Case C-405/19: Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 1 October 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Hof van Cassatie — Belgium) — Vos Aannemingen BVBA v Belgische Staat (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Taxation — Common system of value added tax (VAT) — Sixth Directive 77/388/EEC — Article 17(2)(a) — Right to deduct input tax — Services also having benefited third parties — Existence of a direct and immediate link with the taxable person’s economic activity — Existence of a direct and immediate link with one or more output transactions)
Date: 2020-10-01
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: VAT, basis of tax assessment, expenditure, overheads, real estate business, sale, tax relief, taxpayer








C_2020399EN.01001801.xml










23.11.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 399/18






Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 1 October 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Hof van Cassatie — Belgium) — Vos Aannemingen BVBA v Belgische Staat
(Case C-405/19) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Taxation - Common system of value added tax (VAT) - Sixth Directive 77/388/EEC - Article 17(2)(a) - Right to deduct input tax - Services also having benefited third parties - Existence of a direct and immediate link with the taxable person’s economic activity - Existence of a direct and immediate link with one or more output transactions)
(2020/C 399/25)
Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Hof van Cassatie

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Vos Aannemingen BVBA

Defendant: Belgische Staat

Operative part of the judgment







1.


Article 17(2)(a) of the Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977, on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment, as amended by Council Directive 95/7/EC of 10 April 1995, must be interpreted as meaning that the fact that expenditure incurred by a taxable person, a property developer, in respect of advertising costs, administrative costs and estate agents’ commission, in connection with the sale of apartments, also benefits a third party, does not preclude that taxable person deducting in full the input value added tax paid on that expenditure where, firstly, there is a direct and immediate link between that expenditure and the taxable person’s economic activity and, secondly, the benefit to the third party is ancillary to the taxable person’s business purposes.










2.


Article 17(2)(a) of the Sixth Directive 77/388, as amended by Directive 95/7, must be interpreted as meaning that the fact that the expenditure incurred by the taxable person also benefits a third party does not preclude that taxable person deducting in full the input value added tax paid in relation to that expenditure, in the case where that expenditure does not relate to the taxable person’s general overheads but constitutes costs attributable to particular output transactions, in so far as those costs maintain a direct and immediate link with the taxable person’s taxable transactions, which is for the referring court to assess with regard to all of the circumstances in which those transactions occurred.










3.


Article 17(2)(a) of the Sixth Directive 77/388, as amended by Directive 95/7, must be interpreted as meaning that, in the case where a third party benefits from expenditure incurred by the taxable person, the fact that it is possible for the taxable person to pass on to the third party a part of the expenditure so incurred constitutes one of the elements, along with all of the other circumstances in which the transactions concerned occurred, which the referring court must consider for the purposes of determining the scope of the taxable person’s right to deduct value added tax.






(1)  OJ C 288, 26.8.2019.