The Supreme Court has ruled that, for tax purposes, an iPad (and, of course, any similar device) is classified as a computer. The Supreme Court has thus followed the Advocate General, whose advice we previously reported on in the article The iPad is a computer after all. We reported on the proceedings before the Amsterdam Court of Appeal in the article Ipad not a computer after all.
This is a rearguard action, as under the work-related expenses scheme (WKR) the distinction between computers and telephones is no longer relevant. Since 2015, all employers have been required to apply the WKR. With effect from 2015, an iPad may be provided tax-free if the device is sufficiently necessary for the performance of the employee’s duties (necessity criterion).
But it is, of course, obvious that the Tax and Customs Administration will capitalise on its victory in this case in the near future by issuing additional payroll tax assessments for previous years.
What was the significance of that distinction again? A computer could be reimbursed or provided tax-free if it could be demonstrated that the employee used the device for business purposes for 90% or more. Given the nature of (the use of) the device, this is a burden of proof that will generally be very difficult to meet in the case of iPads. The reimbursement or provision of a (mobile) telephone, on the other hand, is already tax-free if it is plausible that it was used for business purposes for 10% or more.