The right of a partnership to deduct input VAT paid in respect of preparatory activities conducted by future partners: a commentary on Case C-280/10 Polski Trawertyn
{"title":"The right of a partnership to deduct input VAT paid in respect of preparatory activities conducted by future partners: a commentary on Case C-280/10 Polski Trawertyn","authors":"Marta Papis","doi":"10.5235/WJOVL.1.1.99","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"On 1 March 2012 the Court of Justice delivered a judgment in Case C-280/10 Polski Trawertyn.1 The Court was asked questions relating to the right to deduct input VAT by a partnership, where it had been incurred in relation to the purchase of immovable property effected by the persons who subsequently founded the partnership. The Court held that under the provisions of the VAT Directive2 the partnership was entitled to recover the tax and this right was not affected by the fact that the invoice was issued in the names of the partners rather than the name of the partnership. The judgment fits into the consistent line of jurisprudence of the Court of Justice, which highlights the importance of the principle of neutrality of the European VAT system for taxable persons according to which the trader shall be entirely relieved of the burden of VAT payable or paid in the course of all his economic activities. It is not the first ruling in which the Court of Justice has adopted a non-formalistic approach giving priority to the fundamental principles underlying and constituting an integral part of the VAT system before the formal obligations established by legislation of national laws of Member States.3 Nevertheless, the ruling in Polski Trawertyn must not be listed, without any further commentary, together with other cases whose subject matter centres on the deductibility of input VAT related to acts preparatory to the carrying on of an economic activity. Due to the specific circumstances of the case that differ from the scenarios involved in cases heard by the Court of Justice previously, the judgment goes further than earlier rulings. Not only did the Court, for the first time, interpret the VAT","PeriodicalId":114680,"journal":{"name":"World Journal of VAT/GST Law","volume":"19 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Journal of VAT/GST Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5235/WJOVL.1.1.99","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
On 1 March 2012 the Court of Justice delivered a judgment in Case C-280/10 Polski Trawertyn.1 The Court was asked questions relating to the right to deduct input VAT by a partnership, where it had been incurred in relation to the purchase of immovable property effected by the persons who subsequently founded the partnership. The Court held that under the provisions of the VAT Directive2 the partnership was entitled to recover the tax and this right was not affected by the fact that the invoice was issued in the names of the partners rather than the name of the partnership. The judgment fits into the consistent line of jurisprudence of the Court of Justice, which highlights the importance of the principle of neutrality of the European VAT system for taxable persons according to which the trader shall be entirely relieved of the burden of VAT payable or paid in the course of all his economic activities. It is not the first ruling in which the Court of Justice has adopted a non-formalistic approach giving priority to the fundamental principles underlying and constituting an integral part of the VAT system before the formal obligations established by legislation of national laws of Member States.3 Nevertheless, the ruling in Polski Trawertyn must not be listed, without any further commentary, together with other cases whose subject matter centres on the deductibility of input VAT related to acts preparatory to the carrying on of an economic activity. Due to the specific circumstances of the case that differ from the scenarios involved in cases heard by the Court of Justice previously, the judgment goes further than earlier rulings. Not only did the Court, for the first time, interpret the VAT
合伙企业抵扣对未来合伙人开展的筹备活动所支付的进项增值税的权利:对案件C-280/10 Polski Trawertyn的评论
2012年3月1日,法院对案件C-280/10 Polski trawerty1作出判决。1法院被问及合伙企业抵扣进项增值税的权利,该抵扣是由于合伙企业的创始人购买不动产而产生的。法院认为,根据增值税指令的规定,合伙企业有权追回税款,而这一权利不受发票是以合伙人的名义而不是以合伙企业的名义开具这一事实的影响。该判决符合法院一贯的法理路线,突出了欧洲增值税制度对应税人员的中立原则的重要性,根据该原则,贸易商在其所有经济活动过程中应完全免除增值税应付或支付的负担。这并不是法院第一次在裁决中采取一种非形式主义的做法,将构成增值税制度的基本原则置于会员国国内法所规定的正式义务之前。3然而,在不作任何进一步评论的情况下,不应列出Polski Trawertyn案的裁决。以及其他案件,其主题集中于与进行经济活动的准备行为有关的进项增值税的扣除。由于该案件的具体情况不同于法院以往审理的案件所涉及的情况,因此此次判决比以往的判决走得更远。法院不仅第一次解释了增值税