In RGEX GmbH v Finanzamt Neuss (C-374/16) and Finanzamt Bergisch Gladbach v Igor Butin (C-375/16) the Advocate General of the CJEU preliminarily ruled that a letter box address is sufficient for VAT invoice purposes.
- The taxpayers claimed input VAT supplier invoices where the address was not an address where the economic activity was carried on.
-
The German and Austrian authorities did not allow the VAT to be recovered.
-
They took the view that the address cannot be a mere ‘letterbox address’ and the invoice was not valid.
The Advocate General disagreed:
-
The address is included on a VAT invoice, along with a VAT number to enable the supplier to be identified.
-
By identifying the supplier as a taxable person, the purchaser can recover the VAT.
-
It would be too strict to require the address to be where the economic activities are carried out.
-
E-commerce and remote working mean that you can run a business buying and selling goods using just an internet connection and a computer. This should not preclude VAT recovery.
This case concerned the use of an office address, but could equally refer to the use of an accountant’s address used as registered office, or a PO Box address.
Links
What constitutes a valid VAT invoice?
Case: RGEX GmbH v Finanzamt Neuss (C-374/16) and Finanzamt Bergisch Gladbach v Igor Butin (C-375/16)
