Opinion of advocate general Sharpston in the case Klinikum Dortmund.
Sharpston is of the opinion that the Court should answer the questions raised by the Bundesfinanzhof to the following effect: 
  1. The expression ‘closely related activities' in Article 13A(1)(b) of the Sixth Council Directive includes supplies of goods as well as supplies of services. 
  2. In order to qualify for exemption as an activity closely related to hospital and medical care pursuant to Article 13A(1)(b) of Directive 77/388, it is not essential for a supply to be made by the person who provides the care in question. 
  3. Supplies of goods or services which are
  • closely related to the provision of medical care in the exercise of the medical and paramedical professions within the meaning of Article 13A(1)(c) of Directive 77/388, 
  • physically and economically dissociable from the provision of such medical care and 
  • not closely related to hospital and medical care within the meaning of Article 13A(1)(b) of the same directive do not qualify for exemption pursuant to either of those two provisions. 
A-G CJ No. C-366/12

Informatiesoort: Nieuws

Rubriek: Europees belastingrecht, Omzetbelasting

H&I: Previews


Gerelateerde artikelen