E-commerce · 🇳🇱 Netherlands
OSS filed, domestic BTW forgotten
A Dutch BV correctly registered for One Stop Shop and assumed it covered everything. It does not cover domestic supplies.
Amsterdam BV, EU-wide sales, quarterly BTW. Client identity withheld — we publish names only with written permission, so this engagement is described by its shape rather than by who it was.
2
Return streams reconciled
4
Quarters corrected
1
Monthly close covering both
The situation
- The company sold across the EU and registered for OSS to avoid registering in each member state.
- Domestic Dutch supplies continued alongside, and the two were not being separated cleanly.
What we found
- Domestic Dutch sales were partly reported through OSS, where they do not belong.
- The domestic BTW return and the OSS return were prepared from different exports, so they did not tie to the ledger.
- Reverse-charge B2B sales were not distinguished from B2C distance sales in the ledger.
What we did
- Separated domestic supplies, EU B2B reverse-charge and EU B2C distance sales at the transaction level.
- Corrected four quarters across both return streams.
- Brought both returns into a single monthly close so they reconcile to the same ledger.
The outcome
- Domestic BTW and OSS now come from one reconciled source and agree with the ledger.
- The separation also made per-market profitability visible for the first time.
Start with a conversation
Recognise any of this in your own books?
Thirty minutes. We review where your books stand and where the money's actually going — no obligation.