Advanced search
Publication Cover
World Journal of VAT/GST Law Volume 3, 2014 - Issue 3
Journal homepage
713
Views
2
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Original Articles

The preferred treatment of the fixed establishment in European VAT

Rasa Mikutienė Graduate in Masters in European and International Tax Law from the School of Economics and Management of Lund University, Sweden. Associate with the Tax and Customs practice group at the law firm Sorainen, Vilnius, Lithuania. Email: [email protected].
Pages 166-190 | Published online: 07 May 2015

  • Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (2006) OJ L 347/1.
  • Council Implementing Regulation No 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 L 77/01.
  • Articles 11 and 53 of the Council Implementing Regulation No 282/2011 (n 2).
  • Case C-168/84 Berkholz ECLI:EU:C:1985:299, (1985) ECR I-2251, para 19.
  • Thomas Ecker, ‘Place of Effective Use and Enjoyment of Services—EU History Repeats Itself’ (2012) November/December International VAT Monitor 407–408; EC Consultation Paper, ‘VAT—The Place of Supply of Services to Non-Taxable Persons' 2005, 2 http://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/resources/documents/vat_place_of_supply_en.pdf (accessed 13 May 2014).
  • Ben JM Terra, The VAT Package and Anti-fraud Tax Measures (Lund University School of Economics and Management 2009) 93; Ad van Doesum, Herman van Kesteren, Gert-Jan van Norden and Irene Reiniers, ‘The New Rules on the Place of Supply of Services in European VAT’ (2008) 2 EC Tax Review 78.
  • EC Consultation Paper (n 5), 3.
  • Ecker (n 5) 409.
  • Ibid, 408.
  • Berkholz (n 4) para 17; Case C-260/95 DFDS ECLI:EU:C:1997:77, (1997) ECR I-1005, para 19; Case C-390/96 Lease Plan ECLI:EU:C:1998:206, (1998) ECR I-2553, para 24; Case C-190/95 ARO Lease ECLI:EU:C:1997:374, (1997) I-4383, para 15; Case C-605/12 Welmory ECLI:EU:C:2014:2298, (2014) ECR I-00000, paras 53–56.
  • DFDS (n 10) paras 22–23. It is however admitted by several authors that so far the CJEU refused taxation at the location of the deemed fixed establishment only when the result would have been non-taxation of the supply in the EU, see Ben JM Terra and Julie Kajus, A Guide to the European VAT Directives, Volume 1, Introduction to European VAT (IBFD, 2014), Section 11.4.2.1. However, in these cases the CJEU also considered that no fixed establishment was created at all so avoiding reference solely to the principle of the primary point of reference; see to that effect Ben Terra and Peter Wattel, European Tax Law (Kluwer Law International, 2012) 188.
  • Madeleine Merkx, Establishments in EU VAT (Kluwer Law International, 2013) 82–83.
  • Council Directive 2006/112/EC (n 1).
  • Case C-210/04 FCE ECLI:EU:C:2006:196, (2006) ECR I-2803, para 39.
  • www.oecd.org/berlin/publikationen/43324465.pdf (accessed 30 October 2014).
  • Eg Pasquale Pistone, ‘Fixed Establishment and Permanent Establishment’ (1999) May/June VAT Monitor 106.
  • Michaele Iavagnilio, ‘Concepts of Permanent and Fixed Establishments under Italian Law—the Philip Morris Case’ (2002) November/December VAT Monitor 471.
  • When the place of supply rule refers to the supplier's establishment, eg the general rule for B2C supplies. See Merkx (n 12) 82.
  • Marcin Gorazda and David Elvira Benito, ‘Destination Principle in Intra-Community Services and the “Fixed Establishment” in the VAT. A Comparative Study of Polish and Spanish Law’ (2014) 42 Intertax 123.
  • Berkholz (n 4) para 18, and Articles 11 and 53 of the Implementing Regulation (n 2).
  • ARO Lease (n 10) para 19.
  • The same view is shared by Joep Swinkels who considers the active fixed establishment being an extension of its head office abroad and, in addition, that the CJEU abandoned the suggestion of the Commission of the EU expressed in the proposal for a Nineteenth Directive to treat as a fixed establishment any fixed installation of a taxable person, even if no taxable transactions can be carried out there, see ‘Fixed Establishments and VAT-Saving Schemes' (2006) November/December International VAT Monitor 416.
  • These provisions of the Implementing Regulation define the fixed establishment for the purposes of, respectively, the place of supply and the application of the reverse charge mechanism. Even though Article 53 of the Implementing Regulation presupposes the existence of the fixed establishment as it speaks of application of the reverse charge when the conclusion on existence of the fixed establishments should have already been made, analysis of the provisions of this Article should also be taken into account as it might benefit the analysis on the concept of the fixed establishment itself and functions that it should and should not necessarily engage in.
  • VAT Committee Working Paper No 791 Concerning the Application of EU VAT Provisions of 15 January 2014, 5.
  • HM Revenue and Customs guidance No VATPOSS 05100, www.hmrc.gov.uk/manuals/vatpossmanual/vatposs05100.htm (accessed 30 May 2014).
  • Guidelines adopted at the 86th meeting of the VAT Committee on 18–19 March 2009.
  • Article 63 of the VAT Directive (n 1).
  • ARO Lease (n 10) para 18.
  • For the purposes of the permanent establishment these functions would be relevant and would require attribution of a respective part of the profit to the permanent establishment engaged in these functions, provided that they would not be treated as ancillary ones, see Commentary of Article 5 of the OECD Model Convention on Income and on Capital (n 15).
  • Guidelines adopted at the 86th meeting of the VAT Committee (n 26).
  • DFDS (n 10). Peculiarities related to the fact that the subsidiary providing the resources and performing the functions forming the core of the supplies was a separate legal entity will be discussed in Section 3.2.
  • See Case C-260/95 DFDS ECLI:EU:C:1997:20, (1997) ECR I-1005, Opinion of Advocate General La Pergola, paras 3–4.
  • Ben JM Terra and Julie Kajus, Introduction to European VAT (n 11) Section 11.4.2.
  • L De Broe, ‘Cross-border leasing of cars into Belgium: issues of VAT and the freedom to provide services—analysis of and comments on the European Court's holding in Aro Lease’ (1997) 4 EC Tax Review 222.
  • Except where the service being supplied is marketing.
  • Later on in the judgment in Lease Plan (n 10) para 28, the CJEU confirmed that registration of the vehicles in the jurisdiction of the customer has no relevance for the creation of the fixed establishment as well.
  • Case C-452/03 RAL ECLI:EU:C:2005:65 (2005) ECR I-3947, Opinion of Advocate General Maduro. The CJEU in this case did not analyse the existence of the fixed establishment although was asked to do so by the referring court. The CJEU considered that the services provided in the UK by RAL Channel Islands Ltd qualified as entertainment services. These services were subject to VAT in the place where they were physically carried out and thus the existence of the fixed establishment was irrelevant in determining the place of supply, see to that effect Case C-452/03 RAL ECLI:EU:C:2005:289, (2005) ECR I-3947, para 34.
  • ibid, paras 2–4.
  • Ibid, para 54.
  • Ibid, para 51.
  • Pursuant to Advocate General Maduro for the gaming service to be supplied pay-out to the customer is not an essential part of the service. Only the action of gaming itself is the core element of the supply of this type of service and thus relevant for the creation of the fixed establishment.
  • The same view is shared by Terra and Wattel (n 11) 189.
  • Peter Schilling and Deirdre Hogan, ‘Intervention—A Problematic New Concept in EU VAT Law’ (2010) May/June International VAT Monitor 190.
  • See to that effect Schilling and Hogan (n 43) 191; Madeleine Merkx (n 12) 86.
  • Madeleine Merkx treats conclusion of agreement as an auxiliary function as it does not have the effect of the fixed establishment taking part in the supply of a service, see ‘Fixed Establishments and VAT Liabilities under EU VAT—Between Delusion and Reality' (2012) January/February International VAT Monitor 24–25.
  • See for a similar conclusion Terra and Kajus (n 11) Section 11.4.2.1.
  • Merkx (n 12) 76.
  • FCE (n 14) para 35.
  • DFDS (n 10).
  • Welmory (n 10).
  • The applicant in Welmory case was afraid of the same person being treated as a supplier and at the same time as a purchaser of services supplied under the cooperation agreement, see Case C-605/12 Welmory ECLI:EU:C:2014:366, (2014) ECR I-00000, Opinion of Advocate General Kokott, para 51.
  • Opinion of Advocate General Kokott in Welmory (n 52) para 52.
  • Berkholz (n 4) para 18.
  • Case C-231/94 Faaborg EU:C:1996:184 (1996) ECR I-2395, para 18. The CJEU, however, avoided relying solely on the principle of primary point of reference, although the logic of this principle is that it has to be firstly determined whether the fixed establishment exists and only then whether a more rational result is reached by referring to the primary or to the secondary establishment.
  • It is concluded by Madeleine Merkx that Berkholz (n 4) and Faaborg (n 54) cases do not represent the CJEU's actual opinion on the requirement for a suitable structure in terms of human and technical resources, see to that effect Merkx (n 12) 74.
  • Ben JM Terra, ‘BTW en het elektronische handelsverkeer’ (1998) 6301 Weekblad fiscaal recht para 1049, referred to in the note 26 in Pasquale Pistone, ‘Fixed Establishment and Permanent Establishment’ (1999) May/June VAT Monitor 104.
  • This was taken into account by the EU legislator as the place of supply rule for electronic services supplied by non-EU suppliers to non-taxable EU customers was changed as of 1 July 2003. These special provisions apply to services that are in most cases related to automated supplies of services via internet or other electronic networks where human intervention is non-existent or insignificant and ensures taxation at the place of the establishment of the customer. This eliminates the relevance of the fixed establishment of the supplier. Analogous change for the supplies of electronic services supplied by the EU suppliers, as well as supplies of telecommunications and broadcasting services to non-taxable customers will come into force as of 1 January 2015. However, as illustrated by Berkholz (n 4) and RAL (n 37) cases, the use of solely technical means in the supplies goes far beyond the supplies of electronic services.
  • Opinion of Advocate General Maduro in RAL (n 37) para 55.
  • As it was already mentioned, the CJEU solved the case by applying not the general but the special place of supply rule for entertainment services where existence of the fixed establishment is irrelevant as the service is taxed where it is actually performed.
  • Welmory (n 10) paras 59–60.
  • Although it is true that human resources will be needed for the vast majority of the supplies at least for certain ancillary actions to be performed, eg maintenance of technical resources. The same view is shared by Gorazda and Benito (n 19) 125.
  • OECD Commentary on Paragraph 1 of Article 5 of the OECD Model Convention on Income and on Capital (n 15).
  • www.oecd.org/tax/transfer-pricing/20655083.pdf (accessed 13 May 2014) p 68.
  • See for more details www.oecd.org/ctp/tax-challenges-digital-economy-discussion-draft-march-2014.pdf, www.oecd.org/tax/transfer-pricing/20655083.pdf, p 68 (accessed 13 May 2014).
  • www.bna.com/spanish-court-imposes-n17179871765 (accessed 13 April 2014). Currently the case is under the appeal procedure.
  • Under these contractual arrangements the subsidiary had the following obligations: make available qualified sales and operational personnel, deal with passengers' complaints, make reservations of the trip and accommodation (by accessing the parent company's central computer), accept payments, provide the customer with the requisite documentation issued in the name of the parent company, handle customer's claims. The subsidiary was obliged under the agency agreement to coordinate its actions, especially from the financial point of view, with the parent company, eg to obtain approval for conclusion of the major contracts with the customers, for appointment of public relations agents and management staff, to follow the parent company's policy as regards advertising and marketing, handling of customers' complaints and etc, see DFDS (n 10) para 25.
  • Opinion of Advocate General Kokott in Welmory (n 52) paras 9–14.
  • The CJEU has indirectly expressed such a position in the judgments that followed DFDS (n 10); for example, in ARO Lease (n 10), where self-employed intermediaries actually made the resources available to ARO Lease, the CJEU decided that no fixed establishment was created because based on the contractual arrangements the resources were only used for performance of non-core functions inherent in the supply of a leasing service rather than because of the lack of ownership over the resources.
  • Berkholz (n 4) para 19.
  • VAT Committee Working Paper No 791 (n 24).
  • As it was concluded in Section 2.1, it is not the role of the fixed establishment to shift the place of taxation to the location of the customer.
  • Merkx (n 12) 77.
  • Except occasional activities that are treated as economic activities pursuant to Article 12 of the VAT Directive, see Case C-230/94 Renate Enkler ECLI:EU:C:1996:352, (1996) ECR I-4517, paras 20 and 29.
  • Article 11(1) of the Implementing Regulation (n 2).
  • Ine Lejeune, Ellen Cortvriend and David Accorsi, ‘Implementing Measures Relating to EU Place-of-Supply Rules: Are Business Issues Solved and Is Certainty Provided?’ (2011) May/June International VAT Monitor 147.
  • Ben JM Terra (n 6) 65. In addition, as Madeleine Merkx explains, there are opinions that the presence of the passive fixed establishment in a Member State means that it will use the government facilities provided by that Member State and this country will be the country of the actual consumption and spending for this passive fixed establishment, see Merkx (n 12) 94. However, as it was concluded in Section 2.2, the fixed establishment is used as a proxy in the place of supply rules and is not necessarily the place of the actual consumption.
  • Merkx (n 12) 93; Lietuvos Respublikos Pridėtinės vertės mokesčio įstatymo 13 straipsnio apibendrintas komentaras (Commentary to the Law on VAT of the Republic of Lithuania) http://mic.vmi.lt/documentpublicone.do?id=1000130133 (accessed 13 May 2014); VAT Committee Working paper No 791 (n 24).
  • Madeleine Merkx is also of the opinion that the passive fixed establishment cannot exist independently from the active one, see Merkx (n 12) 96.
  • Although there are opinions that this principle should not apply to B2B supplies, it is currently so applied, see to that effect Merkx (n 12) 96.
  • Terra and Kajus (n 11) Section 7.2.2.
  • http://georgereisman.com/blogWP/?tag=productive-expenditure (accessed 4 May 2014).
  • The same approach is upheld in Poland where national courts consider that acquisition and consumption of services referred to in Article 44 of the VAT Directive must be directly related to the economic activities carried by that establishment. In the absence of such economic activities, being provided with the services consumed by that establishment cannot determine its fixed character or, in other words, cannot create a fixed establishment. See Gorazda and Benito (n 19) 129.
  • Merkx (n 12) 93.
  • See more on channelling of acquisitions in Section 4.2.2.
  • Gorazda and Benito (n 19) 129.
  • Referral of the Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny, para 16.2, see also paras 11 and 12 http://orzeczenia.nsa.gov.pl/doc/1BB1CD362E (accessed 15 May 2014).
  • Opinion of Advocate General Kokott in Welmory (n 52) para 42.
  • ibid, para 43.
  • Welmory (n 10) para 59.
  • Case C-565/12 Le Credit Lyonnais ECLI:EU:C:2014:190, (2014) ECR I-00000, paras 33, 40 and 49; PricewaterhouseCoopers on Le Credit Lyonnais www.out-law.com/articles/2013/september/credit-lyonnaisdecision-shows-deficiencies-in-eus-vat-treatment-of-international-branches-says-expert/ (accessed 13 May 2014).
  • Case C-268/83 Rompelman ECLI:EU:C:1985:74, (1985) ECR I-655, para 24; Case C-110/94 Inzo ECLI:EU:C:1996:67, (1996) ECR I-857, para 18.
  • Thirteenth Council Directive 86/560/EEC of 17 November 1986 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes—Arrangements for the refund of value added tax to taxable persons not established in Community territory (1986) OJ L 326/40, and Council Directive 2008/9/EC of 12 February 2008 laying down detailed rules for the refund of value added tax, provided for in Directive 2006/112/EC, to taxable persons not established in the Member State of refund but established in another Member State (2008) OJ L 44/11.
  • Joined Cases C-318/11 and C-319/11 Daimler and Widex ECLI:EU:C:2012:666, (2012) ECR I-00000, para 39.
  • Such a system exists in Lithuania where the passive fixed establishment needs to report the due VAT in a special report on VAT obligations of non-VAT-identified persons and pay the VAT to the revenue. The non-resident head office has to subsequently claim the refund of the VAT under one of the Refund Directives, see Lietuvos Respublikos Pridėtinės vertės mokesčio įstatymo 13 straipsnio apibendrintas komentaras (Commentary to Article 13 of the Law on VAT of the Republic of Lithuania) http://mic.vmi.lt/documentpublicone.do?id=1000130133 (accessed 13 May 2014).
  • Casper Bjerregaard Eskildsen, ‘Pro Rata Deduction by Entities Established in Several VAT Jurisdictions’ (2012) January/February International VAT Monitor 28.
  • Merkx (n 45) 23.
  • The risk for the supplier is laying in the fact that the tax administrator of his jurisdiction may disagree with the attribution made. In a situation where, pursuant to the tax administrator, the establishment actually using the service is located in the same jurisdiction as the supplier, the latter might be assessed with additional output VAT that he did not invoice to the customer. In situations where the supplier attributed the supply to a wrong but still a foreign establishment, administrative issues related to non-corresponding reports on intra-EU supplies are likely to occur.
  • Services acquired under the global contracts are used in an unidentifiable and unquantifiable manner.
  • Application of this rule, however, does not prevent the supplier from difficulties as he needs to determine where the head office is located. Based on the CJEU's judgment in Planzer (Case C-73/06 Planzer ECLI:EU:C:2007:397, (2007) ECR I-05655, paras 60–61) and later adopted Article 10 of the Implementing Regulation, location of the head office is where the functions of the central administration are carried out. The latter place should be determined based on where the essential decisions concerning the management are taken, where the registered office is located and where the management meets, the first one having precedence.
  • FCE (n 14) paras 37 and 41.
  • For example, fixed establishment located in Switzerland, through which the acquisition is channelled, would be entitled to input VAT deduction as its subsequent reselling of the service would be treated as being inside of the scope of EU VAT from the Swiss VAT law perspective. Establishment located in the EU to which the service is re-routed would not be obliged to account VAT under the reverse charge as from the EU VAT perspective this acquisition would be outside of the scope of VAT. See more on Swiss VAT aspects related to head office—fixed establishment relationship in Pierre-Marie Glauser, ‘Head Office/Branch Relationship from the Perspective of Swiss VAT' (2010) January/February International VAT Monitor 31–35.
  • Le Credit Lyonnais (n 90) paras 33 and 40.
  • Pursuant to Article 168 of the VAT Directive and CJEU's case law (eg Case C-98/98 Midland Bank ECLI:EU:C:2000:300, (2000) ECR I-4177; Case C-26/12 PPG Holding ECLI:EU:C:2013:526, (2013) ECR I-00000; Case C-124/12 AES ECLI:EU:C:2013:488, (2013) ECR I-0000) the first rule for input VAT deduction is direct attribution of the acquired service to the taxable output supply. However, one can consider that in the case of channelling such a link would not exist (as this establishment could not establish a direct link with any of its output supplies) and thus the costs of the fixed establishment through which the acquisition is channelled could only be treated as overheads (ie costs related to the business in general). Respectively, input VAT incurred on such acquisitions would only be deductible based on the pro-rata of the fixed establishment.
  • For example, instead of acquiring certain service through the fixed establishment located in the same jurisdiction as the supplier (which would require pre-financing of VAT), the customer might channel the acquisition through the fixed establishment located in another Member State (which would entitle to the application of the reversecharge and deduction of input VAT in the same VAT return).
  • Swinkels (n 22) 241–242.
  • According to Madeleine Merkx, tax administrators should be able to track down the missing VAT through direct taxation as for direct taxes each permanent establishment is treated as a separate taxpayer and thus costs are required to be recharged to the establishment that actually enjoys a particular service, see Merkx (n 12) 129–130.
  • Other measures such as the use of the abuse of law doctrine or elimination of exemptions will not be addressed in this paper. See to that effect Merkx (n 12) 128–133; Christian Amand, ‘VAT Grouping, FCE Bank and Force of Attraction' (2007) July/August International VAT Monitor 247; Swinkels (n 22) 421. In the latter source the author questions whether the Member State that has not transposed Article 27 of the VAT Directive to its national law is at all entitled to rely on the abuse of law doctrine.
  • It must, however, be stressed that taxpayers are not required to choose business models resulting in the highest possible tax burden and, therefore, not all tax advantages gained by businesses is a result of abusive practices, see Case C-255/02 Halifax ECLI:EU:C:2006:121, (2006) ECR I-1609; Case C-425/06 Part Service ECLI:EU:C:2008:108, (2008) ECR I-897; Case C-277/09 RBS Deutschland ECLI:EU:C:2010:810, (2010) ECR I-13805. Respectively, not all the situations should be subject to the application of anti-abuse rules, see to that effect Andrea Parolini, Carlos Bechara, Mariken van Hilten, Des Kruger, Rebecca Millar and Greg Sinfield, ‘VAT and Group Companies' (2011) June Bulletin for International Taxation 355–356.
  • Eight Member States have consulted the VAT Committee in relation to transposition of Article 27 of the VAT Directive into their national laws; see http://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/resources/documents/taxation/vat/key_documents/vat_committee/consultations_vat_committee_en.pdf (accessed 6 May 2014). However, currently only Belgium applies internal supply rule and does that to a very limited extent—only for certain immovable property related services, see Swinkels (n 22).
  • Ad van Doesum, Herman van Kesteren and Gert-Jan van Norden, ‘The Internal Market and VAT: intra-group transactions of branches, subsidiaries and VAT groups’ (2007) 1 EC Tax Review 42. It is submitted here that internal supply rule does not conflict with the CJEU's judgment in the FCE Bank case as the latter can only be interpreted in the way that does not conflict with the VAT Directive foreseeing deemed supplies rules, one of which is the internal supply rule.
  • Christian Amand, ‘VAT Grouping, FCE Bank and Force of Attraction—The Internal Market is Leaking’ (2007) July/August International VAT Monitor 247.
  • The internal supply rule, however, would not always eliminate the cash-flow advantages reached by channelling of acquisitions of services. For example, if the supplier and the fixed establishment of the fully taxable business that will use the service are both established in one Member State, in order for the reverse charge to be applied acquisition might be channelled through the head office or another fixed establishment located in another Member State. In such a situation application of the internal supply rule would oblige the fixed establishment which will use the service to account for VAT in its Member State but this VAT would be deductible in the same VAT return and thus the cash-flow advantage would be saved, see Christian Amand, ‘Cross-Border Entities and EU VAT: A Contradictory Concept?’ (2010) January/February International VAT Monitor 20.
  • It should, however, be mentioned that for VAT purposes the actual recharging of costs (payment for the service) is not relevant and thus the internal supply should take place even in situations where the establishment actually using the service does not in fact reimburse the costs of the establishment through which the acquisition is channelled.
  • Alain Charlet and David Holmes, ‘Determining the Place of Taxation of Transactions under VAT/GST: Can Transfer Pricing Principles Help?’ (2010) November/December International VAT Monitor 434–436.
  • Although under Article 63 of the VAT Directive VAT is due at the time of the supply, it is suggested that VAT could be accounted for internal supplies after the transfer pricing analysis is made, using the VAT adjustments mechanism, see to that effect Charlet and Holmes (n 114) 435.
  • VAT/GST Guidelines see www.oecd.org/ctp/consumption/ConsolidatedGuidelines20130131.pdf (accessed 13 May 2014) 31–32.
  • Madeleine Merkx, ‘Should EU VAT Apply the Recharge Method in the Place of Supply Rules for B2B Services?’ (2013) 06 EC Tax Review 283.
  • Joep Swinkels, ‘Scope of the Self-Supply Rule under EU VAT’ (2008) May/June International VAT Monitor 175.
  • There are suggestions to treat each member of the cross-border VAT group as a separate taxable person as regards transactions with third parties and only the input VAT deduction to be based on the worldwide pro-rata ratio, see Ruud Zuidgeest, ‘Cross-border VAT Grouping’ (2010) January/February International VAT Monitor 30. On the one hand, such a regime, which would follow to some extent the Australian practice, would not eliminate the encouragement for businesses to channel acquisitions through the establishments located in the jurisdictions providing a more favourable tax treatment of the respective supplies. On the other hand, if the VAT group acted as a single taxable person with respect to its supplies and acquisitions, businesses would tend to choose the jurisdiction in which the group should be registered and a representative member should be located depending on benevolence of taxation rules relevant for respective business. The undesired effects of the latter aspect could, however, be mitigated by clear rules on how the representative member of the group (and thus jurisdiction in which the group should be registered) should be determined based on the corporate structure and financial, economic and administrative ties between the members.
  • These analyses were mostly done in the context of whether the territorial restriction of Article 11 of the VAT is in line with the freedom of establishment, see Zuidgeest (n 119) 25–30; Merkx (n 12) 149–161, Casper Bjerregaard Eskildsen, ‘VAT Grouping versus Freedom of Establishment’ (2011) 20 EC Tax Review 114.
  • Kenneth Vyncke, ‘VAT Grouping in the European Union: Purposes, Possibilities and Limitations’ (2007) July/August International VAT Monitor 256.
  • Ivan Massin and Kenneth Vyncke, ‘EC Communication on VAT Grouping: An Attempt to Harmonise or to Restrict the Use of Group Registration’ (2009) November/December International VAT Monitor 460.
  • Parolini, Bechara, van Hilten, Kruger, Millar and Sinfield (n 108) 358, n 6; PricewaterhouseCoopers Study to Increase the Understanding of the Economic Effects of the VAT Exemption for Financial and Insurance Services, Final Report to the European Commission of 2 November 2006, para 84; Massin and Vyncke (n 122) 460.
  • Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on the VAT Group option provided for in Article 11 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC on the common system of value added tax COM (2009) 325 final of 2 July 2009, 8.
  • Case C-7/13 Skandia America (USA) ECLI:EU:C:2014:2225, (2014) ECR I-0000, paras 30–31.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Order Reprints Request Corporate Permissions

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

Request Academic Permissions

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.

Supercharge Your Next Research Paper: Research and write your next paper with Jenni AI.

Related research

People also read lists articles that other readers of this article have read.

Recommended articles lists articles that we recommend and is powered by our AI driven recommendation engine.

Cited by lists all citing articles based on Crossref citations.
Articles with the Crossref icon will open in a new tab.