„Frumoasa și Bestia” în planul TVA: Servicii medicale cu o componentă terapeutică scutite vs. servicii medicale cu scop unic estetic
“The Beauty and the Beast” in the VAT field: Exempt Medical Services with a Therapeutic Aim vs. Medical Service with an Unique Estetic Aim

Summary/Abstract: In the last decade, following the judgement of the Court of Justice in case C‑91/12, PFC Clinic, some questions were raised concerning medical services with only an aesthetic aim and their VAT treatment, as opposed to medical services with a therapeutic aim, which are VAT exempt. This article considers the case‑law of the Court of Justice of the European Union and analyzes the Romanian experience in a pending case. The main conclusions are to the sense that the Court provided a wide interpretation of art. 132 (1) (b) and (c) of the VAT Directive, considering that the “therapeutic aim” requirement should not be interpreted in a restrictive manner that would deprive the VAT exemption of its purpose. Moreover, as to the “authority” that can distinguish between VAT exempt and taxable medical services, the Court of Justice pointed out that is primarily for physicians and acknowledged specialists to determine such a “therapeutic aim” in a somehow decisive manner, without interference from the tax administration or other national authorities.

• Details
• Contents