In État Belge v Henfling & Others (administrators of Tiercé Franco-Belge SA) (ECJ Case C-464/10) a company operated a bookmakers’ business.
It paid commission to several local agents described as ‘buralistes’.
It treated this commission as exempt from VAT under Article 13B(f) of the EC Sixth Directive.
The tax authority issued a ruling that VAT was chargeable on the commission.
The company appealed and the case was referred to the ECJ which found in favour of the company holding that ‘in so far as an economic operator acts in his own name but on behalf of an undertaking carrying on a bet-taking business in the collection of bets covered by the exemption from value added tax under Article 13(B)(f) that latter undertaking is to be considered ...
If you or your firm subscribes to Taxjournal.com, please click the login box below:
If you do not subscribe but are a registered user, please enter your details in the following boxes:
In État Belge v Henfling & Others (administrators of Tiercé Franco-Belge SA) (ECJ Case C-464/10) a company operated a bookmakers’ business.
It paid commission to several local agents described as ‘buralistes’.
It treated this commission as exempt from VAT under Article 13B(f) of the EC Sixth Directive.
The tax authority issued a ruling that VAT was chargeable on the commission.
The company appealed and the case was referred to the ECJ which found in favour of the company holding that ‘in so far as an economic operator acts in his own name but on behalf of an undertaking carrying on a bet-taking business in the collection of bets covered by the exemption from value added tax under Article 13(B)(f) that latter undertaking is to be considered ...
If you or your firm subscribes to Taxjournal.com, please click the login box below:
If you do not subscribe but are a registered user, please enter your details in the following boxes:
