Countries: Netherlands

Netherlands vs “Tobacco B.V.”, October 2022, Rechtbank Noord-Holland, Case No ECLI:NL:RBNHO:2022:8936

blank

“Tobacco B.V.” is a Dutch company belonging to an international tobacco group. Following an audit an assessment of additional taxable income of €196,001,385, €220,624,304 and €179,896,349 for FY 2008-2010 was issued to “Tobacco B.V.”, and a penalty for non-compliance for FY 2010 of €477,624 was imposed. The dispute focused on whether the fees charged by […]

Netherlands vs “Agri B.V.”, September 2022, Court of Appeal, Case No AWB-16_5664 (ECLI:NL:RBNHO:2022:9062)

blank

“Agri B.V.” is a Dutch subsidiary in an international group processing agricultural products. Following a restructuring in 2009 “Agri B.V.” had declared a profit of € 35 million, including € 2 million in exit profits. In an assessment issued by the tax authorities this amount had been adjusted to more than € 350 million. Judgement […]

Netherlands vs “Fertilizer BV”, April 2022, Court of Appeal, Case No. ECLI:NL:GHSHE:2022:1198

blank

In 2016 Fertilizer BV had been issued a tax assessment for FY 2012 in which the tax authorities had imposed additional taxable income of €133,076,615. In November 2019 the district court ruled predominantly in favor of the tax authorities but reduced the adjustment to €78.294.312. An appel was filed by Fertilizer BV with the Court […]

Netherlands – Crop Tax Advisers, January 2022, Court of Appeal, Case No. 200.192.332/01, ECLI:NL:GHARL:2022:343

blank

The question at issue was whether a Crop tax adviser had acted in accordance with the requirements of a reasonably competent and reasonably acting adviser when advising on the so-called royalty routing and its implementation. Judgement of the Court of Appeal “Crop is liable for the damages arising from the shortcoming. For the assessment of […]

Netherlands vs Hunkemöller B.V., July 2021, Supreme Court, Case No ECLI:NL:2021:1152

blank

In 2011 a Dutch group “Hunkemöller BV” acquired “Target BV” for EUR 135 million. The acquisition was financed by four French affiliates “FCPRs” in the Dutch Group – EUR 60,345,000 in the form of convertible instruments (intercompany debt) and the remainder in the form of equity. The convertible instruments carried an interest rates of 13 […]

Netherlands vs “Related Party B.V.”, July 2021, District Court, Case No ECLI:NL:RBGEL:2021:3382

blank

In 2013 “Related Party B.V” entered into an agreement with “X BV” for the provision of transportation- and support services for oil and gas. The Dutch tax authority suspected that the parties were affiliated within the meaning of Section 8b of the Corporate Income Tax Act 1969. Decision of Court The Court decided in favor […]

Netherlands vs “Share Owner/Lender”, February 2021, Supreme Court (Preliminary ruling by the Advocate General), Case No 20/01884

blank

The interested party bought AEX-listed shares, sold three-month futures based on those shares through its shareholder/broker [D], and lent the shares to [D] (stock lending). It received cash collateral ($ deposits as collateral) and a stock lending fee for its lending. According to the interested party, the shares always briefly reverted to its ownership around […]

Netherlands vs X B.V., December 2020, Supreme Court (Preliminary ruling by the Advocate General), Case No 20/02096 ECLI:NL:PHR:2020:1198

blank

This case concerns a private equity takeover structure with apparently an intended international mismatch, i.e. a deduction/no inclusion of the remuneration on the provision of funds. The case was (primarily) decided by the Court of Appeal on the basis of non-business loan case law. The facts are as follows: A private equity fund [A] raised […]

Netherlands vs Zinc Smelter B.V., March 2020, Court of Appeal, Case No ECLI:NL:GHSHE:2020:968

blank

A Dutch company, Zinc Smelter B.V., transferred part of it’s business to a Swiss group company in 2010. In dispute was whether the payment for the transferred activities had been set at arm’s length, and whether the cost-plus remuneration applied to the Dutch company after the business restructuring constituted an arm’s length remuneration for the […]

Netherlands vs Hunkemöller B.V., January 2020, AG opinion – before the Supreme Court, Case No ECLI:NL:PHR:2020:102

blank

To acquire companies and resell them with capital gains a French Investment Fund distributed the capital of its investors (€ 5.4 billion in equity) between a French Fund Commun de Placement à Risques (FCPRs) and British Ltds managed by the French Investment Fund. For the purpose of acquiring the [X] group (the target), the French […]

Netherlands vs “Fertilizer BV”, November 2019, District Court, Case No. ECLI:NL:RBZWB:2019:4920

blank

In 2016 Fertilizer BV had been issued a tax assessment for FY 2012 in which the tax authorities had imposed additional taxable income of €162,506,660. Fertilizer BV is the parent company of a fiscal unity for corporation tax (hereinafter: FU). It is a limited partner in a limited partnership under Dutch law, which operates a […]

Netherlands vs. Swiss Corp, November 2019, Rechtbank Noord-Nederland, Case No. 2019:1492

blank

For the purpose of determining whether a Swiss Corporation had effectively been managed from the Netherlands or had a permanent establishment in the Netherlands, the Dutch tax authorities send a request for information. The Swiss Corp was not willing to answer the request and argued that the request was disproportionate and that the concepts of […]

British American Tobacco hit by £902 million tax assessments in the Netherlands

blank

According to the 2018 financial statement, British American Tobacco group has been hit by a £902 million tax assessments in the Netherlands. “The Dutch tax authority has issued a number of assessments on various issues across the years 2003-2016 in relation to various intra-group transactions. The assessments amount to an  aggregate net liability across these periods of […]

Aruba vs PriceSmart Inc., September 2019, Council for Tax Affairs of Aruba, Case No 2010/45712

blank

PriceSmart Inc (PSMT) operates a retail chain including approximately 25 department stores in the Caribbean and Central America. PSMT’s local branch had recognised losses in their profit tax returns for the years 2001 to 2006. In 2009, the tax authorities audited the tax returns for the years 2002 to 2006. At issue was the definition […]

Netherland vs. A BV, October 2017, Lower Court, case no 2017: 5965

blank

A Dutch parent company was providing support services to its foreign subsidiary on a cost-plus basis and received a compensation fee following a business restructuring where headquarter and strategic functions was transferred from the Dutch parent company to Switzerland. The Dutch tax authorities took the view that the compensation paid was insufficient, and that the […]

Netherlands vs “Zinc-Smelter Restructuring BV”, September 2017, Rechtbank ZWB, No BRE 15/5683

blank

A Dutch company was engaged in smelting of zinc. The business was then restructured, for which the company received a small compensation. Dutch tax authorities disagreed with both the amount of compensation payment and the arm’s-length remuneration of the post restructuring manufacturing activities. Until 2003 the Dutch Company was a fully fledged business. The company owned the assets and controlled […]

Nederlands vs. Corp, January 2014, Lower Court, Case nr. AWB11/3717, 11/3718, 11/3719, 11/3720, 11/3721

blank

The case involved a Dutch mutual insurance company, DutchCo, which paid surpluses from the insurance activity back to the participating members in the form of premium restitution. Prior to 2002, DutchCo reinsured the majority of its risks with external reinsurers via an external reinsurance broker. DutchCo kept a small part of the risks for its […]

Netherlands vs “X B.V.”, March 2013, Supreme Court, Case No 11/02248, ECLI:NL:HR:2013:BW6552

blank

The application of the WEV (waarde in het economische verkeer) rule is particularly relevant if the non-corporate loan is interest-free or the agreed interest is owed. The interest to be taken into account for tax purposes is then determined on the market value of each interest period at the time it falls due. The assessment […]

Nederlands vs “Paper Trading B.V.”, October 2011, Supreme Court, Case No 11/00762, ECLI:NL:HR:2011:BT8777

blank

“Paper Trading B.V.” was active in the business of buying and selling paper. The paper was purchased (mostly) in Finland, and sold in the Netherlands, Belgium, France, and Germany. The purchasing and selling activities were carried out by the director of Paper Trading B.V. “Mr. O” who was also the owner of all shares in […]

Nederlands vs Corp, July 2011, District Court of Hague, Case No AWB 08/9105, LJN BR4966

blank

X is the holding company of the so-called A-group, which is active in the recreation business. The activities in X was taking out cancellation insurance. Within the group an Irish re-insurance company was established. Several contracts were concluded between X and the Irish company with regard to the insurance activities. The court considered that the tax administration had proved […]

Netherlands vs “Holding B.V.”, March 2007, District Court, Case No AWB 06/288, V-N 2007/35.6

blank

“Holding B.V.” is a holding company. The actual activity of the [X] group in the Netherlands – a wholesale trade in garden-related (gift) items – takes place in [X] B.V. The latter is included in a fiscal consolidation for corporate tax purposes with “Holding B.V.”. Customers of [X] B.V. are located in both the Netherlands […]

Netherlands vs “X B.V.”, August 1998, Supreme Court, Case No 32997, ECLI:NL:HR:1998:AA2288

blank

In a situation where a new intangible asset has been developed and is transferred to an affiliate at a time when its success is not yet sufficiently apparent, for example, because the intangible asset has not yet generated revenues and there are significant uncertainties in estimating future revenues, the valuation at the time of the […]

Netherlands vs “Metal Packaging Procurement B.V.”, April 2004, Hoge Raad, Case No 39542, ECLI:NL:HR:2004:AO9474

blank

This case concerns allocation of profits resulting from centralizing procurement functions within a group. The tax authorities took the position that the profit claimed by a centralized purchasing office was not aligned with the functions performed and the risks assumed by the office. According to the tax authorities profits derived from the realized discounts should […]

Netherlands vs Bosal Holding BV, September 2003, European Court, Case no C-168/01

blank

Bosal is a company which carries on holding, financing and licensing/royalty related activities and which, as a taxpayer, is subject to corporation tax in the Netherlands. For the 1993 financial year, it declared costs amounting to NLG 3 969 339 in relation to the financing of its holdings in companies established in nine other Member […]

Netherlands vs “Dutch Low Risk Treasury B.V.”, August 2003, District Court, Case No 01/04083, ECLI:NL:GHAMS:2003:AJ6865

blank

This case concerns a Dutch treasury company with a low risk intra-group borrowing and on-lending activity. The interested party was incorporated on 5 August 1995 by a legal person named V Limited, under Canadian law. Its subscribed and paid-up capital amounted to NLG 40,000 in the years under review. The claimant is part of the […]