Highlights & Insights on European Taxation (H&I) bevat diepgaande informatie over actuele ontwikkelingen binnen het Europees belastingrecht zoals de omzetbelasting, douane, accijnzen en de winstbelasting. Een team van internationale experts becommentarieert jurisprudentie van het Europese Hof van Justitie, voorstellen van de Europese Commissie en andere Europese instanties.
Kijk hieronder voor de inhoudsopgave van de laatst verschenen aflevering.
Verschenen in Highlights & Insights
Judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union in the case Gabel Industria Tessile and Canavesi. The third paragraph of Article 288 TFEU must be interpreted as precluding the disapplication by a national court, in a dispute between private parties, of a provision of national law establishing an indirect tax contrary to a clear, precise and unconditional provision of a directive that has not been transposed or has been incorrectly transposed, unless national law provides otherwise or unless the entity against which that inconsistency of the aforementioned tax is relied upon is subject to the authority or control of the State or possesses special powers beyond those which result from the normal rules applicable to relations between private parties.
Judgment of the Court of Justice in the case Bitulpetrolium Serv. Council Directive 2003/96/EC must be interpreted as precluding national provisions or practices according to which, in the event of reintroduction into a tax warehouse of energy products to be used as heating fuel in order to be subsequently sold, the absence of notification of that reintroduction to the competent authority and the absence, in the certificates of receipt and cancellation invoices relating to those products, of references to the marking and colouring of those products, result in, as a penalty for non-compliance with those conditions, the application to those products, irrespective of their actual use, of the higher rate of excise duty laid down for gas oil for use as a motor fuel. Article 2(1)(a), Article 63 and Article 78(1)(a) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC must be interpreted as precluding national provisions or practices according to which, in the event of reintroduction into the tax warehouse of energy products for use as heating fuel, value added tax is due on the amount set by the tax authority as additional excise duty on account of the application to those products of the excise duty provided for in respect of gas oil for use as a motor fuel, unless a taxable transaction consisting in a supply of the energy product in question for the purposes of its use as a motor fuel is carried out.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgerichtshof in the case Finanzamt Österreich.
Judgment of the Court of Justice in the case TP v Administration de l’enregistrement, des domaines et de la TVA. Article 9(1) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC must be interpreted as meaning that the member of the board of directors of a public limited company under Luxembourg law carries out an economic activity, within the meaning of that provision, where he or she supplies services to that company for consideration provided that that activity is effected on a continuing basis and for a remuneration for which the procedures for fixing that amount are foreseeable.
Judgment of the Court of Justice in the case Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira. Point 2 of Annex IV to Council Directive 2006/112/EC must be interpreted as not precluding national legislation which provides for the application of a reduced rate of VAT to services relating to the renovation and repair of private dwellings on condition that the dwellings concerned are actually used for residential purposes at the time when those works are carried out.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Högsta förvaltningsdomstolen in the case Palmstråle.
Judgment of the General Court in the case Hispavima v Commission on the Spanish tax leasing regime. The Court dismisses the action of Hispavima.
Opinion of Advocate General Kokott in the case Casino de Spa. Article 135(1)(i) of the VAT Directive has no direct effect. It is neither unconditional nor sufficiently precise.
Opinion of Advocate General Ćapeta in the case Digital Charging Solutions. Council Directive 2006/112/EC must be interpreted as meaning that the recharging of an electric vehicle at a network of charging points to which a user has access by means of a subscription concluded with a company other than the charging-point operator implies that the electricity consumed is delivered from that operator to that user, and the company offering access to those charging points acts, in that supply, as a commissionaire within the meaning of Article 14(2)(c) of that directive.
Opinion of Advocate General Kokott in the case Chaudfontaine Loisirs. Article 135(1)(i) of the VAT Directive has no direct effect. It is neither unconditional nor sufficiently precise.
Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) on BEFIT. The EESC notes that Member States will be entitled to add tax base increases, tax deductions or tax incentives to their allocated parts. While the EESC acknowledges the value of allowing Member States room for manoeuvre, such flexibility could come at odds with the Commission objective of reducing the compliance costs weighing on companies. Furthermore, the EESC believes that, in order to actually simplify and reduce costs...
Judgment of the Court of Justice in the case B2 Energy. Article 138(1) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC must be interpreted as meaning that the exemption from VAT of a supplier established in one Member State, having supplied goods to another Member State, must be refused where that supplier has not shown that the goods were supplied to a recipient having the status of a taxable person in that Member State and that, in the light of the factual circumstances and evidence provided by the supplier, the information necessary to verify that the recipient did not have that status is lacking.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel București in the case Arcomet Towercranes. Is Article 2(1)(c) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC to be interpreted as meaning that the amount invoiced by a company (the principal company) to an associated company (the operating company), equal to the amount necessary to align the operating company’s profit with the activities carried out and the risks assumed in accordance with the margin method of the OECD Transfer Pricing Guidelines, constitutes a payment for a service which therefore falls within the scope of VAT?
Action in the case Commission v Luxembourg. The Commission submits that Luxembourg added securitisation special purpose entities to the types of financial undertakings listed in Article 2(5) of Directive 2016/1164 with a view to allowing their exclusion from the scope of the interest limitation rules of Article 4 of that directive.
Judgment of the Court of Justice in the case Omya CZ. The fifth indent of Article 2(4)(a) of Council Directive 2003/96/EC must be interpreted as meaning that the use of electricity for the operation of machines used for the processing of limestone extracted from a quarry consisting of several stages of grinding and crushing thereof until obtaining fine and coarse limestone fillers does not constitute a use of electricity for mineralogical processes.
Verhuurders van vrije sectorwoningen vrezen dat ze miljarden euro's aan huurders moeten terugbetalen nadat kantonrechters een streep hebben gezet door meerdere huurverhogingen, omdat die niet in lijn zijn met Europese wetgeving. Dat meldt de Vereniging van Institutionele Beleggers in Vastgoed, Nederland (IVBN) op basis van een studie naar de gevolgen van de rechtelijke uitspraken.
Het ministerie van Financiën heeft de plannen voor een tariefkorting voor emissievrije personenauto’s in
de motorrijtuigenbelasting verzameld in een 'factsheet'.
Advocaat-generaal Pauwels concludeert dat geen sprake is van strijd met het gelijkheidsbeginsel, maar met het discriminatieverbod. Het discriminatieverbod is geschonden omdat duidelijk geen redelijk evenwicht bestaat tussen de met art. 9.4 Uitv. reg. LB 2011 behartigde belangen en de ongelijkheid voor de arbeidskorting.