German Federal Ministry of Finance responds to court decision on how reverse-charge mechanism applies to construction

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

German Federal Ministry of Finance responds to court decision on how reverse-charge mechanism applies to construction

german-flag-wavy250x167.jpg

The reverse-charge-scheme is only applicable to supplies to property developers where the property developer uses the received construction work directly for such a supply itself, explains Robert Hammerl of KMLZ.

The German tax authorities have now, once again, commented on the decision of the Federal Fiscal Court of August 22 2013 (V R 37/10) that the reverse-charge-scheme is no longer applicable to supplies to property developers and have released another Federal Ministry of Finance’s circular dated May 8 2014.

New legitimate expectation

The reverse-charge-scheme is only applicable to supplies to property developers where the property developer uses the received construction work directly for such a supply itself. If the recipient confirms to the property developer that it intends to directly use the received supply for construction work itself, the recipient is obliged to pay VAT though he might not ultimately directly use it for such a supply itself. This shall not apply if the property developer knew about the inaccuracy of the confirmation.

Non-entrepreneurial purpose

Due to the direct use now required by the Federal Fiscal Court, the reverse-charge-scheme is no longer applicable to the recipient as regards services for non-entrepreneurial purposes.

VAT group

If one part of the VAT group obtains construction work, the reverse-charge-scheme is only applicable if the supply is directly used for construction work. In this context direct use means that one part of the VAT group (controlling company or controlled company) uses the received supply to carry out such a supply to a third person.

Expansion of the non-objection scheme

The non-objection scheme has been extended by two cases. If construction work is commenced before February 15 2014, it will not be subject to objection if the parties invoice this construction work carried out after February 14 2014 by mutual agreement using the reverse-charge-scheme. It also will not be objected to if a service is invoiced with VAT before February 15 2014 by mutual agreement and in consideration of the then administrative interpretation, though the recipient would have already been liable for VAT according to the new case law.

Advance and final invoices

The property developer will owe VAT for construction work if he has issued advance invoices before February 15 2014 without VAT for building projects which will be completed after February 14 2014, as the supply is to be assessed in accordance with the new legal position.

In the interest of simplification, however, it is sufficient for the property developer to charge VAT for the total amount in the final invoice. The advance payments made are to be charged in their net amount (without VAT) in the final invoice. Value-added tax for the total payment is to be declared in the VAT return for the period in which the service was carried out. The recipient will need to correct the VAT paid for the advance payments in the same period.

hammerl-web100x90.jpg
Robert Hammerl (robert.hammerl@kmlz.de) is a managing associate of Küffner Maunz Langer Zugmaier – KMLZ, the principal Germany correspondent of the indirect tax channel of www.internationaltaxreview.com.

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

The partnership model was looking antiquated even before the UK chancellor’s expected tax raid on LLPs was revealed. An additional tax burden may finally kill it off
The US’s GILTI regime will not be forced upon American multinationals in foreign jurisdictions, Bloomberg has reported; in other news, Ropes & Gray hired two tax partners from Linklaters
APAs should provide a pragmatic means to agree to an arm's-length outcome for an Australian entity and for the ATO, the tax authority said
Overall revenues and average profit per partner also increased in the UK, the ‘big four’ firm revealed
Increasingly complex reporting requirements contributed towards the firm’s growth in tax, it said
Sector-specific business taxes, private equity tax treatment reform and changes to the taxation of non-residents are all on the cards for the UK, authors from Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer predict
The UK’s Labour government has an unpopular prime minister, an unpopular chancellor and not a lot of good options as it prepares to deliver its autumn Budget
Awards
The firms picked up five major awards between them at a gala ceremony held at New York’s prestigious Metropolitan Club
The streaming company’s operating income was $400m below expectations following the dispute; in other news, the OECD has released updates for 25 TP country profiles
Software company Oracle has won the right to have its A$250m dispute with the ATO stayed, paving the way for a mutual agreement procedure
Gift this article