Global VAT & Indirect Tax News

The European General Court dismissed an Italian association’s challenge to EU VAT directives that impose a deemed‑supplier model on digital platforms for short‑term accommodation rentals. The court held the association lacked direct and individual concern, as the rules target platform operators, not property owners. The decision confirms the applicability of Directive (EU) 2025/516 and Regulation (EU) 2025/518.

The blog outlines emerging trends in intra‑group loan transfer pricing for 2026, highlighting recent court rulings in Luxembourg, Belgium, and the Netherlands that tighten documentation and credit‑rating requirements. It stresses the need for fact‑specific debt‑capacity analyses, robust credit‑rating methodologies, and clear contractual terms to mitigate audit risk. Multinationals should align loan terms with arm‑s‑length principles and document them comprehensively.

The Bombay High Court ruled that a minimum three‑month gap must exist between a Section 73(2) show‑cause notice and the final order under Section 73(10) in GST proceedings. Orders passed earlier, such as the two‑and‑a‑half‑month order in the A.M. Marketplaces case, were quashed. The decision underscores procedural fairness and the need for adequate time for taxpayers to respond.

The European Court of Justice issued a preliminary ruling on Jan. 22, 2026, stating that the Spanish VAT exemption for services rendered by cost‑sharing groups to members at cost is not valid. The ruling interprets Council Directive 2006/112/EC as precluding such an exemption, as the services were deemed outsourced and not linked to tax‑exempt activities. The decision applies to services such as cleaning for healthcare and educational buildings.

On 21 January 2026 the Philippine Court of Tax Appeals issued CTA Case No. 10505, clarifying that unutilized input VAT refunds on zero‑rated sales must be substantiated with an administrative refund claim and proof of entitlement. The decision confirms that the Internal Revenue Commissioner’s denial of a 2018 excess input VAT refund was based on the taxpayer’s failure to meet these requirements.

The UK Supreme Court confirmed that VAT incurred on adviser fees related to an exempt share sale is not recoverable, applying a strict two‑stage test that requires a direct and immediate link to the transaction. The ruling rejects the modified approach that allowed recovery based on intended use of proceeds and clarifies that VAT grouping does not alter the nature of a share sale. Businesses must conduct early VAT analysis for share disposals to account for irrecoverable adviser fees.

On 26 January 2026, the UK Supreme Court ruled that VAT incurred on adviser fees for an exempt share sale is not recoverable. The decision applies a strict two‑stage test, rejecting the modified approach that allowed recovery based on intended use of proceeds. The ruling closes the possibility of treating such costs as general overheads to fund taxable activities.