The platform economy: challenges and tax implications under DAC7 and VAT

International Tax Review is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

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

The platform economy: challenges and tax implications under DAC7 and VAT

Sponsored by

logo.png
Digital platforms on a mobile phone.jpg

Fernando Matesanz of Spanish VAT Services argues that reporting obligations for platform operators should be harmonised to prevent them from becoming ‘quasi-tax inspectors’ in a digital economy reshaped by servitisation

The digital economy, particularly through the phenomenon of ‘servitisation’ and the ‘platform economy’, has significantly transformed interactions between businesses, consumers, and tax administrations. This shift represents an evolution from a traditional ownership-based model to one centred on access to services. In this new landscape, consumers benefit from improved accessibility and usage conditions for goods and services, while businesses gain new opportunities to diversify their revenue streams.

The rise of servitisation

Servitisation is an increasing trend in which services are integrated into product offerings, progressively blurring the lines between goods and services. This shift has even led to the complete replacement of certain physical goods, such as records or books, with digital services such as streaming playlists. For instance, whereas few people today purchase vinyl records (a supply of goods), most subscribe to music streaming services (a supply of services). The implications of this new consumption pattern for VAT are immense.

The role of digital platforms

Digital platforms, defined as technological infrastructures that facilitate direct interactions between suppliers and multiple users, are at the core of the digital economy. Unlike the traditional economy, which relies on physical interactions between the parties involved in a transaction, digital platforms streamline and manage these interactions between providers and end consumers, acting as intermediaries or as active facilitators of commercial transactions. It is the legislator’s responsibility to ensure that the traditional economy is not unfairly disadvantaged compared to the platform economy. If both serve the same type of consumer (which is debatable in certain cases), they should be subject to the same tax treatment.

From a tax perspective, digital platforms play a crucial role in two key areas:

  • In the collection and transmission of data to tax administrations; and

  • In their responsibility for collecting and remitting VAT (deemed supplier provisions).

The former aspect is being particularly reinforced by European regulations, such as the DAC7 Directive (Council Directive (EU) 2021/514), which establishes due diligence obligations for digital platforms.

DAC7: strengthening administrative cooperation

The DAC7 Directive aims to enhance administrative cooperation in taxation by imposing obligations on digital platforms to collect, verify, and report detailed information about active sellers engaging in relevant activities, including so-called personal services. The information required includes tax identification details, addresses, the number of transactions conducted, the compensation received, and specific details in the case of real estate rentals.

DAC7 clearly defines key concepts such as platform, platform operator, and relevant activity. The platforms covered by the directive are those that facilitate direct or indirect commercial interactions between users, excluding those that merely process payments, conduct advertising services, or redirect users to other platforms, a definition that closely resembles that of a “facilitating platform” under VAT rules. Platform operators, which provide the infrastructure for transactions between sellers and consumers, must comply with strict reporting and verification obligations.

The directive distinguishes between active sellers, those subject to reporting, and those that are exempt. Active sellers are those that conduct transactions within the relevant reporting period. Reportable sellers include individuals or entities residing in the EU or in partner jurisdictions, and those engaging in activities such as property rentals within these territories. Exempt sellers include government entities, publicly listed companies, and those with minimal economic activity.

Non-compliance with DAC7 obligations can result in penalties, not only for platform operators but also for sellers subject to reporting. The directive establishes clear enforcement mechanisms, such as the temporary or permanent suspension of accounts and the withholding of payments until compliance with reporting requirements is ensured.

Harmonising reporting obligations: a necessary but complex task

The platform economy and servitisation represent deep shifts in both economic and tax models. Effective collaboration and coordination between digital platforms and tax administrations are essential to ensure transparency, efficiency, and fairness in tax collection. This new regulatory framework is not only intended to increase tax revenues but also to promote fiscal transparency and fairer competition in the digital marketplace.

Some platform operators argue that excessive bureaucratic requirements are being imposed on them, making their operations more complex and expensive. The DAC7 reporting obligation shares many similarities with the VAT record-keeping requirements for digital interfaces facilitating certain supplies of goods and services. In some cases, the information required is similar or even duplicated, but it must be stored in different ways and provided through separate procedures to different tax administrations, as each has distinct objectives.

Perhaps it is time to consider harmonising these reporting obligations in some way. It is a complex task, but it should not be dismissed. The collaboration of digital platforms is undeniably crucial in today’s economy, but turning them into quasi-tax inspectors (while also exposing them to penalties for non-compliance) may, in some cases, be excessive.

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

The deal to acquire ITR's parent company is expected to complete by the end of May 2025
JBS, the biggest meat company in the world, allegedly used Luxembourgian ‘mailbox companies’ to avoid taxes between 2019 and 2022
Despite the conviction of Jessa Dabalos, the Tax Practitioners’ Board’s investigative work continues with five outstanding PwC scandal probes
Heads of tax need to push their teams forward as strategic business advisers to add value across their organisations, says Sandy Markwick
Scott Bessent reportedly felt undermined by Musk naming Gary Shapley as acting IRS commissioner; in other news, Baker Tilly will combine with a top 15 US firm
The promise of nine years’ tax certainty and a ‘rational and pragmatic’ government process makes APAs a no-brainer, Indian tax advisers tell ITR
Despite garnering significant revenues from multinationals, Italy’s digital services tax presents pressing double taxation issues, say Stefano Simontacchi and Francesco Saverio Scandone of BonelliErede
ITR’s research shows that in-house tax counsel in Asia also feel underserved by their advisers’ international networks
World Tax global head of research Jon Moore tells ITR how his team spots standout submissions, and gives early statistical insights into this year’s entries
Australia’s conservative opposition will repeal controversial tax agent reporting rules if elected in the country’s May general election
Gift this article