Sweden requests preliminary CJEU ruling on re-valuation for VAT purposes

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

Sweden requests preliminary CJEU ruling on re-valuation for VAT purposes

Sponsored by

sponsored-firms-kpmg.png
Gavel of judge with scales of justice and book against European Union flag

Marie Hedin and Jennifer van der Gronden of KPMG Sweden hope for clarification from the CJEU after a referral by the Supreme Administrative Court regarding whether the tax agency’s approach aligns with the VAT Directive

The provisions in articles 72 and 80 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 (the VAT Directive) allow EU member states to put anti-avoidance and anti-evasion measures in place with respect to the re-valuation of the supplies of goods or services between related parties. These provisions have been implemented in the Swedish VAT Act.

During the past decade, the Swedish Tax Agency (STA) has decisively, aggressively, and –unfortunately – quite successfully re-valued supplies between related parties where the recipient of the supplies is not in a full VAT recovery position.

A case in Sweden’s Supreme Administrative Court

A parent company’s sole, fully taxable economic activity was to actively manage its partially exempt subsidiaries. It provided services within business management, finance, property management, investment, IT, and HR, which were valued using a cost-plus method.

The parent company incurred VAT on the costs of providing those services. It also incurred VAT on accounting, audit, costs of raising equity capital, and other shareholders’ costs, which it treated as general overheads and did not include in the valuation of its supplies. The parent company recovered VAT in full on all costs where VAT was incurred.

The STA argued that the parent company should have valued its supplies, on a market value basis, by reference to its whole cost base since:

  • Given the unique nature of the parent company’s services to its subsidiaries, as a principle, there were no comparable services that could be obtained under normal market conditions; and

  • The taxpayer could not disconnect some of its costs from the tax base of the supplies as it had a single economic activity.

The taxpayer objected to the STA’s arguments on the basis that:

  • The different service elements, comprising the tax base of its supplies, were not unique to its group and could have been outsourced on an arm’s-length basis;

  • The cost-plus method used to calculate the supplies’ consideration was in line with the market practices between independent suppliers;

  • The equity capital raising, and other shareholders’ costs, pertained to the group’s shareholders, and had no connection to the subsidiaries’ management; and

  • The argument advanced by the STA would result in a disproportionate application of the re-valuation rules.

The Supreme Administrative Court’s decision

The Supreme Administrative Court requested a preliminary ruling from the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) on the following two questions:

  • Is it compatible with articles 72 and 80 of the VAT Directive to consider, when applying national regulations on valuation of the tax base, that when a parent company provides its subsidiaries with the type of services at issue in the case, they are always unique supplies whose market value cannot be determined by such a comparison as provided for in the first paragraph of Article 72?

  • Is it compatible with articles 72 and 80 of the VAT Directive to consider, when applying national provisions on the valuation of the tax base, that a parent company's entire cost base, including capital acquisition and shareholder costs, constitutes the company's cost for the services provided to its subsidiaries, when the parent company's only activity consists of active management of the subsidiaries and the company has made deductions for all included VAT attributable to its acquisitions?

KPMG’s commentary

KPMG’s view is that it is not compatible with the VAT Directive to apply the rules on re-valuation in the way that the STA does.

The STA's principled approach leads to an extensive and routine application of the re-valuation rules in the case of the provision of services between parent companies and subsidiaries where the latter have limited, or no, right of deduction. In practice, the STA's approach means that Article 72(1) of the VAT Directive becomes null and void for Swedish purposes.

The referral is significant from the standpoint of providing legal certainty in Sweden in this area of VAT. KPMG believes that the value of supply should be determined on objective, rather than principled, criteria. It is hoped that the CJEU judgment in this case will provide the necessary clarity in this area.

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

ITR’s data has highlighted the US firm’s ambition to become America’s ‘premier’ tax player via a concerted partner recruitment strategy
Jaap Zwaan’s arrival continues a recent streak of A&M Tax investing in the region; in other news, the US and Japan struck a deal that significantly lowered tariff rates
In a world where international tax concepts rely on human activity, Leonard Wagenaar poses existential questions about the future of such ideas when AI is ever-present
France v Axa provides a practical illustration of how the burden of proof is applied in TP matters under French law, ITR also heard
In an exclusive interview with ITR, Ian Gary calls for a central public CbCR database and bemoans the US’s lack of involvement in international tax transparency
Reckitt Benckiser is to divest its Essential Home business, which includes more than 70 brands, to private equity firm Advent International
In the first of a new series of weekly opinion pieces, ITR Editor Tom Baker reflects on the OECD’s attempts to sanitise the US’s brazen pillar two negotiations
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
Gift this article