Juan Manuel Vázquez, Liselot Bakker, Daan Both, Gino Sparidis, Bram Middelburg, Emma van Doornik, Bruce van Schaik, Gijs Groenewoud
FASTER Directive adopted by the Council of the European Union
On 10 December 2024, the Council of the EU adopted the Directive on Faster and Safer Relief of Excess Withholding Taxes (FASTER). The FASTER Directive introduces a unified framework for withholding tax (WHT) relief procedures for dividends and interest on publicly traded instruments. It aims to make WHT relief processes faster and more efficient as well as to prevent tax fraud and abuse. The text of the FASTER Directive adopted by the Council is aligned with the compromise text politically agreed by the Member States in May 2024.
DAC9 proposal published by the European Commission
On 28 October 2024, the European Commission proposed amending again the Directive on Administrative Cooperation (DAC) to facilitate the filing and exchanging of Pillar Two-related information in the EU. This proposal is referred to as "DAC9". The proposal transposes, in a coordinated manner, the OECD's GloBE Information Return into EU law by making it the Top-up Tax Information Returns (TTIR), as already contemplated by the EU directive implementing Pillar Two. It also lays down an EU framework to facilitate the exchange of TTIRs between Member States.
CJ rules that Dutch ‘net taxation’ regime restricts the free movement of capital
(XX v Inspecteur van de Belastingdienst, Case C-782/22)
On 7 November 2024, the CJ delivered its judgment in case XX v Inspecteur van de Belastingdienst (C-782/22). The case concerned the question whether Dutch legislation, under which dividends distributed by resident companies to non-resident insurance companies are subjected to a withholding tax of 15%, while dividends distributed to resident companies are effectively tax-exempt, is compatible with the free movement of capital.
CJ judgment regarding VAT on termination fees
(Rhtb, case C-622/23)
On 28 November 2024, the CJ issued its judgment in the case Rhtb (C-622/23), which deals with the question of whether VAT should apply to contract termination fees. In its judgment, the CJ confirmed that these termination fees are subject to VAT.
CJ judgment regarding VAT position of charging card issuers
(Digital Charging Solutions, Case C 60/23)
On 4 October 2024, the CJ issued its judgment in the case Digital Charging Solutions (C‑60/23), which deals with the VAT treatment of issuers of charging cards for electric vehicles. In its judgment, the CJ ruled that a card issuer that facilitates charging sessions for electric vehicles can be regarded to buy and resell the electricity for VAT purposes.
