The Fiscal Court in Hesse dealt with the issue of absorption of employee relocation expenses by employers in a judgement published in July 2018 (6 K 2033/15 of 22.02.2018). In the particular case, the Court held that the employer’s business interest in the move took priority. Thus, there is no free of charge supply here. Consequently, the absorption of relocation expenses by an employer can justify a claim for the company’s input VAT deduction. The Court considered the assumption of an exchange-like transaction as unrealistic

In the Enteco Baltic case, the ECJ once again examined the significance of VAT-ID-Nos. for the application of a VAT exemption. On this occasion, it concerned the exemption from import VAT in case of a subsequent intra-Community supply (so-called “procedure 42”). In consistent continuation of its previous case law, the ECJ ruled that the disclosure of the purchaser's VAT-ID-No. is merely a formal requirement and not a substantive prerequisite for exemption from import VAT. In addition, the judgment contains statements on good faith and evidential value of documents issued in the excise tax suspension procedure.

On 05.07.2018 the European Court of Justice ruled in the case Marle Participations - C-320/17 that a holding company is generally entitled to fully deduct input VAT from costs in connection with the acquisition of shares in its subsidiaries. The prerequisite is that the holding company intervenes in the management of its subsidiaries and, to this extent, carries out an economic activity. A holding company is already regarded as carrying out an economic activity when it provides rental services subject to VAT to its subsidiaries.