Important judgment of the CJEU on VAT interest on intra-Community acquisition of goods
The Court of Justice of the European Union issued a judgment in a case filed by the Voivodship Administrative Court in Gliwice (decision of 4 November 2019, ref. No. I SA/Gl 495/19), concerning compliance of national regulations with the VAT Directive in the scope of recognition of input and output tax on intra-Community acquisition of goods in two different settlement periods. Polish regulations introduced in 2017 raised doubts regarding observance of the principle of VAT neutrality. In the opinion of the CJEU, introduction by the Polish legislator of an additional requirement, which leads to disclosing of output and input VAT in two different settlement periods, is contrary to the essence of regulations applicable to the common system of value added tax.
The judgment concerns intra-Community acquisition of goods transactions, however it is worth noting that it can be used to support refund of overpaid interest in connection with other transactions based on the reverse charge mechanism. If an application for overpayment is submitted within 30 days from the publication of the CJEU judgment, the refund may be increased by an appropriate interest rate.
Photo by katarina_dzurekova
Related posts
New regulations on transparency of remuneration in the recruitment process
New regulations on transparency of remuneration in the recruitment processLABOUR LAW NEWSLETTER – collective labour agreements under new rules
LABOUR LAW NEWSLETTER – collective labour agreements under new rules
Political agreement on abolishing the €150 threshold for e-commerce shipments – changes as early as 2026?
news Political agreement on abolishing the €150 threshold for e-commerce shipments – changes as early as 2026?
Political agreement on abolishing the €150 threshold for e-commerce shipments – changes as early as 2026?Flavourings with alcohol. CJEU: it is the intended purpose that counts, not the actual use
Flavourings with alcohol. CJEU: it is the intended purpose that counts, not the actual useConcerned about
missing out
on key legal
developments?