Is a transfer pricing adjustment subject to VAT?

Recently, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has issued several judgments regarding the link between transfer pricing and VAT. It would be beneficial for companies to evaluate how these rulings may affect their pricing policies and tax bases in intra-group transactions.

A previous article on transfer pricing adjustments (here) extensively covered their scope and current developments. In this article, we will examine the interaction between VAT and transfer pricing in slightly more detail.

As we wrote previously, for a long time, the prevailing view within the European Union legal framework was that transfer pricing adjustments were not automatically subject to VAT. However, this practice has begun to change, and we will therefore examine the issue in more detail, based on recent CJEU judgments on the matter.

Cases where VAT is payable on the adjustment made

Refreshing the memory of what was mentioned in the previous article, the CJEU in the case Arcomet Towercranes SRL C-726/23 recognized that a transfer pricing adjustment can be subject to VAT if it is essentially considered remuneration for a service provided.

In the case between the related parties, remuneration was provided for the actions performed by the parties in an amount corresponding to the sum necessary to place the Romanian company in an economic situation proportionate to its actual functions and risks assumed. At the same time, it was stipulated that this remuneration item was to be determined by mutual agreement between the parties, based on the application of the transactional net margin method. The Belgian company, for its management services provided to the Romanian related company, issued an invoice once a year, the amount of which depended on the profit level of the Romanian company (stipulating that the portion exceeding a certain threshold would also constitute remuneration for such services, but if it did not reach the lower threshold, the Belgian company would compensate for the “excessive” expenses).

The CJEU pointed out that the decisive factor is whether there is a direct link between the provision of the service and the payment received. Conversely, in cases where the transfer pricing adjustment is made solely for direct tax purposes, for example, to level the profit margin without a direct link to a specific supply of goods or provision of services, it may not be considered subject to VAT.

The CJEU concluded in the case that such a link existed in the specific instance and VAT was applicable to the adjustment invoice.

Cases where VAT is not payable on the adjustment made

The CJEU has delivered a judgment in the case Stellantis Portugal (C-603/24), which assessed the application of VAT to transfer pricing adjustments within a group to ensure compliance with the arm’s length principle.

According to the agreement between the manufacturing company and the distributor, the distributor was guaranteed a certain profit margin on the vehicles purchased and resold. In accordance with this agreement, the manufacturing company adjusted transfer prices, taking into account the costs incurred by the distributor, including vehicle acquisition costs, repair expenses, marketing, and administrative costs, and issued credit notes and debit notes (Transfer Pricing Adjustments). This case evaluated whether these adjustments could be considered remuneration for vehicle repair services.

The adjustments made covered not only the repair costs that the dealers had invoiced to the distributor but also the company’s operating costs as a whole. The CJEU noted that the distributor had no guarantee of receiving separate compensation for repair costs if the specified profit margin had already been reached. Therefore, the court concluded that the potential link between the repair services and the transfer pricing adjustments is only indirect. Furthermore, it did not appear from the case materials that the distributor had acted on behalf of the manufacturing companies regarding the repair services.

Thus, the CJEU concluded that a transfer pricing adjustment regarding vehicles previously sold by a group manufacturing company to a distribution company does not, in itself, constitute remuneration for the provision of services by the distributor. To qualify such a payment as remuneration for a service, a legal relationship must exist between the parties within which the distributor provides a specifically identifiable service for remuneration. Since the agreement concluded by the group companies provided only for the sale of vehicles and not for the provision of services, the CJEU recognized that such a legal relationship does not exist. The judgment emphasizes how critical the correct structuring of intra-group agreements is from a VAT perspective.

Latvian practice

In the previous article, we mentioned that the practice of the State Revenue Service (SRS) regarding the interaction between transfer pricing adjustments and VAT corresponds to the CJEU case law, as mentioned, for example, in SRS Advance Ruling No. P005-17/8.6.4/20961 of April 14, 2026, on the application of VAT to transfer pricing adjustments, in which the SRS explains that:

1. A transfer pricing adjustment affects VAT in cases where the adjustment is related to a VAT-taxable transaction, and this price adjustment can be directly linked to a previously performed, specifically identified transaction. In such a case, the price (value) of the previously performed transaction is adjusted, and the parties involved in the transaction have agreed upon it.
2. Conversely, if the price adjustment has no direct link to the initial supply, but rather the price adjustment is intended to achieve a certain profit margin, then such a price adjustment is not subject to VAT and should be treated as a payment that is outside the scope of VAT application.

Conclusion

One of the fundamental principles of VAT stipulates that for the provision of a service, there must be a direct link between an identifiable service and remuneration, based on a legal relationship between the parties.

From a VAT perspective, it is important to note that under certain circumstances, a retrospective price reduction can affect the taxable value. If it is concluded that no separate provision of services has occurred and there are no other transactions between the parties, then, from a transfer pricing perspective, the purpose of transfer pricing adjustments is most likely to adjust the price of goods/services to ensure compliance with the arm’s length principle. Transfer pricing adjustments are not made in isolation from the underlying transaction – they are intended for the adjustment of the specific transaction price between related parties. For VAT purposes, the previously determined remuneration for the supply of goods can only be adjusted if there is a direct link between the adjustment and the initial supply.

Consequently, each transfer pricing adjustment in the context of VAT must be evaluated individually, analyzing the economic substance of the transaction, the contractual obligations of the parties, and whether the adjustment essentially functions as remuneration for a VAT-taxable transaction.

Overall, the mentioned judgments confirm that the following factors are of decisive importance in determining VAT consequences:

1. the economic substance of the transaction and
2. the agreements concluded by the parties.

Therefore, corporate groups are advised to review the structure and documentation of intra-group agreements to ensure both compliance with transfer pricing requirements and correct VAT application.