Ness Stephanie
Diplomatic Academy of Vienna (Diplomatische Akademie), University of Vienna (Universität Wien), Vienna, Austria.
Int Cybersecur Law Rev. 2024;5(3):459-490. doi: 10.1365/s43439-024-00124-2. Epub 2024 Jul 2.
The verdict in the case of (Kokott, Advocate General (2015) Opinion delivered on 16 July 2015, Case C-264/14. ECLI:EU:C:2015:498. Available via TandF Online. 10.1080/20488432.2015.1096631.) is crucial for understanding how the EU treats virtual currencies, such as Bitcoin, in terms of Value-added Tax (VAT). This case involved the Swedish citizen David Hedqist who was seeking clarity from the Swedish Tax Authority Skatteverket on exchanging money for Bitcoins. The case set a precedent exempting such services from VAT under the EU's VAT Directive (Council Directive 2006/112/EC (2006) On the common system of value added tax. OJ L347. Available via EUR-Lex. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX:32006L0112. Accessed 3 January 2024.). Specifically, Article 135(1)(e) of the EU's VAT Directive excludes those transactions from VAT that include money-related transactions, that include deals or negotiations about different kinds of money, including cash and coins that are officially legal tender, i.e., used for buying things, except for collectable items like special coins or notes that people collect but do not use as a means of payment. (Kokott, Advocate General (2015) Opinion delivered on 16 July 2015, Case C-264/14. ECLI:EU:C:2015:498. Available via TandF Online. 10.1080/20488432.2015.1096631.) clarified that cash transactions are not subject to VAT, even though they are considered services for VAT purposes. Despite this clarity, the evolving landscape of digital assets' uniqueness, including Non-Fungible Tokens (Alawadhi KM, Alshamali N (2022) NFTs Emergence in Financial Markets and their Correlation with DeFis and Cryptocurrencies. Applied Economics and Finance 9:108. 10.11114/aef.v9i1.5444. Available at CORE. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/524752899.pdf. Accessed 3 January 2024.), continues to challenge VAT frameworks across member states. Using insights from the European Commission's Working Paper 1060, this article advocates for a unified approach tailored to digital and crypto services, addressing complexities in NFT taxation to reduce uncertainty and foster market cohesion. The findings highlight the importance of legislative changes and increased cross-border collaboration, as well as provide recommendations for policymakers and stakeholders in the digital finance and platform sector (European Commission (2024) Working Paper 1060. Available at: https://ec.europa.eu/info/publications/working-paper-1060_en. Accessed 3 March 2024.). By proposing strategic harmonisation of VAT enforcement, the research helps to improve tax compliance and support long-term growth in the EU's digital market (Cappai M (2023) The role of private and public regulation in the case study of crypto-assets: The Italian move towards participatory regulation. Computer Law & Security Review 49:105831. Available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/computer-law-and-security-review/vol/49/suppl/C.; Hasa J (2021) Digitaalisten palvelujen rajat ylittävä kuluttajakauppa ja laajeneva arvonlisäveron erityisjärjestelmä. Licentiate thesis. University of Lapland, Faculty of Law. Available at: https://lauda.ulapland.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/64771/Hasa_Juho.pdf?sequence=1. Accessed 1 March 2024.).
（科科特，总法律顾问（2015年），2015年7月16日发表意见，C-264/14号案件。ECLI:EU:C:2015:498。可通过TandF Online获取。10.1080/20488432.2015.1096631。）该案件的裁决对于理解欧盟在增值税（VAT）方面如何对待比特币等虚拟货币至关重要。该案件涉及瑞典公民大卫·赫德奎斯特，他就用货币兑换比特币一事向瑞典税务机关瑞典税务局寻求明确解释。该案件开创了一个先例，根据欧盟增值税指令（理事会指令2006/112/EC（2006年）关于增值税共同制度。OJ L347。可通过EUR-Lex获取。https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX:32006L0112。2024年1月3日访问。），此类服务免征增值税。具体而言，欧盟增值税指令第135(1)(e)条将那些包括与货币相关的交易排除在增值税范围之外，这些交易包括关于不同种类货币的交易或谈判，包括法定货币现金和硬币，即用于购买物品的货币，但不包括人们收藏但不作为支付手段的特殊硬币或纸币等可收藏物品。（科科特，总法律顾问（2015年），2015年7月16日发表意见,C-264/14号案件。ECLI:EU:C:2015:498。可通过TandF Online获取。10.1080/20488432.2015.1096631。）明确现金交易不缴纳增值税，尽管就增值税目的而言它们被视为服务。尽管有了这种明确规定，但包括非同质化代币在内的数字资产独特性不断演变的格局（阿拉瓦迪·KM，阿尔沙马利·N（2022年）非同质化代币在金融市场的出现及其与去中心化金融和加密货币的相关性。《应用经济与金融》9:108。10.11114/aef.v9i1.5444。可在CORE获取。https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/524752899.pdf。2024年1月3日访问。），继续对各成员国的增值税框架构成挑战。本文借鉴欧盟委员会第1060号工作文件的见解，主张针对数字和加密服务采取统一方法，解决非同质化代币税收方面的复杂性问题，以减少不确定性并促进市场凝聚力。研究结果凸显了立法变革和加强跨境合作的重要性，并为数字金融和平台领域的政策制定者及利益相关者提供了建议（欧盟委员会（2024年）第1060号工作文件。可在：https://ec.europa.eu/info/publications/working-paper-1060_en获取。2024年3月3日访问。）。通过提议对增值税执法进行战略协调，该研究有助于提高税收合规性并支持欧盟数字市场的长期增长（卡帕伊·M（2023年）公私监管在加密资产案例研究中的作用：意大利迈向参与式监管的举措。《计算机法律与安全评论》49:105831。可在：https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/computer-law-and-security-review/vol/49/suppl/C.获取；哈萨·J（2021年）跨境消费者交易和扩大的增值税特殊制度中的数字服务。硕士论文。拉普兰大学法学院。可在：https://lauda.ulapland.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/64771/Hasa_Juho.pdf?sequence=1获取。2024年3月1日访问。）。
