Greg Sinfield and Matthew Legg of Lovells LLP regret that a recent ECJ decision has created uncertainty
On 22 October 2009 the ECJ handed down its judgment in Swiss Re Germany Holding GmbH v Finanzamt München für Körperschaften Case C-242/08. The judgment followed Advocate-General Mengozzi's Opinion delivered on 13 May 2009 reaching the same conclusion that the transfer of 195 reinsurance contracts from Swiss Re Germany to Swiss Re Switzerland was not an exempt supply of insurance but was a taxable supply of services chargeable to VAT in Germany where the supplier was established (following the existing place of supply rules). It is unfortunate (if sadly not uncommon) that the ECJ's decision has created far more uncertainty than existed before the judgment — not because of...
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:
Greg Sinfield and Matthew Legg of Lovells LLP regret that a recent ECJ decision has created uncertainty
On 22 October 2009 the ECJ handed down its judgment in Swiss Re Germany Holding GmbH v Finanzamt München für Körperschaften Case C-242/08. The judgment followed Advocate-General Mengozzi's Opinion delivered on 13 May 2009 reaching the same conclusion that the transfer of 195 reinsurance contracts from Swiss Re Germany to Swiss Re Switzerland was not an exempt supply of insurance but was a taxable supply of services chargeable to VAT in Germany where the supplier was established (following the existing place of supply rules). It is unfortunate (if sadly not uncommon) that the ECJ's decision has created far more uncertainty than existed before the judgment — not because of...
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:
90a1d87b-c1b5-43c3-a720-cd324830adee.tmb-editorspic.jpg?sfvrsn=1b2d0a7e_1)
