VAT-exempted management of Dutch special investment funds contested in ECJ

International Tax Review is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Garden, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

VAT-exempted management of Dutch special investment funds contested in ECJ

Denis Pouw and Rakesh Gobind of WTS examine Advocate General Juliane Kokott’s Opinion in an ECJ case which could affect the VAT treatment of real estate exploitation for special investment funds.

The Dutch VAT legislation (based on the EU VAT Directive) includes an exemption for the management of special investment funds. Until recently, the widespread opinion was that the special investment funds should only include funds which invest in securities.

The Dutch tax authorities’ policy is that the VAT exemption does not apply to services provided to real estate funds, unless the services are the management of the actual sale and purchase of real estate. Property management and the exploitation of real estate are therefore taxable with VAT. This VAT is, in general, not reclaimable for special investment funds.

One Dutch VAT entrepreneur has disputed the (deemed) exclusivity of the exemption for the management of security funds and took the position that the exemption should also be applicable for the management of real estate funds. Besides, the Dutch VAT entrepreneur maintained that the management of a real estate fund included the following services:

  1. activities as a managing director;

  2. handling activities arising from legal regulations, statutes, regulations and administrative decisions;

  3. managing the exploitation of real property;

  4. financial reporting, data processing and internal audit services;

  5. controlling the assets of the fund, including the sale and purchase of real estate; and

  6. the acquisition of shareholders or certificates holders.

The Dutch Supreme Court decided that the the VAT legislation and current jurisprudence regarding the management of special investment funds is not sufficient to give a decision and therefore requested the European Court of Justice (ECJ) to answer the following two questions:

  1. Can a company with multiple shareholders which solely invests in real estate qualify as a special investment fund?; and

  2. If question one is answered in the affirmative, does the term 'management' also cover the outsourced actual exploitation of a special investment fund's real estate?

After the initial hearing at the ECJ, Advocate General Kokott recently gave her opinion regarding this case. The ECJ will decide at a later stage, but the majority of cases follow the opinion of the Advocate General.

First, the Advocate General investigated what special investment funds actually are, concluding that an investment fund can only qualify as a special investment fund under the EU VAT Directive if the fund is subject to a special government regulatory regime. The Advocate General investigated whether the exemption for special investment funds could also apply to real estate funds and came to a positive conclusion. So the first question of the Dutch Supreme Court is answered in the affirmative. Regarding the second question of the Dutch Supreme Court the Advocate General concluded that the actual exploitation of real estate also qualifies as being part of the management of a special investment fund.

If the ECJ follows the Kokott opinion, the outsourced exploitation of real estate for qualifying funds will not be taxable with VAT. This decision would clearly be profitable for special investment funds which invest in real estate as it will decrease their VAT burden.

Denis Pouw (denis.pouw@wtsnl.com / +31 10 21791 73) and Rakesh Gobind (rakesh.gobind@wtsnl.com / +31 10 21791 77); WTS World Tax Service

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

The threat of 50% tariffs on Brazilian goods coincides with new Brazilian legal powers to adopt retaliatory economic measures, local experts tell ITR
The country’s chancellor appears to have backtracked from previous pillar two scepticism; in other news, Donald Trump threatened Russia with 100% tariffs
In its latest G20 update, the OECD also revealed tense discussions with the US where the ‘significant threat’ of Section 899 was highlighted
The tax agency has increased compliance yield from wealthy individuals but cannot identify how much tax is paid by UK billionaires, the committee also claimed
Saffery cautioned that documentation requirements in new government proposals must be limited if medium-sized companies are not exempted from TP
The global minimum tax deal is not viable without US participation, Friedrich Merz has argued
Section 899 of the ‘one big beautiful’ bill would have spelled disaster for many international investors into the US, but following its shelving, attention turns to the fate of the OECD’s pillars
DLA Piper’s co-head of tax for the US and Latin America tells ITR about her fervent belief in equal access to the law, loving yoga, and paternal inspirations
Tax expert Craig Hillier agrees with the comparison of pillar two to using a sledgehammer to crack a nut
The amount is reported to be up 57% from the £5.6bn that the UK tax agency believes was underpaid in the previous year
Gift this article