VAT / tax setup for NFT sales without KYC (EU/Germany) — how is this handled in Autonomous Forest?

Discuss and Organize
1

Hi everyone,

We’d love to understand how Autonomous Forest handles VAT (USt) on NFT sales.

We purchased an NFT ourselves and did not go through any KYC / location verification — and we’re genuinely happy we got to take part in the launch. Congrats on launching the project!

As we understand it, for EU/Germany B2C sales, the lack of reliable buyer-location evidence can create VAT risk (including retroactive assessments). A relevant German example is Finanzgericht Niedersachsen, judgment dated 10 July 2025 (case no. 5 K 26/24), where the court estimated 50% of turnover as taxable in Germany.

So our main question is simple:

  • Do you charge/pay German VAT (19%) by default on NFT sales?

  • If not, what legal/compliance setup allows you not to charge 19% VAT (e.g., OSS with sufficient buyer-location evidence, a different legal classification, sales via an intermediary/Merchant of Record, geo-restrictions, etc.)?

More broadly, this kind of regulation feels quite strict, and we suspect many in the crypto community are unlikely to be comfortable sharing personal data just to purchase an NFT—so we’re very curious how you’ve navigated this in practice.

Any clarity (even high-level) would be hugely appreciated.

Thanks!

Hannah & Dima

1 Like
2

Welcome to both of you!

Thanks for bringing this up. It’s a crucial topic for us as a German-registered e.V. (association) and because we did not collect KYC data (names/addresses) during the mint, our tax classification is the single most important factor in determining our liability.

Here is the current status of our assessment and the two options we are weighing.

Option A: The Membership Model (Our Preferred Approach)

Based on our Statutes (§ 4 and § 5.3), we are positioning the ETH collected not as a “sale of goods,” but as Admission Fees (Aufnahmegebühren).

The Logic: Every transaction was exactly 0.08 ETH. This fixed pricing structure supports the argument that this was a standard membership contribution, not a speculative market sale. The NFT is legally treated as the digital membership certificate/key, rather than a commercial product.

The “No KYC” Impact: If accepted by the Finanzamt, this falls into the Ideal Sphere (Ideeller Bereich). Membership fees are generally tax-exempt. Therefore, the lack of KYC/location data is irrelevant because no VAT is due regardless of where the member lives.

Option B: The Commercial Service Model (The Risk Case)

If the tax authorities reject the membership argument (e.g. citing the July 2025 FG Niedersachsen ruling on NFTs), they would classify this as a “Commercial Business Operation.”

The Logic: They would view the NFT as a “digital service” supplied electronically.

The “No KYC” Impact: This is where the lack of KYC hurts. Normally, we could remove VAT for non-EU buyers. But since we cannot prove the location of the anonymous wallet owners, the tax office would likely force us to apply 19% German VAT to the entire 16.32 ETH (as of today) collected. This would be a significant cost that we would have to pay out of the project funds.

Current Approach

We are proceeding with Option A as our primary strategy. Our Statutes were written to support this, and the on-chain data (uniform pricing) backs it up. We believe this is the most accurate reflection of what Autonomous Forest is—a community of members, not a shop selling jpegs.

Ultimately, this is a decision for a tax advisor to finalize. For now, we are optimistic that the “Membership” classification will hold, solving the VAT/KYC issue entirely. And if not, we think it is worth paying the premium in exchange for allowing anonymous / pseudonymous participation in the project.

2 Likes