News article

No simplified triangular trade if invoices without the statement ‘Reverse charge’ are corrected several years after delivery

An Austrian company purchases goods from companies in Sweden and Denmark using its Austrian VAT number. These goods were dispatched directly from Sweden or Denmark to other EU Member States, excluding Austria. The shipments were made directly from those suppliers to the Austrian company’s buyers, who acted under the VAT number of the destination country. The Austrian company reported these purchases in Austria as intra-Community acquisitions with both due and deductible Austrian VAT, and the sales as exempt intra-Community supplies, including in its recapitulative statement (sales listing), but without the specific code referencing simplified triangular trade.

The invoices issued by the Austrian company to its buyers did not contain the statement ‘Reverse charge’. Due to the absence of this statement, the tax authority argued that the simplified triangular trade scheme was applied incorrectly. Consequently, the safety net provision was triggered, requiring the Austrian company to pay non-deductible VAT in Austria (the Member State issuing the VAT number used for the purchase) on the intra-Community acquisition. The tax authority therefore denied the deduction of the VAT declared as due on the intra-Community acquisition.

Following this, several years after the deliveries took place, the Austrian company corrected the invoices by adding a reference to simplified triangular trade and the statement ‘Reverse charge’. It also corrected its recapitulative statements for the relevant periods with a reference to simplified triangular trade and included the VAT levied on the intra-Community acquisition as deductible VAT in its VAT return.

According to the taxable person, correcting the invoices and listing reports rectified all irregularities, thereby fulfilling all conditions for simplified triangular trade. However, the Austrian tax authority maintained that the corrected invoices do not have retroactive effect.

The court of first instance agreed with the company, allowing retroactive effect for the corrected invoices and thus the application of simplified triangular trade. The tax authority appealed this decision. The appellate court requested a preliminary ruling from the Court of Justice to determine whether the subsequent issuance of corrected invoices allows the simplification scheme for triangular trade to take effect retroactively.

The Court of Justice had previously established that the statement ‘Reverse charge’ on the invoice is a substantive condition for applying simplified triangular trade (C‑247/21, Luxury Trust Automobil, 8 December 2022).

According to the General Court of the EU, it cannot be inferred from the wording of Article 42 of the VAT Directive when the invoice containing the statement ‘Reverse charge’ must be issued. One objective of this article is to ensure that VAT on the intra-Community acquisition is levied on the final customer, for whom the subsequent supply is intended. Therefore, the subsequent issuance of an invoice containing the statement ‘Reverse charge’ for the first time cannot have retroactive effect. As long as this condition is not met, standard VAT rules apply. The objective of simplified triangular trade—simplifying administrative procedures—can no longer be achieved retroactively. Furthermore, applying the simplification scheme several years after the facts carries the risk that the final customer liable for the VAT on the acquisition may no longer exist.

Thus, the simplification scheme for triangular trade cannot be applied retroactively if invoices were initially issued without the statement ‘Reverse charge’ and only corrected several years later to include it.

Ruling of the Court

Article 42(a) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax, as amended by Council Directive 2010/45/EU of 13 July 2010, read in conjunction with Article 197(1)(c) of Directive 2006/112, as amended, must be interpreted as meaning that the fact that, several years after supplies for which invoices had already been issued without the statement ‘Reverse charge’ referred to in Article 226(11a) of that directive—which is required for the application of the derogating scheme for triangular transactions—invoices containing that statement for the first time have been issued, does not produce the legal effects of that scheme for administrative simplification for those supplies, and consequently the amount of the VAT adjustment for those supplies cannot be reported in the return for the current tax period or in a return for a future tax period.

General Court of the EU, Case T‑773/25, F., 7 October 2026