Voucher or not a voucher? The answer to this question is crucial for the correct VAT treatment. Two recent ECJ judgments illustrate the subtle yet decisive criteria distinguishing vouchers from discounts and from instruments that already constitute the consumable benefit itself. As is so often the case, everything depends on the specific design of the instrument in the individual case. With its decisions, the ECJ provides greater clarity for customer loyalty programmes and digital instruments, while at the same time opening up new scope for structuring. Companies should now critically review their existing models.

In its judgment of 5 March 2026 (C‑472/24), the ECJ decided on how trading in in-game assets against conventional currencies should be treated for VAT purposes: The VAT exemption for transactions involving means of payment does not apply, nor is the trade to be treated as a transfer of a (multi-purpose) voucher. The decision affects not only gaming platforms and professional traders, but also marketplaces, developers, and investors in the sector of digital goods. Particularly relevant is the rejection of VAT exemption and margin scheme.

Since its inception in 2009, the German requirement to apportion supplies of accommodation services (eg, hotel accommodation with breakfast) has been heavily criticised: it is said to be purely politically motivated (“Mövenpick tax”) and to violate the principle that the supply of an ancillary service (eg, breakfast) shares, from a VAT perspective, the fate of the main supply (accommodation). The European Court of Justice (ECJ) now brings clarity to all of the controversial discussions, and rules that the apportionment requirement is in accordance with Union law.