VAT recovery and pension schemes
The judgment in ATP Pension Service A/S v Skatteministeriet (Case C-464/12) was delivered by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) on 13 March 2014. It was the latest in a line of cases concerning the VAT treatment of costs incurred by or in relation to pension schemes and represents good news for defined-contribution schemes. Whereas the case for exemption of management services provided to defined-benefit schemes suffered defeat in Wheels Common Investment Fund just more than a year ago, ATP marks a success for defined-contribution schemes on the same issue.
ATP Pension Service A/S provided services to pension funds in Denmark. Its main customer was PensionDanmark. PensionDanmark administers pension schemes on behalf of trade unions and employers in the public and private sectors. ATP operated a system that opened pension accounts for employees. These accounts were set up by ATP on behalf of the pension scheme members at a financial institution on the basis of information received from employers. ATP would handle payments to and from these accounts, maintain records and provide reports to the employees and employers.
ATP argued that its services should be exempt under either article 13B(d)(3) of the Sixth VAT Directive, ‘transactions, including negotiation, concerning deposit and current accounts, payments, transfers, debts, cheques and other negotiable instruments, but excluding debt collection’ (what is now article 135[d] of Directive 2006/112/EC) or article 13B(d)(6) of the Sixth VAT Directive, ‘the management of special investment funds as defined by member states’ (what is now article 135[g] of Directive 2006/112/EC). The Østre Landsret referred questions to the ECJ concerning both articles. However, of greatest interest was the question as to whether the expression ‘special investment funds’ covered pension funds of the type to which services were provided by ATP…
Click on the link below to read the rest of the DLA Piper briefing.
News from DLA Piper
News from The Lawyer
Briefings from DLA Piper
Health Alert — Appleton v Norris; Psychology Board of Australia v GA; Reben v Medical Board of Australia; and more
DLA Piper has released the 15 September 2014 issue of its Health Alert, which focuses on judgments, legislation and reports in the health sector.
What if you had to return all the revenue you received from every customer in California for the last several years?
Analysis from The Lawyer
Shearman & Sterling is making its presence felt in the City, squaring up to magic circle firms and looking to muscle in on key relationships. Private equity house Bridgepoint is one outfit that has had its head turned by the US firm.
A new breed of lawyer is smoothing the path for companies entering emerging or unstable jurisdictions