Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
V B 28/25 ECLI:DE:BFH:2026:B.230626.VB28.25.0 AI generated

Input tax deduction for mixed-use building expansions where improvements benefit both tax-exempt and taxable areas

Case Number V B 28/25
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Germany (DE)
Decision Date
Outcome Allowed / Granted
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Federal Court of Finance admitted an appeal on points of law, allowing the taxpayer's case to proceed to the appellate stage after the Berlin-Brandenburg Finance Court had previously ruled against her claim for input tax deduction. The dispute concerned whether input VAT incurred on construction services for expanding a building that had been previously rented out under a mix of tax-exempt and taxable leases is deductible, given that the new expansion areas were utilized exclusively for tax-exempt rental and sale purposes, yet the construction work also benefited the existing structure by reinforcing its statics and supply systems. The court identified an open legal question regarding the apportionment of input tax in mixed-use buildings where improvements to the old structure incidentally benefit taxable activities, prompting the admission of the revision to clarify the applicable deduction rules under the VAT Act.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

§ 116 Abs. 5 Satz 2 letzte Alternative der Finanzgerichtsordnung; Input tax deduction for mixed-use building expansions where improvements benefit both tax-exempt and taxable areas: The dispute concerned whether input VAT incurred on construction services for expanding a building that had been previously rented out under a mix of tax-exempt and taxable leases is deductible, given that the new expansion areas were utilized exclusively for tax-exempt rental and sale purposes, yet the construction work also benefited the existing structure by reinforcing its statics and supply systems. The court identified an open legal question regarding the apportionment of input tax in mixed-use buildings where improvements to the old structure incidentally benefit taxable activities, prompting the admission of the revision to clarify the applicable deduction rules under the VAT Act.

Keywords

AI generated
input tax deduction mixed tax tax system construction services deduction for property maintenance costs leasing

Cited Legislation

AI generated
§ 116 Abs. 5 Satz 2 letzte Alternative der Finanzgerichtsordnung
Procedural rule cited in the dispositive to justify the decision being issued without further reasoning or statement of facts.
AI generated
XI B 98/10
Input tax deduction for mixed-use buildings: binding effect of prior revision ruling and distinction between construction and ongoing costs
V R 35/09
Input VAT deduction: distinction between integrated building expansion and separate asset under mixed-use allocation
XI R 31/09
VAT input deduction for mixed-use buildings: precedence of floor-area over turnover allocation and limits of statutory correction after legislative change
XI R 9/08
Input VAT deduction for mixed-use company buildings: allocation to business assets vs. tax-exempt residential lease to shareholder-managers

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

AI generated
§ 116 Abs. 5 Satz 2 letzte Alternative der Finanzgerichtsordnung

Procedural rule cited in the dispositive to justify the decision being issued without further reasoning or statement of facts.

Need to analyze how this precedent applies to your matter?

Cross-reference this judgment against statutes, commentaries, and subsequent citing case law inside Legislator AI.

Open in Legislator →

Full text

Vorsteueraufteilung bei gemischt genutzten Gebäuden

[LEITSATZ]

NV: Die Revision wird zur Klärung der Rechtsfrage zugelassen, ob und inwieweit Vorsteuerbeträge aus Eingangsleistungen für eine Baumaßnahme zur Erweiterung eines bislang steuerfrei und steuerpflichtig vermieteten Gebäudes zum Vorsteuerabzug berechtigen, wenn die Erweiterungsflächen zwar steuerfrei vermietet und veräußert werden, die Baumaßnahme aber auch insoweit dem Altgebäude zugutekommt, als dessen Statik und Versorgungsbereiche ertüchtigt werden.

[TENOR]

Auf die Beschwerde der Klägerin wegen Nichtzulassung der Revision gegen das Urteil des Finanzgerichts Berlin-Brandenburg vom 10.04.2025 - 2 K 2150/22 wird die Revision zugelassen.

[GRUENDE]

1. Die Revision wird zur Klärung der Rechtsfrage zugelassen, ob und inwieweit Vorsteuerbeträge aus Eingangsleistungen für eine Baumaßnahme zur Erweiterung eines bislang steuerfrei und steuerpflichtig vermieteten Gebäudes zum Vorsteuerabzug berechtigen, wenn die Erweiterungsflächen zwar steuerfrei vermietet und veräußert werden, die Baumaßnahme aber auch insoweit dem Altgebäude zugutekommt, als dessen Statik und Versorgungsbereiche ertüchtigt werden.

2. Der Beschluss ergeht nach § 116 Abs. 5 Satz 2 letzte Alternative der Finanzgerichtsordnung ohne weitere Begründung sowie ohne Darstellung des Sachverhalts.