The VAT consequences of common cryptocurrency transactions

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

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

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

The VAT consequences of common cryptocurrency transactions

Sponsored by

Spanish VAT Services logo.jpg
quantitatives-zaibez5ltrg-unsplash.jpg

Fernando Matesanz of Spanish VAT Services discusses the VAT treatment of transactions carried out with certain cryptoassets.

The VAT treatment of transactions carried out with certain crypto assets is a controversial issue as these are products that are difficult to classify from a legal perspective and are constantly evolving due to the speed of change in the digital economy. 

The CJEU already issued an opinion on the VAT treatment of bitcoin transactions in 2015 (case 264/14, David Hedqvist). This case was limited to transactions concerning the exchange of bitcoins for traditional currencies. Since then, the world of cryptoassets and in particular virtual currencies has changed enormously. It is therefore particularly important to have a common framework for determining their VAT treatment under the EU VAT Directive.

We must define what we are referring to when we talk about cryptoassets since, as mentioned above, there is a growing universe of options around this topic. In this regard, there is a proposed definition by the EU legislator (Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament amending EU Directive 2019/1937) which is as follows: “digital representation of value or rights which may be transferred and stored electronically, using distributed ledger technology or similar technology(…).” 

We, therefore, see how a cryptoasset can be not only what is normally known as ‘currency’, but it can be any other type of asset that represents a value and that can be traded in exchange for a consideration. This should undoubtedly have VAT consequences.

Once the cryptoassets have been created (this can be done in several ways and with its own implications for VAT), they must be put into circulation and made available to potential users who will acquire them usually for consideration. 

If these activities fall within the scope of VAT because the supplier qualify as a taxable person and because there is direct link between the supply and the consideration received (reciprocal performance between the provider of the service and the recipient) it is fundamental determining whether they can be exempt from VAT.

The exemption that may apply should be one of the two following:

  • Article 135(1)(d) of the VAT Directive (transactions concerning payments); or

  • Article 135(1)(e) of the VAT Directive (transactions concerning currencies).

The EU Commission has stated in the past (VAT Committee Working Paper No.892) that the exemption concerning currencies (Article 135(1)(e) of the VAT Directive) could apply to transfer of certain cryptoassets like cryptocurrencies.

However, there may be other activities which do not necessarily involve the transfer of the asset itself but which are necessary for the functioning of the whole process of creation (like, for example, mining), supervision and trading of these assets. These other side activities might also be exempt from VAT by application of Article 135(1)(d) of the VAT Directive.

According to the above and bearing in mind the difficulty involved in classifying this type of activity, it may be justified that the exemptions provided for financial activities listed in Article 135 of the VAT Directive would apply to the majority of transactions carried out with crypto assets.

An increasing activity in the market is the exchange of cryptoassets. There should be no difference between their exchange and the exchange of any other ‘normal’ currency. Thus, the transactions should be exempt from VAT by, again, application of Article 135(1)(e) of the VAT Directive. 

It is also becoming common to pay for goods and services using virtual currencies. There is no reason to treat this type of activity differently than if payment were made in traditional currencies. 

If the transaction is a taxable activity subject to VAT, the fact that it is paid with a cryptocurrency should be irrelevant. The supplier should account for the VAT and charge the corresponding VAT amount to the recipient of the goods or services. The only possible difficulty here could be the correct determination of the taxable amount. 

However, we insist that no distinction should be made and therefore the standard provisions of Article 73 of the VAT Directive should apply (the taxable amount should be everything which constitutes consideration obtained or to be obtained by the supplier). It will be, therefore, necessary to determine what is the value of the cryptoasset delivered in exchange for the goods or services.

The above is a brief summary of the VAT implications of the most common and basic transactions in the world of cryptoassets. The universe around these products is huge and we are sure that while we were writing this article, new products and new ways of trading them are being developed somewhere in the world. This means that we are dealing with an extremely complex type of activity, which makes also extremely complicated to fit into the EU VAT rules. This should not prevent from seeking common standards for their VAT implications. This will provide certainty for the traders. It will also help the legislator to understand the type of activity he is dealing with and it will protect the consumer from situations that are often extremely difficult  to understand.

 

 

Fernando Matesanz

Managing director, Spanish VAT Services

E: fmc@spanishvat.es

 

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

The new office on the fourth floor of 4 More London will span 14,230 square feet, with the potential to expand to the first and second floors
MNEs now face a shift from modelling to execution as the side‑by‑side deal forces tax teams to upgrade systems, harmonise data, and prevent costly pillar two mismatches
As recent surveys suggest a disconnect between AI adoption and employee engagement, the big four risk digging themselves into a strategic hole
Almost three-quarters of surveyed tax professionals are concerned about inaccurate AI outputs; in other news, Dentons hired a partner from CMS to lead its Belgian tax team
Long-running, high-value and complex enquiries are a significant reason for HM Revenue and Customs’s increased TP yield, experts suggest
Landmark legal updates in India have led companies to prioritise specialised tax advisers over accountants, ITR has found
Brazil’s shift to a nationwide consumption tax is more than conceptual; it fundamentally transforms municipal revenue, enforcement, and administrative disputes
While some advisers praised the ruling’s definition of a ‘voucher’ for VAT purposes, a UK partner said the case left unanswered questions
While pillar two has been enacted on paper in Brazil, companies are encountering a range of practical compliance issues, ITR has heard
Moore, founding partner of the Chicago tax boutique which bears her name, shares her career wisdom for ITR’s new Women in Tax interview series
Gift this article