tag: VAT

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.

Following the recent reinterpretation by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) of the definition of closed-end finance leasing, a new Advocate General (AG) opinion has exploded another “VAT bomb” in relation to current practice. For many years, leasing companies have divided the fees payable under finance lease contracts into a VATable and a non-VATable part, but the latest AG opinion states that the whole lease fee should be liable for VAT in its integrity. This could have serious implications for the Hungarian leasing market too, so it is worth keeping an eye on how the case progresses.

Our traditional survey again looks at how many types of taxes there are in Hungary. The number of Hungarian taxes has fallen by one again this year, so we’ve counted 58 this time. The decrease, however, is of a technical nature only, while at the same time we continue to live with taxes such as the seemingly ineradicable charge payable on household employees or the newly introduced poster tax.

In 2009 the Supreme Court made it clear that the VAT on public-purpose investments related to property developments is deductible if it would not be possible to implement the development without such investment. Recently, however, some alarm was unexpectedly caused by the preliminary opinion of the advocate general of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in a similar, Bulgarian case, which recommended prohibiting the tax deduction right. Although the ECJ’s judgement published in the middle of last week did not follow the advocate general’s opinion, it did make exercising the deduction right subject to some strict conditions.

One of the most frequent areas of dispute between the tax authority and taxpayers relates to the conditions under which a taxable entity participating in a chain transaction can deduct the VAT passed on to it. The tax authority (NAV) was recently struck another blow in the tussle when the Supreme Court, in a precedent-setting ruling, took issue with the tax authority’s practice of regularly reclassifying the participants in chain transactions as agents. What’s more, the Curia’s ruling goes significantly further, and questions in general the tax authority’s right to reclassify the transactions of taxable entities on a whim.

In our traditional beginning-of-year review, we again counted the number of taxes levied in Hungary today. This time we got 59. Although the number of taxes has decreased by one since last year, the scale and structure of the tax system has not changed. In terms of tax revenue generated, VAT continues to top the list, bringing in approximately HUF 3,300 billion in 2016.

Under current practice the Tax and Customs Administration (NAV) fines taxpayers that are caught with a VAT shortfall even if the budget has sustained no losses. An opinion recently published by the Advocate General of the European Court of Justice could spell the end for this extremely unfair and much criticised procedure.

In its latest decision, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) has ruled that the Hungarian tax authority (NAV) unlawfully refused to allow VAT deduction to taxpayers who could not have known that the invoice’s issuer was implied in tax fraud. A special twist in the so-called Signum case is that it was the court of first instance who referred the case to the ECJ, as opposed to the guidelines of Hungary’s supreme court. The decision will have a significant bearing on ongoing tax audits and tax-authority findings, especially in the agricultural and trade sectors.