The rules on VAT-exempt intra-Community supplies of goods have long been a source of worry for businesses. It is not uncommon for the tax authority to deny tax exemption on such transactions on the grounds that the goods never left the country. Although a recently accepted proposal by the EU clarifies the rules, complying with them entails a great deal of bureaucracy for companies that deliver to EU markets.

Since January this year, it’s been more difficult than ever to litigate in Hungary. Courts have been rejecting countless petitions, filed by even the most experienced lawyers, citing professional inaccuracies or formal errors. The stringent policy is likely to prompt parties with grievances to use alternative forums for the settlement of disputes.

In its judgement passed a few weeks ago, the treatment of European Court of Justice (ECJ) was flexible in the interpretation of the VAT “triangular transactions”. While this decision in favour of the taxpayer creates a tax planning opportunity for businesses involved in international trade of goods, it pays off to be cautions on the other side.

Venture capital funds financed partly or entirely with government money have been all the rage in the equity markets these past few years. Initially the Jeremie funds pumped capital into the market in four successive rounds, but as the placement period for this scheme ended, the first solely state-owned venture capital investor also entered the market. And from this year on, new venture capital funds with EU money at their disposal are coming on stream, as well as a state-financed equity fund is set up to assist ventures with potential for future stock exchange listing.

Companies are faced with countless situations where, for reasons beyond their control, they are unable to collect the money owed to them, including its VAT part. In such cases the tax authority often refuses to allow the reclaim of the lost VAT even where this would not incur a loss for the budget. Based on recent judgements by the European Court of Justice (ECJ), however, the VAT should be recoverable in many cases of this kind.

Based on a recently announced EU directive, your name and any tax advice you have received could end up with the tax authority. From July 2020, tax advisors, or in certain cases the taxpayers themselves, will be required to inform the tax authority of the details of certain tax planning structures that are classified as aggressive under the new directive. And what’s more, the disclosure obligation will apply retrospectively to all structures that taxpayers started implementing after 25 June 2018.

The popularity of simplified, or “small” business taxes (KATA, KIVA) grows unabated, with thousands of engineers, computer programmers, hairdressers and lawyers opting for one or other of these schemes. Meanwhile, few are fully aware of the risks that these types of tax can entail. The potential consequences are measurable in hard tax forints and penalties, both for payers of these forms of tax and for the businesses that provide their income.

Due to a seemingly trivial error, a series of NAV decisions are being overturned in court: a good many of them don’t contain the proper signature. This procedural error, however, could be useful not only in ongoing lawsuits, but possibly in past, closed procedures too – hundreds of businesses could claw back the tax forints they thought were lost for good.