Sign up for tax alert emails    GTNU homepage    Tax newsroom    Email document    Print document    Download document

November 15, 2019

Sweden’s Supreme Administrative Court requests preliminary ruling from CJEU on “reverse-Skandia situation” where a head office in Denmark supplies services to its Swedish branch


A Danish bank operates in the Nordic countries through different branches, including a branch in Sweden. The head office in Denmark allocates costs to its Nordic branches for the use of an IT platform necessary for the operations carried out in their respective countries. The case was brought before the Swedish Board for Advance Tax Rulings where the branch argued that in the capacity of a branch to a head office the branch is not independent and is not itself liable for the economic risks of its activity. The branch and its head office should consequently be seen as one single taxable person. A different conclusion would be in contradiction with the principle of equal treatment since how the rules for value-added tax (VAT) groups have been implemented by European Union (EU) Member States will impact the branch’s VAT status as well as how transactions should be treated for VAT purposes.

The Board for Advance Tax Rulings ruled that the Swedish branch (not part of a VAT group) and the Danish head office (part of VAT group in Denmark) are two separate taxable persons and that the Swedish branch should account for Swedish VAT under the reverse charge mechanism. Three out of seven members of the Board had dissenting opinions and agreed with the branch’s view that the fact that the head office is part of a VAT group in another EU Member State does not imply that the branch should be considered as a separate taxable person.

Request for preliminary ruling

The case was appealed by the branch to the Swedish Supreme Administrative Court. The Branch argued that the Swedish VAT Act lacks a clear and unambiguous legal provision that deems a foreign VAT group to be a taxable person. Hence, the consequence that VAT has to be paid under the reverse charge mechanism by the branch, without support from national law goes against the principle of legality and the principle of legal certainty. The Supreme Administrative Court determined that the case should be referred to the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) for a preliminary ruling. The question referred is whether the Swedish branch should be considered as a separate taxable person, separated from its head office which is part of the Danish VAT group, when the head office supplies services and allocates the costs for these services to the Swedish branch.

The Swedish Supreme Administrative Court mentions in its press release that based on CJEU case law, a branch which is part of a VAT group is considered as a separate taxable person when acquiring services from its head office. However, the referred question has never been directly interpreted by the CJEU.

For additional information with respect to this Alert, please contact the following:

Ernst & Young AB, Indirect Tax, Stockholm




The information contained herein is general in nature and is not intended, and should not be construed, as legal, accounting or tax advice or opinion provided by Ernst & Young LLP to the reader. The reader also is cautioned that this material may not be applicable to, or suitable for, the reader's specific circumstances or needs, and may require consideration of non-tax and other tax factors if any action is to be contemplated. The reader should contact his or her Ernst & Young LLP or other tax professional prior to taking any action based upon this information. Ernst & Young LLP assumes no obligation to inform the reader of any changes in tax laws or other factors that could affect the information contained herein.


Copyright © 2024, Ernst & Young LLP.


All rights reserved. No part of this document may be reproduced, retransmitted or otherwise redistributed in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including by photocopying, facsimile transmission, recording, rekeying, or using any information storage and retrieval system, without written permission from Ernst & Young LLP.


Any U.S. tax advice contained herein was not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, by the recipient for the purpose of avoiding penalties that may be imposed under the Internal Revenue Code or applicable state or local tax law provisions.


"EY" refers to the global organisation, and may refer to one or more, of the member firms of Ernst & Young Global Limited, each of which is a separate legal entity. Ernst & Young Global Limited, a UK company limited by guarantee, does not provide services to clients.


Privacy  |  Cookies  |  BCR  |  Legal  |  Global Code of Conduct Opt out of all email from EY Global Limited.


Cookie Settings

This site uses cookies to provide you with a personalized browsing experience and allows us to understand more about you. More information on the cookies we use can be found here. By clicking 'Yes, I accept' you agree and consent to our use of cookies. More information on what these cookies are and how we use them, including how you can manage them, is outlined in our Privacy Notice. Please note that your decision to decline the use of cookies is limited to this site only, and not in relation to other EY sites or Please refer to the privacy notice/policy on these sites for more information.

Yes, I accept         Find out more