Ryanair loses Irish High Court appeal on VAT refund

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


Ryanair loses Irish High Court appeal on VAT refund

ryanair-small.jpg

Sonya Manzor, of William Fry, explains how Ryanair’s recent High Court defeat highlights that an intention to provide management services is not sufficient to enable taxpayers to claim a VAT refund.

On May 2 2013, Ireland’s High Court ruled that Ryanair was not entitled to claim a VAT deduction for legal and stockbroking fees incurred during its bid to acquire a 100% shareholding in Aer Lingus in October 2006.

ryanair.jpg

The appeal related to a decision of the Appeal Commissioners that such fees did not relate to its core economic activity of air transport and was therefore not VAT deductible.

The court found that Ryanair was not a taxable person carrying out an economic activity on the basis that the transaction was exempt from VAT under EU law.

The court held that Ryanair’s intention to acquire the entire share capital in Aer Lingus and provide management services did not constitute an economic activity. The court stated that Ryanair did not “take any steps or do any act towards provision of management services” because the takeover bid was ultimately unsuccessful. The only activity which the airline had carried out was the bid itself and that did not qualify as an economic activity within the meaning of EU directives.

The court ultimately held that the necessary direct and immediate link did not exist between the legal and stockbroking costs related to the takeover bid and the output transactions related to the air passenger transport. The court concluded that in the absence of this direct and immediate link, the VAT on the costs was not deductible.

Under Irish VAT law the sale and acquisition of shares is VAT exempt and therefore there is no entitlement to deduct VAT on any expenses incurred in connection with such activities.

However, following the previous ECJ decision in Cibo, the Revenue Commissioners generally accept that where the purchase of shares can be linked to the making of taxable supplies, such as the provision of management services, a deduction in respect of costs incurred on the share acquisition may be permitted.

However, this case highlights that the mere intention to provide management services will not be sufficient in order to be entitled to a VAT refund. It is important that the management services are actually provided.

By principal Tax Disputes correspondent for Ireland, Sonya Manzor (sonya.manzor@williamfry.ie), partner at William Fry Tax Advisors.

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

The recently formed firm has taken a break from hiring EY talent to expand its transactional tax and tax technology capabilities
The AI platform, founded last year by two school friends, is partnering with challenger firms like Unity Advisory and A&M Tax to launch its own assault on the AI tax market
Not only has Aurtus received recognition from ITR in the past, but its founder was both a partner at KPMG and co-founder of Dhruva Advisors
Clients care more about considered counsel than rapid media-friendly soundbites, says Matthew Gilleard, associate director at Infinite
It was also a memorable night for Galicia, KPMG, Skadden and Pinheiro Neto, all of which scooped major awards at a gala ceremony in New York
The former Deloitte UK CEO earned a 45% raise in a year when 1,000 staff reportedly lost their jobs – and the pay gap is only getting bigger
In a seminal development for big law, the 95-year-old firm is set to cease operations after a series of high-profile partner departures
UK Chancellor John Healey extended a VAT cut, suspended tariffs, increased a bank surcharge and vowed to increase funding for HMRC
Kristine Riisberg warned that TP decisions can determine top-up tax exposure under pillar two, while global consensus over the rules remains unsettled
Both Germany’s NIS2 and the EU AI Act now determine whether a tax function can meet its obligations – and both can make management personally accountable
Gift this article