In the past, the ECJ has ruled on the substantive requirements for the VAT exemption of transport services for imported goods. Thereafter, transport costs had to be taken into account in the taxable amount for the import. The judgement that has now been published deals with the question as to which formal, legal requirements the taxable person must fulfil in order to be granted the VAT exemption. Is he required to meet national VAT law requirements to provide specific proof in every case, or is it perhaps sufficient if the goods have been demonstrably released for free circulation (proof by the MRN)?
Already in 2009, the German Federal Fiscal Court (BFH) ruled, for the first time, that economic integration is also possible indirectly in the context of a VAT group. In practice, this is easily overlooked when examining the requirements of a VAT group. It is therefore all the more important that the BFH is currently taking up this jurisprudence once again. The BFH’s reference, that a participation does not have to be allocated to the economic activity in order to be a controlled company, is also a valuable clarification for the practice.
If a recipient of a supply has paid too much VAT to a supplier and his input VAT deduction fails, then the recipient is dependent on having the corresponding VAT amount refunded by the supplier. If this repayment under civil law also fails, the so-called Reemtsma claim can prove to be the best solution for the recipient. In a recent judgment of 7 September 2023 in the legal case Schütte (C-453/22) the ECJ clarifies that this claim also applies when the supplier invokes the statute of limitation under civil law against the recipient. At the same time, the ECJ restricts the correction by the supplier in accordance with sec. 14c of the German VAT Act and confirms a claim for interest by the recipient.