Before i go to the University-Augsburg to the Esport-Recht Institute today, to attend the first meeting tomorrow with other experts on the subject, I would like to briefly point out an underestimated liability trap.

As you know, the BFH has decided that warnings in the UWG and in copyright are subject to VAT(see my contribution here). It should be noted, however, that the Bundesfinanzhof has not decided that a particular practice must be changed from now on. On the contrary, the Bundesfinanzhof has decided – in both proceedings – that the companies/warnings have so far done it FALSE. This means that over long periods of time, even before the judgments, amounts from warnings received from competitors are subject to VAT and these sums could also be claimed at the next tax audit. Depending on the number of warnings, a tolerable sum is likely to come together.

The same applies, of course, in the upside down case. If in the past you have paid a compensation for reminders, you are sometimes entitled to an invoice and then you can also get vat back. This must be examined on a case-by-case basis on the basis of the specific circumstances and limitation periods. There are, however, both major liability risks and ways to recover money. I would be happy to advise you on these questions.