Late 'reverse charge' invoices cannot revive triangular VAT scheme

Businesses using triangular supplies cannot rescue the simplification scheme with a corrected invoice years later.VMI In its 7 October 2026 judgmentVMI in case T-773/25VMI Finanzamt für Großbetriebe v F GmbH, the General Court heldVMI that invoices first carrying the "Atvirkštinis apmokestinimas" reference — required by Article 226(11a) of the VAT Directive — several years after the suppliesVMI give those supplies no legal effects of the triangular schemeVMI, so the related VAT adjustment cannot be declared for the current or a future tax periodVMI.

The case concerned an Austrian company F which, in 2011–2014, bought goods from suppliers in Sweden and Denmark and had them shipped directly to final customers in other Member States. F declared the transactions in Austria as intra-Community supplies; the original invoices carried no VAT and no information about a triangular transaction or the transfer of the VAT liabilityVMI. The tax authority treated them as "failed triangular transactions", applied the general chain-transaction rules, established an intra-Community acquisition in Austria and refused deduction of the purchase VAT. In 2015 F corrected the invoices and the 2011–2014 recapitulative statements, and entered in its March 2015 advance VAT return an adjustment equal to the VAT paid on the acquisitions. The authority disregarded that adjustment.

The Court stressed that the simplification depends on meeting every conditionVMI. The essential one is the invoice reference "atvirkštinis apmokestinimas" under Article 197(1)(c) and Article 226(11a)VMI, which tells the final customer that it must account for and pay the VATVMI. Recalling the 8 December 2022 judgment in C-247/21 Luxury Trust Automobil, the Court confirmed that the missing reference cannot be cured afterwards by relabelling the invoice as a triangular transaction with the liability transferredVMI.

Nor can an invoice first properly drawn up years after the supply trigger the scheme even from its issue (ex nunc)VMI, for four reasons. The scheme spares the intermediary registration and declaration duties in the destination stateVMI — but years later those duties may already have arisen under the general rules and cannot be undoneVMI. The factual situation may have changed, for example the final customer may no longer exist, so late application could leave the VAT unaccounted forVMI. The reference exists to inform the final customer of its liabilityVMI, and a belated entry defeats that purposeVMI. And fiscal neutrality gives no basis for starting the scheme late where an essential condition was missing from the outsetVMI — this cannot be equated with correcting wrongly stated VATVMI.

For Lithuania, triangular trade under Article 12(2)(3) of the PVM įstatymas covers supplies involving VAT payers of three Member States where goods bought by the intermediary are immediately transported to a third Member State for the final customerVMI. Under Article 80(1)(17), such an invoice must carry "Atvirkštinis apmokestinimas"VMI, and under Article 95(4) the buyer must account for and pay the VAT where Article 331(3) conditions are metVMI. The simplification is an option only after fulfilling every conditionVMI: a transaction that economically looks triangular is not enough on its ownVMI, and adding the details years later is not a formal correction conferring a right to start the schemeVMI.

Businesses must assess whether a triangular transaction actually occurred, whether the final customer accounted for the sale VAT in the destination state, and how the transaction was qualified from the very beginning — case-law conclusions apply in light of the specific facts, never automaticallyVMI. More detail is in VMI letter No RTD-158 of 12 November 2026. Legal basis: Articles 40, 41, 42, 141, 197(1)(c) and 226(11a) of Directive 2006/112/EC and the PVM įstatymasVMI.