Google Übers. schrieb:

...X did not charge any VAT for his work for A. A performed circumcisions on boys and men, according to its website, for religious obligation, medical indications, and hygienic or preventative reasons.

X appealed, arguing that the question of whether a medical service had a therapeutic purpose should be viewed solely from the point of view of the attending physician and that the latter, as a medical expert, assessed whether there was a medical service for the purpose of protection, including preserving or restoring human health.

From the position of the Royal Dutch Society for the Promotion of Medicine (KNMG) it could be deduced that the therapeutic benefit of circumcisions without a direct medical indication was not recognized in the Netherlands.