VAT fixed establishment – Positive decision of the ECJ in the “Berlin Chemie” case

The issue with parent-subsidiary VAT fixed establishment

The concept of VAT fixed establishment has recently been the source of litigation in several Member States. In those cases, tax authorities argue that a subsidiary is the VAT fixed establishment of its parent company.  

In Belgium, we have seen this growing trend whereby the Belgian VAT authorities deem a foreign parent company to have a fixed establishment in Belgium through its daughter company, or more broadly in an intra-group context (specifically toll manufacturers and distributors). 

This causes lots of legal uncertainty for businesses as the notion of fixed establishment is of particular importance when assessing the place of supply rule, the VAT liability as well as in terms of cash flow. Indeed, when tax authorities are retroactively claiming VAT, with interest and penalties, VAT becomes a huge cost for businesses.

Berlin Chemie C‑333/20 

The European Court of Justice (“ECJ”) rendered its long-awaited decision in the Berlin Chemie case on April 7th, 2022. In essence, the ECJ confirmed that a subsidiary rendering exclusive marketing and publicity services through the availability of its human and technical resources, to its parent company, does not constitute a VAT fixed establishment of that parent.

The key argument of the ECJ is that “the same human and technical means cannot be used at the same time to render and receive services”. This contradiction had already been pointed out by Advocate General Kokott in her conclusions in the Dong Yang case (C-547/18), but the judgment of the ECJ finally raised more questions than it answered.

The Berlin Chemie case is therefore very positive for businesses as it provides more clarity on the interpretation of VAT fixed establishment and it offers strong arguments against positions of tax authorities.

Is it the end of the story? Not necessarily. In a major Belgian case where PwC and PwC Legal are assisting, the Belgian Court of Appeal of Liege recently referred a question to the ECJ for a preliminary ruling in a (similar) FE context.

Key takeaways

This decision is positive going forward but we recommend businesses to remain careful. In view of current developments in EU case law, we recommend assessing whether your cross-border activities could lead to the existence of a VAT fixed establishment.

Author: Lionel Wielemans, Director, PwC Belgium

Voir aussi : PwC Belgium

Click here to see the ad(s)
Tous les articles TVA

Derniers articles TVA

Prolongation et extension du tarif réduit de TVA à 6% pour certains travaux immobiliers

L’arrêté royal du 27 mars 2022 modifiant l’arrêté royal n°20 (l’Arrê...

Read more

Btw-attest voor renovatie- en herstellingswerken aan privéwoningen verdwijnt

De wet van 27 december 2021 houdende diverse bepalingen inzake btw voorziet dat een vermelding op de factuur voor renovati...

Btw-attest voor renovatie- en herstellingswerken aan privéwoningen verdwijnt Read more

EU Finance Ministers agree on update of VAT rates

On 7 December, the EU finance ministers (unanimously) agreed to update the current rules governing VAT rates for goods and...

EU Finance Ministers agree on update of VAT rates Read more

Les promoteurs immobiliers et la TVA : une liaison dangereuse

Les promoteurs immobiliers, dont l’activité habituelle consiste à céder avec TVA des bâti...

Read more

LexGO Network