The letter of intent in a business takeover
The letter of intent in a business takeover A business takeover ultimately involves concluding a purchase agreement. A whole process ...
New regulation VAT supplements applicable as of January 1, 2025
From January 1, 2025, a new obligation will apply with regard to VAT supplementations: if it is found that too little VAT has been declared and paid, this must be corrected within eight weeks by submitting a VAT supplementation to the Tax Authorities. This significantly tightens the replenishment deadline, or at least there is less room for ambiguity. Failure to comply with the replenishment obligation may result in the imposition of fines. In the case of intent or gross negligence, there may even be a fine of up to 100%.
Breakthrough; corporate tax interest is unreasonably high, here’s what you can do.
On 7 November 2024, the North Netherlands Court ruled that a tax interest rate of 8 per cent on a 2021 assessment is not reasonable. This landmark ruling opens up new opportunities for taxpayers who have faced high corporate tax interest rates. What does this ruling mean specifically for you, and what steps can you take now?
Preliminary questions Supreme Court: Rent price change clause
On November 29, 2024, the Supreme Court gave a preliminary ruling on a rent modification clause in rental agreements with consumers. The Supreme Court answered the question of whether in the liberalized rental sector a rent modification clause with a surcharge of up to 3% (storage clause) in addition to an indexation clause is unfair.
Action on taxation in box 3
As we all know, there has been a lot of recent movement on box 3 taxation. Box 3 primarily taxes savings, investments and real estate. The assets in this box were previously taxed on the basis of a flat rate of return: the tax authorities set an assumed percentage, regardless of the actual return. This meant that many taxpayers paid taxes on a return they had not actually received. You may also have overpaid taxes in the past. If so, chances are you may be eligible for legal redress!
The Environment Act & Disadvantage Compensation (part 2) The reference date and (planning) comparison
As of Jan. 1, 2024, the Environment Act will be in effect. With its entry into force, it has been said that the largest legislative operation has been completed since the introduction of the Dutch Constitution law in 1848. Several previously existing separate laws and regulations have been combined into one law and four Orders in Council with the Environment Act. With a legislative operation of such magnitude, of course (principle) choices are made that bring about a change from the previously applicable law. So too in the context of the Environment Act.
What are the options and points of attention when subletting business space?
For tenants of business premises, it may make sense to (partially) sublet the leased business premises. The tenant then also becomes a sublessee. Is this allowed?
Prevent an earn-out from becoming a burn-out
An earn-out can benefit both seller and buyer, but it also carries risks. This article shows how an earn-out arrangement can help with uncertainties surrounding a business sale, but also how it can lead to conflict if there are no clear agreements. Find out how to avoid problems and draft a well-crafted earn-out arrangement to avoid misunderstandings and achieve optimal results for both parties.
Dismissal of directors of foundations: new risks and opportunities under the WBTR!
With the introduction of the Management and Supervision of Legal Persons Act (WBTR), the legislature has taken important steps to improve the management and supervision of foundations. One of the most notable changes concerns the expansion of the grounds for dismissal for directors of foundations. In this article, we discuss the new statutory regulation, illustrate the regulation with a practical example, and explain the implications for directors and stakeholders.
Directors’ liability after turboliquidation
In a recent court case concerning turboliquidation of a catering business, the court ruled that the directors were not personally liable. The case involved the discontinuation of the business without assets, with creditors being paid pro rata. The landlord claimed unlawfulness, but the court held that the turboliquidation had been carried out correctly with no obligation of bankruptcy.
