those carried out under the same legal conditions as private traders. As the Commission had not shown the toll operators were subject to private trader conditions, the action was dismissed. Confirms that tolls are consideration for a taxable service, so private and non-public operators of roads, bridges and tunnels are within the scope of VAT.

C-260/98 Commission v Greece

Judgment · 12 September 2000 · Greece

VAT on road tolls collected by a public body

The Court confirmed that providing road access against a toll is an economic activity and a supply of services for consideration, there being a direct link between the toll and the use of the road. However, it rejected the Commission's reading of Article 4(5), that only core, non delegable public functions qualify. What matters is whether the body operates under a special legal regime rather than under the same conditions as a private trader. The Commission had not shown this, so the action, including the own resources claim, was dismissed. Tolling is squarely an economic activity, so private and mixed sector concessionaires charge VAT.

C-172/96 First National Bank of Chicago

Judgment · 14 July 1998 · United Kingdom

Foreign exchange dealing as a supply of services and its taxable amount

Currencies used as legal tender are not tangible property, so such dealings are supplies of services, and they are effected for consideration even without commission, because the bank's remuneration is built into the rates it quotes. The taxable amount is not the currencies transferred, nor the notional bid/offer spread on a single deal, but the overall result of the supplier's transactions over a given period. It does not matter that neither party knows the amount at the time or afterwards. Confirms that spread-based currency dealing falls within the VAT system and generates a taxable amount, so it counts in partial exemption calculations and, where counterparties are outside the Community, can support deduction under Article 17(3)(c). Relevant to advisers designing or negotiating special partial exemption methods for financial institutions with mixed exempt and non-Community business.

C-384/95 Landboden-Agrardienste

Judgment · 18 December 1997 · Germany

Compensation for reducing production, no supply of services

No supply of services and no taxable turnover. Following Mohr, only the nature of the undertaking matters. It must imply consumption. The farmer supplies nothing to an identifiable consumer and confers no benefit capable of being a cost component of another person's activity in the commercial chain. The Court stressed that payments by public authorities in the common interest are not automatically outside VAT, and that the use made of a service by the payer is irrelevant. The third question fell away. Confirms Mohr and extends it to nationally funded, as opposed to EU funded, production restriction schemes.

C-327/94 Dudda

Judgment · 26 September 1996 · Germany

Place of supply of services ancillary to artistic and entertainment events

Article 9(1) does not take precedence over Article 9(2): one asks first whether Article 9(2) applies. Any service which, though not itself artistic or entertainment activity, is a prerequisite for its performance is an ancillary service, judged objectively and irrespective of who supplies it. Sound-engineering therefore falls within the first indent of Article 9(2)(c) and is taxed where physically carried out. Coordination with visual effects produced by others makes no difference, since the same provision covers it. Avoidance risk cannot alter this. Establishes that Article 9(2) is not a narrow derogation to be read down in favour of the supplier's establishment, and that "ancillary" is content-based, not person-based. Relevant to touring and live events supply chains operating cross-border, and to the question of where such contractors register and account.

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.

C-215/94 Mohr

Judgment · 29 February 1996 · Germany

Compensation for discontinuing milk production is outside the scope

It is not a supply of services, and the compensation is not subject to turnover tax. VAT is a general tax on consumption. In paying farmers to cease production the Community acquires nothing for its own use but acts in the common interest of the proper functioning of the milk market. Neither the Community nor the national authorities obtain any benefit that would make them consumers of a service, so the direct link argument fails. The foundation of the "no identifiable consumer" line of authority.

C-16/93 Tolsma

Judgment · 3 March 1994 · Netherlands

A street musician voluntary donations are not consideration for a supply

The Court holds that it is not. There is no supply for consideration where no remuneration is stipulated, even though the musician asks for money and receives sums whose amount is neither quantified nor quantifiable. A supply is taxable only where there is a legal relationship between provider and recipient under which there is reciprocal performance, the payment received being the actual counter value of the service supplied. The foundational authority on the direct link between supply and consideration, cited in almost every later case on the scope of Article 2 of the VAT Directive.

C-102/86 Apple and Pear Development Council

Judgment · 8 March 1988 · United Kingdom

Statutory levies funding collective promotion, no direct link

The exercise of those functions is not a supply of services for consideration. A supply for consideration presupposes a direct link between the service and the consideration received. The body's functions serve the common interests of the industry, individual growers benefiting only indirectly. The levy bears no relationship to the benefit any grower obtains and is recoverable from each grower as a statutory, not contractual, debt whether or not he benefits. There is therefore no direct link, and no taxable supply. The foundation case on the direct link requirement, still the starting point wherever a body funded by compulsory levies rather than negotiated prices claims to make taxable supplies to its members. Relevant to agricultural and industry promotion boards, marketing councils and similar statutory bodies, and to trade associations.

C-107/84 Commission v Germany

Judgment · 11 July 1985 · Germany

Scope of the exemption for public postal services

The Court held that Germany had failed to fulfil its obligations. The wording of Article 13A(1)(a), read across all language versions, exempts supplies by the public postal services in the organic sense, not supplies made for them. The exemption applies whether the postal operator is a body governed by public law or a licensed undertaking, but it does not reach inputs bought in from other traders, even where those inputs pursue the same objectives and are treated in national law as postal activities. Confirms that Article 13 exemptions are construed strictly by reference to both the activity and the body supplying it, and that pursuing an exempt purpose does not exempt subcontracted inputs.

Related topics

Exemptions · Place of supply · Taxable transactions · Right of deduction · Supply of goods · Origin and scope of right of deduction · Supply of goods or services · Economic activity · Chargeable event, chargeability and collection of VAT · Other exemptions