ivm_2010_05_Final_volume_05_2010 17-09-10 15:23 Pagina 334
Articles
Poland/Germany
Aleksandra Bal*
Consignment and Call-Off-Stock Transactions
between Poland and Germany
EU businesses increasingly keep call-off stocks
in other Member States of the European Union.
In this article, the author gives an overview of
the VAT treatment of consignment and call-off
stocks in Poland and Germany and explains that
the optional measures aimed at simplifying the
VAT consequences of specific types of intraCommunity transactions may turn out to have
costly consequences for the parties involved in
cross-border call-off-stock and consignment
arrangements.
1. Introduction
Under call-off-stock arrangements, a supplier makes
goods available to his customer by delivering them at the
premises of the customer or by storing goods earmarked
for the customer in a warehouse operated by a third
party in the vicinity of the customer’s business premises. 1
However, the supplier retains legal ownership of the
goods until the customer actually calls for the goods, i.e.
removes them from the call-off stock. At the time of
removal, the goods are actually supplied to the customer
under civil law and the supplier issues the invoice, usually on a monthly basis. If the customer decides not to
remove the goods from the call-off stock, the remaining
goods are returned to the legal owner (the supplier) and,
from the perspective of civil law, no supply has been
made.
Call-off stocks have several advantages for the customers. They do not have to finance the purchase of
goods until and to the extent that they actually use the
goods (remove them from the call-off stock) and they
are ensured of timely delivery of the goods, which is particularly important where the goods must be transported
over a long distance (from abroad). On the other hand,
unless the supplier stores the goods for his own account
in a warehouse of a third party, the customer must have
the space to store the goods that he does not immediately
need.
Call-off stocks have become a commonplace phenomenon in many sectors, especially in the automobile industry. More and more EU manufacturers of automobile
parts are planning to maintain call-off stocks in other
Member States. Despite the common VAT system of the
European Union, the VAT treatment of call-off stocks
varies significantly from Member State to Member State.
Call-off-stock and consignment arrangements have in
common that, from the perspective of civil law, the
goods are supplied when the customer removes them
from the stock. As compared to call-off-stock arrange334
INTERNATIONAL VAT MONITOR SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2010
ments, the differences are that consignment arrangements constitute a legally defined type of supply under
civil law of specific Member States, that the goods
involved in consignment arrangements are destined to
be resold by the consignee (in a manner of speaking, the
consignee supplies the goods for the account of the consignor), and that it is less certain that the consignor will
actually supply the consignment goods to the consignee.
Consignment arrangements are typically used in the
framework of distributing new products. In order to
attract new distributors for those products, the manufacturer or importer (consignors) may send them on consignment to potential distributors (consignees), who do
not need to finance the purchase. The consignees actually purchase the products from the consignor at the
time they resell them. If the consignee cannot find a customer for the products, the consignment goods are
returned to the consignor and no supply has taken place.
This article focuses on the VAT treatment of call-off
stocks in Poland and Germany. Unless indicated otherwise, the same rules apply to consignment stocks.
2. EU Law
Under the VAT Directive,2 the transfer by taxable persons
of goods forming part of their business assets to another
Member State is deemed to constitute a supply of goods
for consideration if the movement does not take place in
the framework of a supply of the goods.3 The deemed
supply (“taxable transfer”) is made at the place where the
transport of the goods begins4 and is zero rated5 in the
Member State of departure as an intra-Community supply of goods,6 provided that the taxable person holds documentary evidence showing that the goods have physically left the territory of the Member State.7 Since, at the
*
Aleksandra Bal LLM works in the VAT department of Deloitte &
Touche GmbH in Berlin.
1. The definition of the term “call-off-stock arrangements” varies from
Member State to Member State. In specific Member States, that concept simply refers to a commercial practice and also covers “consignment arrangements” which, in other Member States, are legally defined types of supplies of
goods. In the absence of legal definitions, the use of the terms “consignment”
and “call-off stocks” may easily lead to confusion. For example, where they use
the term Konsignationslager (consignment stocks), the German tax authorities
actually refer to call-off stocks.
2. Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common
system of value added tax, OJ L 347 of 11 December 2006.
3. Art. 17(1) of the VAT Directive.
4. Art. 32 of the VAT Directive.
5. In the terminology of the VAT Directive, the zero rate is an exemption
giving the supplier the right to deduct input tax.
6. Arts. 138(1) and 169(b) of the VAT Directive.
7. Under the ECJ judgment of 27 September 2007 in Teleos PLC and others
v. Commissioners of Customs and Excise, Case C-409/04, [2007] ECR I-7797,
the supplier does not have to show that the goods have arrived in the Member
© IBFD
ivm_2010_05_Final_volume_05_2010 17-09-10 15:23 Pagina 335
Articles
time goods are transported to another Member State in
the framework of cross-border call-off-stock and consignment arrangements, the goods have not yet been supplied, the cross-border movement of the goods constitutes a taxable transfer of goods for VAT purposes.
The zero-rated deemed intra-Community supply gives
rise to a taxable intra-Community acquisition of the
goods by their legal owner in the Member State of destination of the goods, i.e. in the Member State where the
call-off stock is located.8 When the customer subsequently removes the goods from the call-off stock, the
non-resident owner of the goods makes a supply in the
Member State where the call-off stock is located. Consequently, the non-resident legal owner of the goods is
obliged to register for VAT purposes in the Member State
where the call-off stock is located, even if the supply of
the goods is subject to the reverse charge mechanism.9 In
any event, the non-resident legal owner of the goods
must account for VAT on the intra-Community acquisition of the goods in the Member State where the call-off
stock is located.
In order to reduce the administrative burdens on taxable
persons who supply goods under intra-Community calloff-stock or consignment arrangements, Member States
informally agreed, in 1993, that the transport of the
goods in the framework of call-off-stock and consignment arrangements can be considered to be carried out
at the time the customer removes the goods from the
call-off (or consignment) stock. Under that simplification, the intra-Community transport of the goods to the
call-off stock does not constitute a taxable transfer of the
goods, and the removal of the goods from the call-off
stock (the actual supply of the goods) is treated as a zerorated intra-Community supply of the goods, which is
followed by a taxed intra-Community acquisition by the
customer in his own Member State.
Not all Member States have adopted the simplification
and, if they have adopted it, Member States may restrict
its scope.10
3. VAT Treatment of Call-Off and Consignment
Stocks in Poland
The ustawa o podatku od towarow i uslug (Polish VAT
Act) defines call-off stocks as stocks of goods transported to Poland from another Member State which are
intended for use by a specific taxable person only and are
stored at his premises.11
Under the VAT Act, the VAT treatment of call-off-stock
transactions is simplified by treating the transaction as
constituting a single intra-Community transaction that
is carried out at the time the customer removes the goods
from the stock.12 Consequently, the non-resident taxable
person who delivers goods to a call-off stock in Poland
does not have to be registered there and the Polish customer must declare the VAT on the intra-Community
acquisition of the goods when removing them from the
stock. However, the simplification is limited to goods
(materials, parts) that the customer will use for the pur© IBFD
poses of his production process, and does not include
merchandise that the customer will resell in the condition in which it was supplied to him (i.e. goods delivered
under consignment arrangements).13 Secondly, the simplification does not apply where the non-resident owner
of the goods is already registered for VAT purposes in
Poland.14 Thirdly, the customer must notify the director
of the regional tax office about the establishment of the
call-off stock and he must keep records of incoming and
outgoing goods.15 Finally, if the customer has not
removed the goods from the call-off stock within 24
months of their arrival, the goods are deemed to be
removed on the first day following that period and the
VAT on the intra-Community acquisition of the goods is
due by the customer on that day.16
In respect of outbound movements of goods, Polish taxable persons may treat the transfer of the goods to the
call-off stock in another Member State and the subsequent supply to their customers in that Member State as
constituting a single intra-Community supply, provided
that the recipient of the goods must account for VAT on
the intra-Community acquisition when he removes the
goods from the call-off stock.17 Thus, the simplification
applies only to outbound cases involving Member States
that provide for a similar simplification.
4. VAT Treatment of Call-Off and Consignment
Stocks in Germany
Germany has never adopted the simplification. Neither
the Umsatzsteuergesetz (German VAT Act, UStG), nor the
Umsatzsteuerrichtlinien (administrative guidelines) give
further guidance on how call-off-stock transactions
must be treated or how those transactions are defined,
which means that those transactions must be treated in
accordance with the legal rules described in 2. Consequently, in line with the provisions of the VAT Directive,
transfers of goods from Germany to another Member
State in the framework of call-off-stock arrangements
are treated as deemed supplies of goods for consideration.18 The transfer (deemed supply) is zero-rated as an
intra-Community supply,19 provided that the supplier
State of destination. For the purposes of zero rating the supply, it is sufficient
that the supplier shows that the goods have left the territory of the Member
State of departure.
8. Art. 2(1b) of the VAT Directive.
9. Under Art. 194 of the VAT Directive, Member States may provide that
taxable supplies of goods or services made by taxable persons who are not
established in the Member State in which the VAT is due are subject to the
reverse charge mechanism. Under the reverse charge mechanism, the supplier
of goods or services does not charge the VAT due to his customer. Instead, the
customer must account for VAT on the value of the received goods or services.
10. For example, Member States may limit the simplification to either consignment arrangements or call-off stocks, or they may limit the period during
which the simplification can be applied, see 3. (Poland).
11. Art. 2(27c) of the Polish VAT Act.
12. Art. 12a(1) of the Polish VAT Act.
13. Art. 12a(1)(2) of the Polish VAT Act.
14. Art. 12a(1)(1) of the Polish VAT Act.
15. Art. 12a(3) of the Polish VAT Act.
16. Art. 12a(4) of the Polish VAT Act.
17. Art. 20a of the Polish VAT Act.
18. § 3(1a) UStG.
19. § 4(1b) UStG.
INTERNATIONAL VAT MONITOR SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2010
335
ivm_2010_05_Final_volume_05_2010 17-09-10 15:23 Pagina 336
Articles
mentions on the accompanying pro forma invoice the
VAT identification number designated to him in the
Member State of destination20 and holds documentary
evidence that the goods have been removed from German territory.21
Taxable persons established in another Member State
transferring goods from that Member State to a call-off
stock in Germany effect a taxable intra-Community
acquisition of the goods at the time the transport is carried out.22 The subsequent removal of the goods from
the call-off stock constitutes a domestic, standard-rated
supply of goods.
However, the circular of the Oberfinanzdirektion (Superior Tax Directorate) Frankfurt of 17 March 201023 and
the judgment of the Bundesfinanzhof (Federal Finance
Court) of 30 July 200824 shed further light on the issue.
4.1. Position of the Oberfinanzdirektion Frankfurt
By its circular of 17 March 2010, the Oberfinanzdirektion
Frankfurt presented the views of the tax authorities of
the Länder (states that form part of the Federal Republic
of Germany) and the federal Ministry of Finance on the
VAT treatment of call-off stocks. The authorities point
out that the treatment of call-off-stock transactions
under the provisions of the Umsatzsteuergesetz is fully in
line with the provisions of the VAT Directive and that,
under EU law, Germany is not required to provide for
any simplification in this respect. However, the authorities recognize that problems may arise where call-offstock arrangements involve taxable persons established
in Member States that apply simplification measures.
Although they take the position that the problems
should be resolved at EU level, the authorities accept
that, until the European Commission takes steps to harmonize the VAT treatment of call-off-stock transactions,
an exception to the legal provisions may be made in
individual cases enabling German suppliers who transfer goods to a call-off stock in another Member State to
treat the transfer of the goods and their subsequent supply to the non-resident customer as a single intra-Community supply.
4.2. Position of the Bundesfinanzhof
4.2.1. Facts
The German company HS had ordered mobile telephones from a company established in the United Kingdom. The supply was made under the condition “ship to
hold”. Under that condition, the UK company first delivered the goods to the affiliated company D-Mobilfunk
GmbH in Germany, which had undertaken to deliver the
goods to HS after HS had settled the UK company’s
account. Prior to paying the UK company’s invoice, HS
was allowed to check the quality and general condition
of the ordered telephones at D-Mobilfunk’s premises.
Since HS could not pay for the whole consignment at
once, the telephones were delivered in two batches. After
it had paid the first instalment, HS collected the first
batch at D-Mobilfunk’s premises. A week later, HS paid
336
INTERNATIONAL VAT MONITOR SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2010
the second instalment and collected the second batch of
telephones.
Some time later, HS ordered another consignment of
mobile telephones from the UK company to be supplied
and delivered under the same terms and, again, the UK
company initially delivered the goods to D-Mobilfunk.
However, this time, HS was unable to settle the account.
The UK company found another customer in Germany
who paid for the goods and collected them from the
premises of D-Mobilfunk.
The UK company had treated the supply of the mobile
phones to HS as a zero-rated intra-Community supply
of goods. However, according to the German tax authorities and the Finanzgericht (Finance Court) Lower Saxony,25 the right to dispose of the goods had passed to the
customer on removal of the mobile telephones from the
warehouse of D-Mobilfunk, which meant that the UK
company had made a standard-rated supply in Germany.
Under German case law at that time, the place of the supply of goods dispatched by the supplier was only deemed
to be made at the place where the transport of the goods
began (in the United Kingdom) if the supplier had taken
all necessary steps to ensure that the recipient could
actually take possession of the goods. Moreover, the correct name of the recipient had to be mentioned in the
accompanying transport documents.26 In this case, the
UK company had mentioned D-Mobilfunk in the transport documents as the recipient of the goods. Since, in
the case under consideration, the mobile telephones
could only be delivered to HS after the UK company
had instructed D-Mobilfunk to that effect and, since
D-Mobilfunk was mentioned as the recipient of the
goods in the transport documents, the supply was not
made at the place where the transport of the telephones
began, i.e. in the United Kingdom.
20. If the goods are transported to a consignment or call-off stock in
another Member State, the entrepreneur to whose business assets the goods
belong is also the acquirer of the goods. In order to zero rate the deemed intraCommunity supply, the owner of the goods must be registered in the Member
State of destination of the goods and have a VAT identification number there.
21. § 17a of the Umsatzsteuerdurchführungsverordnung (VAT implementing
regulations) contains a detailed list of proof which the entrepreneur must
have in support of his claim that goods have been transported to a destination
elsewhere in the European Union. The proof consists of two parts. The first
part is the so-called Belegnachweis (documentary evidence), which means that
the supplier must hold a valid commercial document (bill of consignment,
delivery note) showing that the destination of the goods is outside Germany.
The second part is the so-called Buchnachweis (bookkeeping requirements),
which covers the manner in which the transaction is entered into the taxable
person’s business records.
22. § 1a(2) UStG.
23. OFD Frankfurt am Main, Verfügung betreffs Warenlieferungen in und aus
Konsignationslager of 17 March 2010, No. S-7100 aA – 4 – St 110.
24. Judgment of the Bundesfinanzhof of 30 July 2008, XI R 67/07, BStBl. II
2009, 552.
25. Judgment of the Finanzgericht Lower Saxony of 3 May 2007, 5 K 232/02,
DStRE 2008, 1274.
26. Judgment of the Bundesfinanzhof of 10 November 1966, V 73/64,
BFHE 87, 162.
© IBFD
ivm_2010_05_Final_volume_05_2010 17-09-10 15:23 Pagina 337
Articles
4.2.2. Decision
5. Examples
The Bundesfinanzhof agreed with the arguments presented by the UK company that the transport of the
mobile telephones and their subsequent supply to HS
constituted a zero-rated intra-Community supply,
thereby deviating from its previous judgments under
which the correct name of the recipient must be mentioned in the transport documents. The Bundesfinanzhof
held that, where goods are not directly delivered to the
final customer in another Member State but, at the time
transport of the goods begins, the identity of the final
customer can easily be established on the basis of the
documents relating to the underlying transaction, the
whole transaction is to be regarded as a regular intraCommunity supply between the supplier and the final
customer.
The following scenarios show the problems that may
arise as a result of the fact that different rules apply to
call-off and consignment stock arrangements in Poland
and Germany, and the possible effects of the judgment of
the Bundesfinanzhof of 30 July 2008 and of the circular of
the Oberfinanzdirektion Frankfurt of 17 March 2010.
4.2.3. Consequences for call-off stocks
Although the judgment of the Bundesfinanzhof did not
relate to a call-off-stock arrangement, many legal scholars take the view that the judgment also applies to the
transport of goods under call-off-stock arrangements. 27
Where, at the time the goods are transported to a call-off
stock in another Member State, there is already an agreement for the supply of the goods, that view is obviously
correct. However, even if, at that time, there is not a full
contract for the supply of the goods, the situation to
which the Bundesfinanzhof’s decision relates strongly
resembles typical call-off-stock arrangements. In both
situations, ownership of the goods actually passes to the
customer upon removal of the goods from the place
where the goods are initially stored and, at the time the
transport of the goods begins, the only element that is
missing for treating the arrangement as a “supply of
goods” is that it is not known precisely when the customer will collect (remove) them, i.e. when the supply
will be made. Although the delivery of goods to a call-off
stock is not based on a formal sales contract, the supplier
has the intention to supply the goods to a particular customer and, in the normal course of events, that supply
will actually take place. Moreover, call-off-stock arrangements normally contain a maximum number of goods
that can be stored under those arrangements. Thus, the
customer does not need to conclude a separate sales contract for each and every individual removal. The call-offstock arrangements can be seen as a framework sales
contract; the only missing element, i.e. the time of transfer of ownership of the goods, is unilaterally determined
by the customer. Under the assumption that the judgment of the Bundesfinanzhof also applies to call-off
stocks held at the customer’s premises in another Member State, transport of the goods to the call-off stock does
not have to be treated as constituting a deemed intraCommunity supply (taxable transfer) of the goods. In
such a case, it is clear at the time the transport begins, or
it can be established with great probability, who will be
the final recipient of the goods in the ordinary course of
business.
© IBFD
5.1. Call-off and consignment stocks in Germany
5.1.1. Call-off stocks
A company (company P) established in Poland manufactures parts for agricultural machines and maintains
a call-off stock at the premises of its German customer
(company G). Under the contract between companies P
and G, ownership of the parts passes to company G when
that company removes the parts from the call-off stock.
Since the parts are destined to be used by company G for
the purposes of its production process, company P will
treat the transaction, in accordance with the provisions
of the Polish VAT Act, as a zero-rated intra-Community
supply of goods, in the expectation that company G will
account for VAT on the intra-Community acquisition of
the goods when it removes them from the call-off stock.
Company P may not be aware that the German legal
rules differ quite significantly from the Polish rules and,
consequently, company P may not apply for registration
in Germany.
However, under the German VAT Act, company P is considered to have transferred the goods to Poland and must
account for German VAT on the intra-Community
acquisition there. When G removes the parts from the
call-off stock, company P is considered to have made a
supply of goods that is subject to German VAT. Since that
supply is not subject to the reverse charge mechanism,
company P must charge the German VAT on the invoice
addressed to company G. Also on that ground, company
P must be registered in Germany and remit VAT to the
German authorities. If it is unaware of its administrative
obligations in Germany (the circular of the Oberfinanzdirektion Frankfurt of 17 March 2010 does not
apply to transfers of goods from another Member State
to Germany), company P may be assessed for unpaid
German VAT, which, if company P is unable to recharge
that VAT to company G, will severely damage its financial position. Even if company P is able to recharge the
German VAT to company G, the possible accusation of
tax fraud may adversely affect its reputation.
Under the assumption that the judgment of the Bundesfinanzhof of 30 July 2008 applies to call-off-stock arrangements, the German rules are identical to the Polish rules,
i.e. company P makes a zero-rated intra-Community
supply, which is followed by an intra-Community acquisition of the goods by company G, at the time the latter
27. See A. Köster-Böckenförde, “BFH: Ort der Lieferung bei innergemeinschaftlicher Versendung”, BB 2009, p. 650; K-H. Böttner, “Konsignationslager
auf dem Prüfstand”, DStR 2009, pp. 624-626.
INTERNATIONAL VAT MONITOR SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2010
337
ivm_2010_05_Final_volume_05_2010 17-09-10 15:23 Pagina 338
Articles
company removes the parts from the call-off stock.
When they are transported to the call-off stock in Germany, the goods are clearly destined to be supplied to
company G. Therefore, company P is not required to register for VAT purposes in Germany.
5.1.2. Consignment stock
Where company P manufactures agricultural machines
and sends the goods on consignment to the premises of
distributing company G, under the condition that the
goods will be supplied to company G if and when that
company resells the goods to a third party (removes the
machines from the consignment stock), company P is
considered, from the perspective of the German VAT
Act, to have transferred the machines to Germany, and
must be registered there and account for German VAT
on the intra-Community acquisition of the machines. In
respect of the subsequent supply of the machines to
company G, company P must charge German VAT on
the invoice.
Under the assumption that the judgment of the Bundesfinanzhof of 30 July 2008 also applies to consignment
arrangements, the German authorities will refuse to register company P. Company P will not have to account for
VAT on the intra-Community acquisition of the consignment goods in Germany and must not charge VAT
on the subsequent supply of the machines to company G.
If company P were to have charged German VAT to company G on the subsequent supply of the machines, that
charge would have been unlawful and the VAT could not
have been deducted by company G because, under the
judgment of the Bundesfinanzhof, the supply between
companies P and G is a zero-rated intra-Community
supply of goods. In this case, company G must account
for German VAT on the intra-Community acquisition of
the goods at the time it resells the goods (removes them
from the consignment stock).
5.2. Call-off and consignment stocks in Poland
5.2.1. Call-off stock
In the reverse situation, in which company G manufactures parts for agricultural machines and maintains
a call-off stock at the premises of company P, which uses
the parts for the purposes of its production process,
company G is considered, from the perspective of the
German VAT Act, to have transferred the parts to Poland
and must account for VAT there on the intra-Community acquisition of the parts. However, the Polish authorities will refuse to register company G because, under the
Polish VAT Act, the entire transaction is a zero-rated
intra-Community supply of goods and company P must
account for VAT on the intra-Community acquisition of
the parts when it removes them from the call-off stock.28
Since it does not have a Polish VAT identification number, which is required in order to zero rate the deemed
intra-Community supply in Germany, company G must
account for German VAT at the rate of 19% on the transfer of the parts to company P’s call-off stock. However,
company P will refuse to pay the German VAT charged
338
INTERNATIONAL VAT MONITOR SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2010
to it because, under Polish law, it must account for Polish
VAT on the intra-Community acquisition of the parts
when it removes them from the call-off stock. Thus,
company G is stuck with an additional cost of 19% of the
value of the goods transferred to Poland.
However, applying the judgment of the Bundesfinanzhof
of 30 July 2008, the German rules are identical to the Polish rules, i.e. company G makes a zero-rated intra-Community supply, which is followed by an intra-Community acquisition of the goods by company P, at the time
the latter company removes the parts from the call-off
stock. When they are transported to Poland, the goods
are clearly destined to be supplied to company P. Therefore, company G is not required to register for VAT purposes in Poland.
Company G can achieve the same result by requesting
the tax authorities to treat the transfer of the parts to the
call-off stock of company P and the subsequent supply
of the parts to company P as a single intra-Community
supply based on the circular of the Oberfinanzdirektion
Frankfurt of 17 March 2010. However, as the decision is
left to the discretion of the tax authorities, it is not certain that they will be willing to depart from the statutory
rules.
5.2.2. Consignment stock
Where company G manufactures agricultural machines
and sends the goods on consignment to the premises of
distributing company P, under the condition that the
goods will be supplied to company P if and when that
company resells the goods to a third party (removes the
machines from the consignment stock), company G is
considered to have transferred the machines to Poland
and must be registered there and account for Polish VAT
on the intra-Community acquisition of the machines. In
respect of the subsequent supply of the machines to
company P, company G must charge Polish VAT on the
invoice addressed to company P. The circular of the
Oberfinanzdirektion Frankfurt of 17 March 2010 does
not apply because, under Polish law, the simplification
measures do not apply to consignment stocks.
However, under the assumption that the judgment of the
Bundesfinanzhof of 30 July 2008 also applies to consignment arrangements, the sole VAT consequence of the
transfer of the machines to company’s P consignment
stock is that company G makes a zero-rated intra-Community supply of the machines when company P resells
them (removes them from the consignment stock). By
contrast, under the Polish VAT Act, company G is considered to have transferred the machines to Poland and
must account for Polish VAT on the intra-Community
acquisition there. When company P removes the parts
from the call-off stock, company G is considered to have
made a supply of goods that is subject to Polish VAT.
Since that supply is not subject to the reverse charge
mechanism, company G must charge the Polish VAT on
28. It is assumed that all conditions for the application of the simplification
© IBFD
ivm_2010_05_Final_volume_05_2010 17-09-10 15:23 Pagina 339
Articles
the invoice addressed to company P. Also on that ground,
company G must be registered in Poland. If it is unaware
of its administrative obligations in Poland, company G
may be assessed for unpaid Polish VAT, which, if company G is unable to recharge that VAT to company P,
6. Conclusion
The circumstance that the simplification measures
applicable to call-off-stock and consignment
arrangements are optional creates significant problems
for taxable persons maintaining such stocks in another
Member State, in particular where, in the Member
State of origin of the goods, the simplification
measures apply, whereas they do not apply or are
applied to a limited extent in the Member State where
the call-off and consignment stocks are maintained, or
vice versa. The consequences of the lack of
harmonization, in the form of non-deductible input
tax, non-rechargeable output tax, mismatches in
reporting intra-Community transactions, interest
charges on VAT assessments, administrative penalties
for non-compliance with administrative obligations or
even criminal proceedings, have been illustrated on
the basis of call-off-stock and consignment
transactions between Germany and Poland. What was
meant as a measure aimed at simplifying the VAT
could severely damage its financial position. Even if
company G is able to recharge the Polish VAT to company P, the possible accusation of tax fraud may
adversely affect its reputation.
consequences of specific types of intra-Community
transactions may turn out to have costly consequences
for the parties involved in cross-border call-off-stock
and consignment arrangements.
The problem of the different VAT treatment of calloff-stock and consignment arrangements within the
European Union should be dealt with at EU level. The
aim of the common VAT system can only be achieved
if the same rules apply in all Member States. However,
until the EU legislator takes steps to address the
problem, solutions can only be found at the national
level of the Member States concerned. In Germany, the
judgment of the Bundesfinanzhof of 30 July 2008 and
the circular of the Oberfinanzdirektion Frankfurt of 17
March 2010 may provide a solution to the problems
that may arise from the fact that the German
authorities have not adopted the simplification
measures for call-off-stock and consignment
arrangements.
COURSES
Sharpen your understanding of tax treaties at your
own convenience
With more than 3,000 tax treaties worldwide, how do you identify the risks and opportunities they present?
ITA Online – Tax Treaty Series now also available with Chinese audio
ITA Online is an interactive online training solution
developed by the International Tax Academy in
collaboration with international tax experts.
Develop a comprehensive understanding of tax
treaties in seven courses with the following
benefits:
•
•
•
•
Accessible
Flexible
Stimulating
Result oriented
“The ITA Online program is a major advancement
in efficient and effective learning about tax.
The modules cover the topics concisely,
comprehensively and with clear perspective,
as well as offering easy access and clear
application to today’s issues.” Patrick Ellingsworth,
Chair of the BIAC-OECD Tax Committee and
recently retired as Executive Vice President-Tax
for Royal Dutch Shell plc
Register for a free trial lesson. Visit www.ibfd.org/ITA_Online or contact us directly:
Telephone: +31-20-554 0160 – Fax: +31-20-620 8626 – Email: [email protected]
IBFD, Your Portal to Cross-Border Tax Expertise
© IBFD
ITAOL/05/H
INTERNATIONAL VAT MONITOR SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2010
339