Hovedytelseslæren i norsk avgiftsrett

The treatment of transactions that consists of different supplies in Norwegian VAT law Every transactions is, as a starting point, subject to VAT in Norwegian VAT law. However, supplies can be subject to different VAT rates, excepted or exempted. The thesis debates the VAT treatment of transactions that consist of several different elements. The aim is to analyze what the appropriate criteria are for deciding, for VAT purposes, whether a transaction which comprises several elements is to be regarded as a single composite supply or as two or more distinct supplies to be assessed separately and decide the tax treatment if there is a composite supply. There are multiple ways to approach this assessment in Norwegian law ? the traditional approach, the necessary and integrated doctrine and the EU law based principal supply doctrine. In my thesis, I aim to deduce the relevant assessments under the different approaches, structuring and systematizing the relevant considerations and circumstances. The starting point under Norwegian law is that each supply must be assessed separately. It is nevertheless the case that transactions that consists of several supplies, might be considered as a composite supply, which, for the purpose of levying VAT, is to be be regarded as one composite supply, which is regarded as one supply according to the Value Added Tax Act § 3-1, cf. § 4-1. Neither the law nor the regulations set out the assessment or conditions for the assessment of whether there is one supply or several supplies. The guidelines for the assessment is therefore drawn up through practice. The Norwegian practice regarding the assessment of transactions consisting several supplies is based on EU law regarding composite supplies. At the same time, VAT law is explicitly exempt from the EEA agreement. It is therefore necessary both to examine the EU law in this area, as well as to examine the methodological significance of Norwegian law being based on EU law, even if one is outside the EEA agreement. The ECJ has established an overall assessment, deciding for VAT purposes, whether a transaction which comprises several elements is to be regarded as a single supply or as two or more distinct supplies to be assessed separately. This assessment includes both a question of whether the supplies are to be treated together as a single composite supply, or separately, as individual supplies, and how a possible composite supply is to be classified. By analyzing the overall assessment the ECJ have established in their case law, I aim to clarify the criteria used to decide whether there is a single composite supply, or two or more distinct supplies, and the tax treatment of a composite supply. Through case law analysis, I try to identify the circumstances and considerations that are relevant in this assessment. In Norwegian VAT law, the treatment of transactions consisting of several supplies, seems to be divided into two steps. The first step concerns the question of whether there is one composite supply, or two or more distinct supplies. The tax treatment is a second, and seemingly independent, step. The first step in Norwegian law consists of two different approaches, namely the traditional approach and the necessary and integrated doctrine. Both approaches are analyzed to establish clearer criteria for the assessments. Further on, I analyze the second step, which also consists of two different approaches: the traditional classification, and the principal supply doctrine. The principal supply doctrine is based on ECJs overall assessment. However, only parts of the overall assessment seem to be reflected in the principal supply doctrine as it is presented in Norwegian case law. Therefore, I aim to clarify the Norwegian doctrine and compare it to the ECJ developed assessment the doctrine is based on. At the end of the thesis, I identify that the different approaches in Norwegian law may lead to different VAT treatment in specific cases. Consequently, there is a need for a more uniform approach to this question. I end my thesis with a recommendation on how transactions that consist of several different elements should be treated in Norwegian law.

Økt kunnskap og regleverksavklaringer, som kan bidra til at avgiftspliktige gjør færre feil, og at Skatteetaten kan fokusere på bevisste regelbrudd. Vil medføre riktigere proveny fra merverdiavgift. Avklaringer oppnådd gjennom prosjektet er allerede brakt videre, og tatt i bruk i konkrete saker i Skatteetaten. Avhandlingens tema skal også presenteres på seminar med deltakere både fra Skatteetaten, og private.

Tittelen på prosjektet er «Hovedytelseslæren i norsk avgiftsrett». Søknad om prosjektstøtte har sin bakgrunn i et felles ønske fra Skatteetaten og Universitetet i Bergen v/Det juridiske fakultet om å styrke skatterett som forskningstema i norsk rettsvitenskap. Avhandlingens tema er å søke å klargjøre hovedytelseslæren i avgiftsretten (merverdiavgift) slik den er utviklet innenfor EU-retten, og hvilken plass denne har i norsk avgiftsrett, særlig med fokus på unntaket for finansielle tjenester i merverdiavgiftsloven § 3-6. FoU-utfordringer: Det må klargjøres om den EU-rettslige hovedytelseslæren kommer til anvendelse i norsk rett og i tilfelle i hvilken utstrekning. Dette må vurderes da merverdiavgift faller utenfor EØS-avtalen. Dersom hovedytelseslæren anses for å være norsk rett, må det næremere innholdet i denne læren klargjøres. Det foreligger ikke noe arbeid som går i dybden på dette. Et generelt arbeid om det nærmere innholdet i denne læren vil derfor kunne ha stor praktisk relevans, også utenfor avhandlingens tenkte fokusområde, - unntaket for finansielle tjenester i mval § 3-6. Et slikt arbeid vil være svært relevant i det praktiske arbeidet i skatteetaten. Innenfor rammene av vanlig saksbehandling, vil det imidlertid ikke være rom for å undersøke verken innholdet i læren eller omfanget den har i norsk rett. For å kunne gå i dybden på dette er det behov for dyptgående rettsvitenskapelig forskning. Avhandlingen kan bidra med avklaring av viktige spørsmål, og på den måte øke forutberegneligheten for både næringslivet og skatteetaten. Avklaring og forutberegnelighet i regelverket vil også i seg selv kunne sikre økt etterlevelse.