Provisional text

JUDGMENT OF THE GENERAL COURT (Fifth Chamber, sitting with five Judges)

8 July 2026 (*)

( Reference for a preliminary ruling – Taxation – Common system of VAT – Tax representative appointed as the person liable for payment of VAT – Article 204 of Directive 2006/112/EC – Joint and several liability – Article 205 of Directive 2006/112 – National legislation appointing the tax representative as liable for payment of VAT and providing for his or her joint and several liability – Proportionality )

In Case T‑356/25, [Rapera], (i)

REQUEST for a preliminary ruling under Article 267 TFEU from the Dioikitiko Protodikeio Thessalonikis (Administrative Court of First Instance, Thessaloniki, Greece), made by decision of 6 May 2025, received at the Court on 8 May 2025, in the proceedings

AY

v

Anexartiti Archi Dimosion Esodon,

THE GENERAL COURT (Fifth Chamber, sitting with five Judges),

composed of S. Papasavvas, President, M. Sampol Pucurull (Rapporteur), T. Pynnä, J. Laitenberger and M. Stancu, Judges,

Advocate General: J. Martín y Pérez de Nanclares,

Registrar: S. Spyropoulos, Administrator,

having regard to the transmission of the request for a preliminary ruling to the General Court by the Court of Justice on 3 June 2025, pursuant to the third paragraph of Article 50b of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union,

having regard to the fact that the case concerns the area referred to in point (a) of the first paragraph of Article 50b of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union and the fact that there is no independent question relating to interpretation within the meaning of the second paragraph of Article 50b of that statute,

having regard to the written part of the procedure,

further to the hearing on 25 February 2026,

after considering the observations submitted on behalf of:

–        AY, by D. Finokaliotis and A. Finokalioti, dikigoroi,

–        the Greek Government, by E.‑E. Krompa, I. Kotsoni and M. Tassopoulou, acting as Agents,

–        the European Commission, by N. Athanasiadou and P. Carlin, acting as Agents,

having decided, after hearing the Advocate General, to proceed to judgment without an Opinion,

gives the following

Judgment

1        This request for a preliminary ruling concerns the interpretation of Articles 204 and 205 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1), as amended by Council Directive (EU) 2019/1995 of 21 November 2019 (OJ 2019 L 310, p. 1) (‘the VAT Directive’), and the principle of proportionality.

2        The request has been made in proceedings between AY, a customs agent resident in Greece, and the Anexartiti Archi Dimosion Esodon (Independent Revenue Authority, Greece; ‘the AADE’) concerning precautionary measures taken against AY in respect of the payment of value added tax (VAT) due in that Member State by O, a company whose registered office is in Italy.

 Legal framework

 European Union law

3        Article 204 of the VAT Directive provides:

‘1.      Where, pursuant to Articles 193 to 197 and Articles 199 and 200, the person liable for payment of VAT is a taxable person who is not established in the Member State in which the VAT is due, Member States may allow that person to appoint a tax representative as the person liable for payment of the VAT.

Furthermore, where the taxable transaction is carried out by a taxable person who is not established in the Member State in which the VAT is due and no legal instrument exists, with the country in which that taxable person is established or has his seat, relating to mutual assistance similar in scope to that provided for in Directive 76/308/EEC and Regulation (EC) No 1798/2003, Member States may take measures to provide that the person liable for payment of VAT is to be a tax representative appointed by the non-established taxable person.

However, Member States may not apply the option referred to in the second subparagraph to a taxable person within the meaning of point (1) of Article 358a who has opted for the special scheme for services supplied by taxable persons not established within the Community.

2.      The option under the first subparagraph of paragraph 1 shall be subject to the conditions and procedures laid down by each Member State.’

4        Article 205 of the VAT Directive provides:

‘In the situations referred to in Articles 193 to 200 and Articles 202, 203 and 204, Member States may provide that a person other than the person liable for payment of VAT is to be held jointly and severally liable for payment of VAT.’

5        Article 213(1) of the VAT Directive is worded as follows:

‘Every taxable person shall state when his activity as a taxable person commences, changes or ceases.

…’

6        Article 214(1) of the VAT Directive provides:

‘Member States shall take the measures necessary to ensure that the following persons are identified by means of an individual number:

(a)      every taxable person … who within their respective territory carries out supplies of goods or services in respect of which VAT is deductible …;

(b)      every taxable person, or non-taxable legal person, who makes intra-Community acquisitions of goods subject to VAT …;

…’

 Greek law

7        Nomos 2859/2000 – Kyrosi Kodika Forou Prostithemenis Axias (Law 2859/2000 on the VAT Code) (FEK A’ 248), in the version in force at the material time (‘the VAT Code’), contained Article 35, entitled ‘Persons liable for payment of the tax’, which provided, in paragraph 1 thereof:

‘In respect of the supply of goods, the intra-Community acquisition of goods and the provision of services, the persons liable for payment of the tax shall be:

(a)      taxable persons established in the territory of the country, in respect of activities carried out by those persons and whose place of taxation is within the territory of the country …;

(b)      taxable persons established in the territory of another Member State, in respect of activities carried out by those persons and whose place of taxation is within the territory of the country, with the exception of the activities referred to in points (e), (f) and (h) and subject to a tax representative not having been appointed in accordance with Article 36(4)(e);

(c)      the tax representative of the taxable person established outside Greece, in respect of activities performed by them and whose place of taxation is within the territory of the country, with the exception of the activities referred to in points (e), (f) and (h);

(d)      …

(e)      provided that he or she is a taxable person, the recipient of the goods, in respect of the following transactions …;

(f)      provided that he or she is a taxable person or a non-taxable legal person, the recipient of the services …;

(g)      the recipient of goods and services established in the territory of the country, concerning the activities in respect of which the person liable for payment of the tax is in principle the tax representative in accordance with the situation in point (c) and in respect of which he or she has not been appointed a tax representative in accordance with Article 36(4)(d);

(h)      in any other situation, the recipient of the goods and services established in the territory of the country …’

8        Article 36 of the VAT Code, entitled ‘Obligations of taxable persons’, provided, in paragraphs 4(d) and (e), and 7(d) thereof:

‘4.      The taxable person shall also be required: …

(d)      to appoint a tax representative before any taxable transaction is carried out within the territory of the country, where it concerns a taxable person who is not permanently established in the territory of the country or in the territory of another Member State and is himself or herself liable for payment of the tax in accordance with the provisions of Article 35. The appointment of the tax representative shall be made by sending a copy of the relevant power of attorney to the head of the tax office responsible for the income tax of the tax representative. That copy must be signed by the Greek consular authority of the place where the taxable person is established or by the authority designated for the signature in accordance with the Hague Convention of 5 October 1961.

(e)      to appoint a tax representative, in addition, in accordance with the provisions of point (d) of this paragraph, in respect of taxable persons who are established in another Member State of the European Union and who have no establishment in Greece. In that situation, the tax representative is not required to keep accounts or to issue accounting documents concerning the transactions carried out by his or her principal.

…

7.      The following persons shall also be subject, where applicable, to the obligations laid down in this Article:

…

(d)      the tax representative, where he or she is classified as the person liable for payment of the tax in accordance with the provisions of Article 35.’

9        Article 55 of the VAT Code, entitled ‘Joint and several liability for the payment of the tax’, provided:

‘The following persons shall be jointly and severally liable, together with the person liable, for the payment of the tax due:

(a)      The persons referred to in Article 36(7), and …

 …

(d)      The non-taxable person, in the event of a supply of goods or services in respect of which the taxable person established outside the country or his or her tax representative shall be considered to be the person liable for payment of the tax, in accordance with the provisions of Article 35.’

10      Article 8 of Nomos 5104/2024 – Kodikas forologikis diadikasias … (Law 5104/2024 on the Code of Tax Procedure …) (FEK A’ 58/19.4.2024; ‘the Code of Tax Procedure’), entitled ‘Tax agent and tax representative’, provides:

‘1.      A taxpayer who is resident for tax purposes abroad may appoint a natural or legal person, resident for tax purposes in Greece, as a tax agent for the purpose of fulfilling the formal obligations flowing from the code and as the recipient of any correspondence concerning the taxpayer.

2.      As regards specifically the obligations relating to value added tax (VAT) and the taxation of insurance premiums, they are subject to Article 36(4)(d) of the VAT Code (Law 2859/2000, FEK A’ 248), which governs the appointment of a tax representative.

3.      The person appointed as a tax agent shall not be responsible for fulfilling or failing to fulfil the tax obligations of the taxpayer.’

 The dispute in the main proceedings and the questions referred for a preliminary ruling

11      AY operates as a customs agent and is registered in Greece as the tax representative of O, a company whose registered office is in Italy. On the basis of a special power of attorney of 2022 lodged at the registry of the competent tax authority, AY was appointed as the ‘tax agent’ of O in Greece and is responsible for the ‘tax representation of the company’ before the customs and tax authorities, the ‘filing of periodic VAT declarations’, the ‘payment by and on behalf of the company of the amounts fixed by the customs and tax authorities in the name of the company’, and ‘the completion of customs formalities of any kind connected with the customs clearance of cargoes in the name of the company through the customs offices of the country, by signing the necessary documents’.

12      O holds an Italian VAT identification number and a Greek VAT identification number. Its main business activity consists in the marketing of cellulose, a raw material intended for the production of toilet paper. To that end, it stores goods from Finland in various storage facilities located in the territory of Greece.

13      In 2023, the AADE carried out an inspection in respect of the tax years 2020 to 2022. That inspection concerned, first, the intra-Community supplies made by O under its Greek VAT identification number to customers established in Bulgaria and Italy and, secondly, intra-Community supplies carried out under its Italian VAT identification number to customers established in Greece.

14      Following that inspection, the AADE found that O’s Greek business had failed to pay VAT totalling EUR 3 344 061.47.

15      In those circumstances, the AADE adopted, against O and against AY, as the tax representative of that company, a decision imposing immediate and urgent protective measures in order to safeguard the public interest, consisting, inter alia, in the freezing of part of the deposits which they held in credit institutions in Greece.

16      AY brought an action for annulment of that decision before the Dioikitiko Protodikeio Thessalonikis (Administrative Court of First Instance, Thessaloniki, Greece), which is the referring court.

17      In support of her action, AY disputes her registration as tax representative of O and her incurring joint and several liability in respect of that company’s tax debts. AY claims, in particular, that she merely submitted the VAT returns relating to the transactions carried out by O under its Greek VAT identification number and paid the corresponding tax, but that she did not keep accounting records or conclude contracts in respect of that company, that she was not aware of the transactions carried out by O and that she was not responsible for the transportation of the goods concerned or the payment of the suppliers.

18      The AADE submits, for its part, that AY, in her capacity as the tax representative of O, was jointly and severally liable for the fulfilment of that company’s VAT obligations, both under Article 35(1)(c) of the VAT Code, relating to the status of the tax representatives of taxable persons established outside Greece as liable for payment of the tax, and Article 55 of that code, relating to persons jointly and severally liable, together with the person liable, for payment of the tax, and that the protective measures were therefore correctly imposed on her.

19      In that context, the referring court is uncertain as to whether, in the light of the case-law of the Court of Justice, in particular the judgments of 20 May 2021, ALTI (C‑4/20, EU:C:2021:397), and of 12 May 2022, U.I. (Indirect customs representative) (C‑714/20, EU:C:2022:374), the provisions of the VAT Directive, and in particular Article 205 thereof, must be interpreted as providing for joint and several liability for the payment of the VAT due in respect of intra-Community acquisitions of goods to be established against a person who merely submits the corresponding VAT returns and pays the tax due without keeping accounts or issuing accounting documents relating to the transactions carried out by his or her principal.

20      In addition, the referring court is uncertain as to the conditions under which the tax representative of a taxable person for VAT purposes established in another Member State may be regarded as liable for payment of the VAT within the meaning of Article 204 of the VAT Directive, in particular where neither the tax administration nor the competent court is empowered to determine whether that representative is actually involved in the economic activity of the taxable person that he or she represents.

21       Lastly, the referring court considers that it is necessary, in order to assess whether the national provisions applied by the AADE satisfy the requirements of clarity and precision and comply with the principle of legal certainty, to determine whether Article 204(1) and Article 205 of the VAT Directive must be interpreted as meaning that a person may be held liable for the payment of VAT simultaneously under those two provisions.

22      In those circumstances, the Dioikitiko Protodikeio Thessalonikis (Administrative Court of First Instance, Thessaloniki) decided to stay the proceedings and to refer the following questions to the Court of Justice for a preliminary ruling:

‘(1)      Must Article 205 of [the VAT Directive] and the principle of proportionality be interpreted as precluding a provision of national law, such as Article 55(d) of [the VAT Code], under which a person who (irrespective of the term used to describe that person under national law, namely a tax ‘representative’ [antiprosopos in Greek] or ‘agent’ [ekprosopos in Greek]) (is not required to or) does not keep records or compile information on transactions carried out by its principal, a taxable person established in another Member State, is jointly and severally liable for payment of VAT, but merely submits the corresponding VAT returns, where that national provision does not allow the tax authority or, by extension, the competent court to examine: (i) whether that person is involved in the economic activity of the taxable person, (ii) whether that person knew or should have known that the tax corresponding to that transaction or to a previous or subsequent transaction would go unpaid, and (iii) whether that person acted in good faith and did everything reasonably within its power?

(2)      Under Article 204 of [the VAT Directive], can the tax representative of a taxable person subject to VAT established in another Member State be held liable as a debtor if the tax representative is not involved in the taxable person’s activity? Is that provision contrary to a national provision such as Article 35(1)(c) of [the VAT Code], under which a tax representative is automatically considered to be liable, without the tax authority or, by extension, the competent court being empowered to examine whether that person is involved in the economic activity of the taxable person?

(3)      Does the answer to the preceding questions differ depending on whether the transaction for which VAT is due is carried out under the [tax identification number] of the Member State in which the taxable person is established or whether it is carried out under the [tax identification number] of the Member State in which the tax is due?

(4)      Are Articles 204(1) and 205 of [the VAT Directive] to be interpreted as meaning that a person may be held liable under both provisions simultaneously, that is to say, as a debtor under Article 204(1) and as jointly and severally liable under Article 205?’

 Consideration of the questions referred

 Preliminary observations

23      As a preliminary point, it should be noted that the questions referred by the referring court are based on different premisses.

24      The first question is based on the premiss that AY is not liable for payment of VAT within the meaning of the first subparagraph of Article 204(1) of the VAT Directive. By contrast, the second and fourth questions are based on the premiss that AY is classified as liable for payment of VAT within the meaning of that provision. As for the third question, the referring court contemplates the two situations in turn.

25      It is apparent from the request for a preliminary ruling and the discussion at the hearing that AY claims to be neither the tax representative of O nor jointly and severally liable for the debts of O.

26      In addition, it should be recalled that, under the division of jurisdiction between the EU judicature and the national courts, it is in principle for the national court to determine whether the factual conditions triggering the application of an EU rule are fulfilled. The EU judicature, hearing a reference for a preliminary ruling, may, however, provide clarification designed to guide the national court in its interpretation (see, to that effect, judgment of 26 June 2025, Makeleio and Zougla, C‑555/23 and C‑556/23, EU:C:2025:484, paragraph 37 and the case-law cited).

27      Therefore, it is for the General Court to provide the referring court with the necessary interpretative guidance concerning the concept of ‘tax representative [appointed] as the person liable for payment of the VAT’ for the purposes of Article 204 of the VAT Directive.

28      In that regard, it should be noted that the VAT Directive does not contain a general definition of the concept of ‘tax representative’. However, it is apparent from Article 204(1) of that directive that it refers specifically to the tax representatives appointed as the persons liable for payment of the VAT.

29      Accordingly, the tax representatives appointed as the persons liable for payment of the VAT for the purposes of Article 204 of the VAT Directive differ from other intermediaries, such as tax representatives acting purely as intermediaries, in that they assume the status of a person liable for payment of VAT on behalf of their principal. Although the VAT Directive does not lay down criteria for classifying a tax representative as a person liable for payment of VAT on the basis, inter alia, of the nature of the activities carried out on behalf of his or her principal, it also does not preclude national legislation from providing that that classification is based on an assessment of the nature of those activities. Indeed, it is for the Member States to lay down the conditions and procedures of such an appointment, which necessarily entails determining its scope in their national legislation. That appointment must, however, be carried out in compliance with EU law and, in particular, the general principles governing the common system of VAT.

30      In the light of the considerations set out in paragraphs 28 and 29 above, it is for the referring court to assess whether the factual conditions for the application of Article 204 of the VAT Directive are satisfied.

 The second question

31      By its second question, which it is appropriate to examine in the first place, the referring court asks, in essence, whether Article 204 of the VAT Directive must be interpreted as precluding a tax representative of a taxable person established in another Member State from being considered to be liable for payment of the VAT, within the meaning of that provision, even though that tax representative is not involved in the taxable transactions carried out by that taxable person.

32      In the situation referred to in the first subparagraph of Article 204(1) of the VAT Directive, the option of appointing a tax representative as the person liable for payment of the VAT, where the Member State concerned has provided for such an option, is a matter for the taxable person and is exercised in compliance with the conditions and procedures laid down by the applicable national legislation, in accordance with Article 204(2) of the VAT Directive.

33      Although Article 204 of the VAT Directive does not make the appointment of the tax representative as the person liable for payment of the VAT conditional on that representative actually participating in the taxable transactions carried out by the taxable person he or she represents, that provision confers on the Member States a margin of discretion in order to determine the conditions and procedures under which such a representative is appointed as the person liable for payment of the VAT.

34      The wording of Article 204 of the VAT Directive therefore permits the inference that that provision does not preclude a tax representative from being appointed as the person liable for payment of the VAT due by the taxable person he or she represents, even though he or she does not intervene in the taxable transactions carried out by that taxable person.

35      That finding is supported by the overall context of Article 204 of the VAT Directive.

36      Articles 193 to 200 and 202 to 204 of the VAT Directive, which form part of Section 1 of Chapter 1 of Title XI of that directive, entitled ‘Persons liable for payment of VAT to the tax authorities’, determine the persons liable for payment of VAT. Although Article 193 of that directive provides, as the basic rule, that VAT is payable by any taxable person carrying out a taxable supply of goods or services, it nevertheless states that other persons may or must be liable for payment of VAT in the situations referred to in Articles 194 to 199b and 202 thereof (see, to that effect, judgment of 30 April 2025, Genzyński, C‑278/24, EU:C:2025:299, paragraph 43 and the case-law cited).

37      Accordingly, the set of provisions of which Article 204 of the VAT Directive is part is aimed at identifying the person liable for payment of VAT in various situations, in order to ensure for the public exchequer the efficient collection of VAT from the most appropriate person in the light of the specific situation, particularly where the parties to the contract are not in the same Member State or where the transaction subject to VAT relates to supplies the specific nature of which makes it necessary to identify a person other than that referred to in Article 193 of that directive (see, to that effect, judgments of 20 May 2021, ALTI, C‑4/20, EU:C:2021:397, paragraph 28, and of 13 October 2022, Direktor na Direktsia ‘Obzhalvane i danachno-osiguritelna praktika’, C‑1/21, EU:C:2022:788, paragraph 49).

38      In the context of that identification, the appointment of a tax representative as the person liable for payment of the VAT provided for in the first subparagraph of Article 204(1) of the VAT Directive, even if it is merely an option for the taxable person, enables a more efficient collection of VAT than that which results from the application of the normal rules, according to which the person liable for payment of the tax is, in principle, the taxable person himself or herself (see, by analogy, judgment of 13 October 2022, Direktor na Direktsia ‘Obzhalvane i danachno-osiguritelna praktika’, C‑1/21, EU:C:2022:788, paragraphs 49 and 50 and the case-law cited).

39      The efficiency of the collection of the VAT thus sought lies in the fact that the tax administration has an interlocutor in the Member State concerned, namely the tax representative, who is more easily accessible than the non-established taxable person in that Member State and, above all, as the person appointed as liable for payment of the VAT, is likely to facilitate the tax administration’s recovery of VAT.

40      In the exercise of the power to lay down the conditions and procedures laid down in Article 204(2) of the VAT Directive, Member States must observe the general principles of law that form part of the EU legal order, which include, in particular, the principles of legal certainty and proportionality (see, by analogy, judgment of 21 December 2011, Vlaamse Oliemaatschappij, C‑499/10, EU:C:2011:871, paragraph 20 and the case-law cited).

41      Under the principle of proportionality, the Member States must employ means which, whilst enabling them effectively to attain the objectives pursued by their domestic laws, cause the least possible detriment to the objectives and principles laid down by the relevant EU legislation. Therefore, whilst it is legitimate for the measures adopted by the Member States to seek to preserve the rights of the public exchequer as effectively as possible, such measures must not go further than is necessary for that purpose (see judgment of 21 December 2011, Vlaamse Oliemaatschappij, C‑499/10, EU:C:2011:871, paragraphs 21 and 22 and the case-law cited).

42      In that context, an additional condition or procedure attached to the option of appointing a tax representative as the person liable for payment of the tax, such as the requirement to participate in the transactions carried out by the taxable person represented, is liable to restrict its scope and, therefore, to compromise its effectiveness in the light of the general objective consisting in ensuring as efficient as possible a collection of VAT in observance of the principle of proportionality. Indeed, the introduction of such a requirement is liable to limit the use of that option and, consequently, to reduce its contribution to the actual recovery of VAT.

43      Conversely, not requiring participation in the transactions carried out by the taxable person represented encourages the full implementation of the option provided for by the EU legislature and ensures, in so doing, that the objective relating to the effectiveness of the application of VAT is achieved and its recovery is guaranteed.

44      It follows that the power conferred on the Member States by Article 204(2) of the VAT Directive to make the exercise of the option to appoint a tax representative as the person liable for the payment of the tax subject to conditions or procedures cannot be interpreted as meaning that the absence of such conditions or procedures is, in itself, contrary to that directive.

45      In the light of all the foregoing considerations, the answer to the second question is that Article 204 of the VAT Directive must be interpreted as not precluding a tax representative of a taxable person established in another Member State from being regarded as liable for payment of the VAT, within the meaning of that provision, even though that tax representative is not involved in the taxable transactions carried out by the taxable person, provided that that tax representative has been appointed as such by that taxable person.

 The first question

46      By its first question, the referring court asks, in essence, whether Article 205 of the VAT Directive, read in the light of the principle of proportionality, must be interpreted as precluding a tax representative responsible for carrying out, on behalf of a taxable person established in another Member State, VAT filing obligations, without having to keep accounts or issue accounting documents relating to the transactions made by that taxable person, from being held jointly and severally liable for the payment of the VAT due, where neither the tax administration nor the competent court is empowered to determine whether he or she is involved in the economic activity of the taxable person, whether he or she knew or ought to have known that the tax would go unpaid and whether he or she acted in good faith and took all the measures reasonably due to ensure compliance with the VAT obligations.

47      As a preliminary point, it should be noted that the question referred concerns a tax representative who has not been appointed as the person liable for payment of the VAT within the meaning of the first subparagraph of Article 204(1) of the VAT Directive.

48      It should be noted that the joint and several liability flowing from Article 55 of the VAT Code is worded unconditionally since it applies to the tax representative of a taxable person, even though that tax representative acts in good faith and no fault or negligence can be imputed to him or her and irrespective of whether he or she was involved in the economic transactions of his or her principal (see, to that effect and by analogy, judgment of 21 December 2011, Vlaamse Oliemaatschappij, C‑499/10, EU:C:2011:871, paragraphs 23 and 24).

49      Article 205 of the VAT Directive states that, in the situations referred to in Articles 193 to 200 and Articles 202, 203 and 204, the Member States may provide that a person other than the person liable for payment of VAT is to be held jointly and severally liable for payment of VAT.

50      Article 205 of the VAT Directive specifies neither the persons who may be appointed as joint and several debtors nor the situations in which such an appointment may be made. It merely confers on the Member States the power to determine the conditions and procedures for the application of the joint and several liability for which it provides, while observing, inter alia, the principles of legal certainty and proportionality (see, to that effect, judgments of 20 May 2021, ALTI, C‑4/20, EU:C:2021:397, paragraphs 31 and 32, and of 10 July 2025, KONREO, C‑276/24, EU:C:2025:554, paragraph 28).

51      It is apparent from the context formed by Articles 193 to 205 of the VAT Directive that Article 205 of that directive is part of a set of provisions aimed at identifying the person liable for payment of VAT in various situations. Those provisions thereby seek to ensure for the public exchequer the efficient collection of VAT from the most appropriate person in the light of the specific situation, particularly where the parties to the contract are not in the same Member State or where the transaction subject to VAT relates to supplies the specific nature of which makes it necessary to identify a person other than that referred to in Article 193 of that directive (see, to that effect, judgments of 13 October 2022, Direktor na Direktsia ‘Obzhalvane i danachno-osiguritelna praktika’, C‑1/21, EU:C:2022:788, paragraph 49, and of 30 April 2025, Genzyński, C‑278/24, EU:C:2025:299, paragraphs 45 and 46 and the case-law cited).

52      The measures which the Member States may adopt on the basis of Article 205 of the VAT Directive cannot go beyond what is necessary to preserve the public exchequer’s rights. In particular, national measures which bring about, in practice, a system of strict joint and several liability are excessive in relation to that objective. That is the case, inter alia, where a person other than the person liable for payment of VAT is obliged to pay the VAT due by that person without being able to release himself or herself from that joint and several liability by demonstrating that he or she had nothing whatsoever to do with the acts of the person liable for payment of VAT. It would clearly be disproportionate to hold that person unconditionally liable for the shortfall in tax caused by acts of a third party over which he or she has no influence whatsoever (see, to that effect, judgment of 21 December 2011, Vlaamse Oliemaatschappij, C‑499/10, EU:C:2011:871, paragraph 24 and the case-law cited).

53      On the other hand, it is not contrary to EU law to require a person other than the person liable to pay the tax to take every step which could reasonably be required of him or her to satisfy himself or herself that the transaction which he or she is effecting does not result in his or her participation in tax evasion (see, to that effect, judgment of 21 December 2011, Vlaamse Oliemaatschappij, C‑499/10, EU:C:2011:871, paragraph 25 and the case-law cited).

54      Accordingly, the fact that a person other than the person liable to pay the tax acted in good faith, exhibiting all the due diligence of a circumspect trader, that he or she took every reasonable measure in his or her power and that his or her participation in fraud is excluded are important points in deciding whether that person can be obliged to account for the VAT owed (see, to that effect, judgment of 21 December 2011, Vlaamse Oliemaatschappij, C‑499/10, EU:C:2011:871, paragraph 26; see also, by analogy, judgment of 21 February 2008, Netto Supermarkt, C‑271/06, EU:C:2008:105, paragraph 25).

55      In those circumstances, it would be disproportionate to attribute to a tax representative who is not appointed as the person liable for payment of the VAT due by a taxable person established in another Member State, the loss of tax revenue caused by the acts of that taxable person, without either the national administration or, as the case may be, the competent court being able to determine whether that representative was involved in the economic activity of the taxable person, since that involvement is capable of influencing, inter alia, the assessment of the measures which he or she was able to take and of his or her awareness of the acts of the taxable person and, in general, of his or her good faith and diligence.

56      Therefore, the answer to the first question is that Article 205 of the VAT Directive, read in the light of the principle of proportionality, must be interpreted as precluding a tax representative who is not appointed as the person liable for payment of the VAT due by a taxable person established in another Member State, but who is responsible for carrying out, on behalf of a such a taxable person, VAT filing obligations, without having to keep accounts or issue accounting documents relating to the transactions made by that taxable person, from being held jointly and severally liable for the payment of the VAT due, where neither the tax administration nor the competent court is empowered to determine whether he or she is involved in the economic activity of the taxable person, whether he or she knew or ought to have known that the tax would go unpaid and whether he or she acted in good faith and took all the measures reasonably due to ensure compliance with the VAT obligations.

 The third question

57      By its third question, the referring court asks, in essence, whether the fact that the transaction in respect of which the VAT is due was carried out under the individual VAT identification number allocated to the taxable person by the Member State in which he or she is established or under that allocated by the Member State in which the VAT is due is decisive for the answers to the first and second questions.

58      It should be noted, as a preliminary point, that, in accordance with Article 213 of the VAT Directive, every taxable person is required to state when his or her activities as a taxable person commence.

59      In order to give effect to that reporting obligation, Article 214 of the VAT Directive provides that taxable persons are to be identified for VAT purposes and requires Member States to put in place the measures necessary to allocate each person an individual VAT identification number.

60      The identification of taxable persons, as provided for under Article 214 of the VAT Directive, is to ensure that the VAT system operates properly, by providing proof of the tax status of the taxable persons for the purpose of applying VAT, by simplifying the inspections with a view to ensuring the correct collection of the tax and facilitating the determination of the Member State in which the final consumption of the goods supplied takes place (see, to that effect, judgment of 14 March 2013, Ablessio, C‑527/11, EU:C:2013:168, paragraphs 18 and 19 and the case-law cited).

61      As each Member State allocates its own individual VAT identification numbers, a taxable person who carries on his or her activities in several Member States must, in principle, be registered in each of them.

62      It is in the light of those considerations that the third question referred by the referring court must be answered.

63      As a preliminary point, it should be stated that Article 204 of the VAT Directive establishes the framework for the appointment of a tax representative as the person liable for payment of the VAT, by providing the opportunity to the Member States to enable a taxable person who is not established in the Member State in which the VAT is due to appoint a tax representative to replace him or her as the person liable for payment of the VAT. There is nothing to indicate that that article is not applicable in situations in which such a taxable person was allocated a VAT identification number by the Member State in which the VAT is due.

64      As regards the answer to the first question, it was established in paragraph 56 above that Article 205 of the VAT Directive, read in the light of the principle of proportionality, was to be interpreted as precluding the unconditionally worded joint and several liability of a tax representative.

65      As regards, in the first place, the influence of the individual VAT identification number with which the transaction at issue is carried out on the answer to the first question, it should be noted that the use by the taxable person of one or other of its individual VAT identification numbers does not, in principle, confer on that tax representative any more or less influence on the acts of the taxable person and thus does not justify attributing to that taxable person joint and several liability such as that at issue in the main proceedings.

66      In particular, the fact that the transactions are carried out by a taxable person not established in the Member State where the VAT is due, under its individual VAT identification number in that Member State, and that they fall within the mandate conferred on that tax representative for the submission of VAT returns and the payment of the VAT relating thereto, cannot, in principle, have the effect of conferring on that tax representative an awareness of the acts of the taxable person relating to those transactions.

67      As regards, in the second place, the influence of the individual VAT identification number with which the transaction at issue is carried out on the answer to the second question, it is sufficient to state that the first subparagraph of Article 204(1) of the VAT Directive states that, where Member States provide that the taxable person may appoint a tax representative to replace him or her as the person liable for payment of the VAT, the tax representative may be appointed as the person liable for payment of the VAT in the situations flowing from Articles 193 to 197 and Articles 199 and 200 of that directive. It is therefore not the use of an individual VAT identification number, but rather the existence of one of those situations that determines whether the tax representative may be held liable for payment of the VAT.

68      Therefore, the answer to the third question is that the fact that the transaction in respect of which VAT is due was carried out under the individual VAT identification number allocated to the taxable person by the Member State in which he or she is established or under that allocated by the Member State in which the VAT is due cannot be decisive for the answers to the first and second questions.

 The fourth question

69      By its fourth question, the referring court asks, in essence, whether Article 205 of the VAT Directive, read in the light of Article 204(1) of that directive, must be interpreted as meaning that a person may both be regarded as liable for payment of VAT and be jointly and severally liable for the payment of VAT.

70      In that regard, it should be noted that Article 204(1) of the VAT Directive renders the VAT debt of the taxable person who is liable for payment of the VAT payable by the person appointed as the person liable for payment of the VAT and that Article 205 of that directive provides for a joint and several payment obligation of the VAT relating to a debt of a third party.

71      Article 205 of the VAT Directive does not specify the persons that the Member States may appoint as jointly and severally liable and also does not make a distinction according to whether or not the person liable for payment of the VAT is a taxable person or not. It merely states that the liability may lie only with a person other than the person liable for payment of the VAT.

72      It follows that the tax representative appointed as the person liable for payment of the VAT under Article 204 of the VAT Directive cannot be held jointly and severally liable for the VAT debt of the taxable person that he or she represents, since Article 205 of that directive provides that the person jointly and severally liable cannot be the person liable for payment of VAT.

73      Therefore, the answer to the fourth question is that Article 205 of the VAT Directive, read in the light of Article 204(1) of that directive, must be interpreted as meaning that a person appointed as the person liable for payment of the VAT under that Article 204 cannot also be jointly and severally liable under Article 205 of that directive.

 Costs

74      Since these proceedings are, for the parties to the main proceedings, a step in the action pending before the referring court, the decision on costs is a matter for that court. Costs incurred in submitting observations to the General Court, other than the costs of those parties, are not recoverable.

On those grounds,

THE GENERAL COURT (Fifth Chamber, sitting with five Judges)

hereby rules:

1.      Article 204 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax, as amended by Council Directive (EU) 2019/1995 of 21 November 2019,

must be interpreted as not precluding a tax representative of a taxable person established in another Member State from being regarded as liable for payment of the VAT, within the meaning of that provision, even though that tax representative is not involved in the taxable transactions carried out by the taxable person, provided that that tax representative has been appointed as such by that taxable person.

2.      Article 205 of Directive 2006/112, as amended by Directive 2019/1995, read in the light of the principle of proportionality,

must be interpreted as precluding a tax representative who is not appointed as the person liable for payment of the value added tax (VAT) due by a taxable person established in another Member State, but who is responsible for carrying out, on behalf of a such a taxable person, VAT filing obligations, without having to keep accounts or issue accounting documents relating to the transactions made by that taxable person, from being held jointly and severally liable for the payment of the VAT due, where neither the tax administration nor the competent court is empowered to determine whether he or she is involved in the economic activity of the taxable person, whether he or she knew or ought to have known that the tax would go unpaid and whether he or she acted in good faith and took all the measures reasonably due to ensure compliance with the VAT obligations.

3.      The fact that the transaction in respect of which VAT is due was carried out under the individual VAT identification number allocated to the taxable person by the Member State in which he or she is established or under that allocated by the Member State in which the VAT is due cannot be decisive for the answers in paragraphs 1 and 2 of the operative part of the present judgment.

4.      Article 205 of Directive 2006/112, as amended by Directive 2019/1995, read in the light of Article 204(1) of that directive,

must be interpreted as meaning that a person appointed as the person liable for payment of the VAT under that Article 204 cannot also be jointly and severally liable under Article 205 of that directive.

Delivered in open court in Luxembourg on 8 July 2026.

[Signatures]

*      Language of the case: Greek.

i      The name of the present case is a fictitious name. It does not correspond to the real name of any party to the proceedings.