Quote from: tavitavi on August 23, 2014, 10:21:10 AM

Quote from: Hermel on August 23, 2014, 09:56:36 AM

Quote from: tavitavi on August 23, 2014, 09:43:00 AM

It's a waste of time for laymen in this thread to try to sort out the directive and the outcome of this case, it doesn't work like that.

And it can also be fatal to blindly trust a professional. If it is important, you cannot get around understanding it yourself.

My point is that the court will make their decision based not primarily on the actual wording of the directive, but on other things such as argumentation, the EU's basic values, the possible implications of the specific and other cases, political agendas, symbolic values and arbitrary discretion. In order to even get a point across you need first and foremost a law degree and secondly immense experience of EUCOJ litigation.
Of course, the discussion is interesting, but I would rather see people focusing on where they can actually make a difference: funding. DH has received just over 1.6 BTC and he will probably need closer to 100 BTC.

Fortunately, my wife has a masters in European VAT (among other degrees). I showed her the question and she is confident that the court won't rule the stupid way. Doing so would cause too many complications. For example, a miner not subject to VAT selling Bitcoins to the exchange could charge 119 and keep all the 119 for himself, while the exchange could reclaim 19 from the tax authorities (Urproduzenten rule in German, not sure how it is called in English).

Edit: you should check out the more more accurate comments on reddit.