header-logo header-logo

VAT

22 November 2013
Issue: 7585 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Tulica v Agentia Nationala de Administrare Fiscala—Directia Generalia de Solutionare a Contestatilor and another case C-249/12 and C-250/12, [2013] All ER (D) 121 (Nov)

It followed from Arts 1(2) and 73 of Council Directive (EC) 2006/112 (the VAT Directive) that the principle of the common system of VAT entailed the application to goods and services of a general tax on consumption exactly proportional to their price and that the taxable amount included everything which constituted consideration obtained or to be obtained by the supplier of goods or services for transactions with the purchaser, customer or a third party. Article 78 of that Directive listed certain items which were to be included in the taxable amount, and Art 78(a) provided that VAT was not to be included in the taxable amount. In accordance with the general rule set out in Art 73, the taxable amount for the supply of goods or services for consideration was the consideration actually received for them by the taxable person. That consideration was thus the subjective value, namely, the value received. That rule should

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll