- Claire Legras, ‘Le prorata de TVA peut-il être mondialisé?’ (11 July 2011) no 301849, Sté Crédit Lyonnais, Revue de jurisprudence fiscale 2011, no 10, Etudes et doctrines, 917. Free translation by the author: ‘The information we have collected is far from complete, but it shows that the palette is varied. Some countries oppose the global prorate, such as France and apparently Germany which use the direct allocation. Others, very clearly like Spain and for a long time, Belgium, have embodied the global prorate in law. Others, like the UK, allow the use of the global prorate only to head offices having their branches outside the European Union.’
- Case C-388/11 Crédit Lyonnais [2013] ECR I-0000.
- Anne Grousset and Philippe Tournes, ‘Bank Branches: The French VAT Experience’, CMS VAT Group (March 2011), 2.
- Case C-33/78 Somafer SA v Saar-Ferngas AG [1978] ECR 2183, para 12.
- Alain Charlet and Dimitra Koulouri, ‘Relations between Head Offices and Permanent Establishments: VAT/GST v Direct Taxation: The Two Faces of Janus’ in Michael Lang, Peter Melz, Eleonor Kristoffersson and Thomas Ecker (eds), Value Added Tax and Direct Taxation: Similarities and Differences (IBFD, 2009) 710.
- Herman van Kesteren and Madeleine Merkx, ‘The Concept of Taxable Persons (and Fixed Establishments) in EU VAT’ in Thomas Ecker, Michael Lang and Ine Lejeune (eds), The Future of Indirect Taxation: Recent Trends in VAT and GST Systems around the World (Kluwer Law International, 2012) 633.
- ibid, 634.
- ibid, 621.
- Arts 44 and 45 VAT Directive and s 4(3) Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 282/2011 of 15 March 2011 laying down implementing measures for Directive 2006/112/EC on the common system of value added tax [2011] OJ L77/1.
- Arts 44 and 196 VAT Directive.
- See, inter alia, Jean Schaffner, How Fixed is a Permanent Establishment? (Kluwer Law International, 2013) 55; Raffaele Russo and Edoardo Pedrazzini, ‘Permanent Establishments under Italian Tax Law: An Overview' [2007] European Taxation (August/September) 389; Erwan Loquet, ‘La Notion d'établissement stable en matière de TVA à la lumière des décisions de la Cour de justice et de la législation luxembourgeoise' (1998) 27 Bulletin Droit et Banque 23. Free translation by the author: ‘the official transposition of this concept [of permanent establishment] in VAT would be a great time saver, as there, difficulties have been resolved for the most part, and in particular it would give the economic operators a legal certainty that they are currently far from benefiting from.’
- OECD, ‘Glossary of Tax Terms', www.oecd.org/ctp/glossaryoftaxterms.htm. All websites accessed November 2013.
- Charlet and Koulouri (n 5) 704.
- Case C-210/04 Ministero dell'Economia e delle Finanze and Agenzia delle Entrate v FCE Bank plc [2006] ECR I-2803.
- ibid, para 35.
- ibid, para 41.
- Pierre-Marie Glauser, ‘Head Office/Branch Relationships from the Perspective of Swiss VAT’ [2010] International VAT Monitor 31; see also Anne Grousset and Armelle Abadie, ‘Etablissement stable et TVA’ [2006] 896 Option Finance 20–21.
- See FCE Bank (n 14).
- CAA Versailles, ‘Sté Hynix Semi Conductor UK Limited’ (5 February 2009) no 06–36 1st ch Revue de jurisprudence fiscale no 635.
- Charlet and Koulouri (n 5) 723.
- Inter alia Germany, Italy, Poland and the United Kingdom.
- Inter alia the Czech Republic, Luxembourg and the Netherlands.
- Legras (n 1) 921.
- Crédit Lyonnais (n 2) paras 32 and 33.
- ibid, paras 37, 38 and 40.
- Art 173 VAT Directive; Case C-333/91 Sofitam SA (formerly Satam SA) v Ministre chargé du Budget [1993] ECR I-3513.
- Art 168 VAT Directive; Case C-435/05 Inverstrand BV v Staatssecretaris van Financiën [2007] ECR I-1315; Case C-98/07 Nordania Finans A/S and BG Factoring A/S v Skatteministeriet [2008] ECR I-1281; Art 176 VAT Directive.
- CFE, Opinion Statement on the FCE Case, 2008.
- See above, section 3.A.
- Inter alia Case C-488/07 Royal Bank of Scotland plc v Commissioners of Her Majesty's Revenue & Customs [2008] ECR I-10409, para 24; Case C-511/10 Finanzamt Hildesheim v BLC Baumarkt GmbH & Co KG [2012] ECR I-0000, para 18.
- Such an arithmetical approach is not in all cases legally justified but in all cases it does require from the foreign branch extra compliance costs to be refunded.
- See nn 21 and 23.
- It depends on Member States' choices.
- See above, section 3.A.
- It does not depend on Member States' choices.
- Joined Cases C-318/11 and C-319/11 Daimler AG and Widex A/S v Skatteverke [2012] ECR I-0000.
- Case C-136/99 Ministre du Budget and Ministre de l'Economie et des Finances v Société Monte Dei Paschi Di Siena [2000] ECR I-6109.
- Case C-244/08 Commission of the European Communities v Italian Republic [2009] ECR I-130.
- Casper Bjerreegaard Eskildsen, ‘Pro Rata Deduction by Entities Established in Several VAT Jurisdictions’ [2012] International VAT Monitor 28.
- Charlet and Koulouri (n 5) 726.
- ibid, 723. Charlet and Koulouri support the analysis that Art 174 of the VAT Directive is a solid basis for a global VAT recovery ratio including the entire turnover of an MJB.
- For example, the definition of a permanent establishment is not the same depending on whether it is in the context of a VAT refund (Commission v Italy (n 39) and Daimler and Widex (n 37)) or VAT localisation purposes (Case C-260/95 Commissioners of Customs and Excise v DFDS A/S [1997] ECR I-1005). See Arts 11 and 53 of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 282/2011 (n 9).
- Case C-186/89 WM van Tiem v Staatssecretaris van Financien [1990] ECR I-4363, para 25.
- VAT Directive, Art 173(1)(2).
- The impact of the rejection of the worldwide prorate of deduction is increased by the rule that services used globally by MJBs are taxable in the Member State where the head office is localised (Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 282/2011 (n 9), Art 21).
- Just as the prorate is only a criterion for the application of the other VAT rules: see Case C-77/01 Empresa de Desenvolvimento Mineiro SGPS SA v Fazenda Pública [2004] ECR I-4295.
- Monte Dei Paschi Di Siena (n 37).
- ibid, para 28.
- Eskildsen (n 39) 30.
- Charlène Herbain, Reimbursement of Cross-Border VAT in the EU, Anticipate Not to be Late (ACE Kluwer, July 2011).
- It also promotes the harmonisation of the VAT system in putting Member States in situations where they ought to know how other Member States apply the VAT rules.
- Dan Bland, ‘Top Tips: China VAT Consolidating Filing’, Corporate Treasurer Weekly Newsletter, 22 April 2013, www.thecorporatetreasurer.com/News/340733,top-tips-china-vat-consolidating-filing.aspxn.
World Journal of VAT/GST Law
Volume 2, 2013 - Issue 3