Judgment of the Court of Justice in the case Berlioz Investment Fund.

In the course of a review of the tax affairs of French company Cofima, the French tax administration sent to the Luxembourg tax administration in 2014 a request for information concerning Cofima's Luxembourg parent company, Berlioz Investment Fund. In response to the Luxembourg tax authorities' request, Berlioz provided all the information sought, except for the names and addresses of its members, the amount of capital held by each member and the percentage of share capital held by each member. According to Berlioz, that information was not foreseeably relevant to the checks being carried out by the French tax administration. As a result of Berlioz' refusal to provide that information, in 2015 the Luxembourg tax administration imposed an administrative fine of €250 000. Berlioz applied to the Luxembourg administrative courts for cancellation of the fine and annulment of the ‘information order'. In today's judgment, the Court of Justice finds, first of all, that the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU is applicable, since, by imposing a fine on Berlioz because of its refusal to provide the information sought, the Luxembourg tax authorities implemented the EU directive on administrative cooperation in the field of taxation. The Court goes on to find that the national court hearing an action against a fine imposed on a person for failure to comply with an information order must be able to examine the legality of that order if it is to comply with the right to an effective judicial remedy, enshrined in the Charter. The Court notes that such an information order can be lawful only if the requested information is ‘foreseeably relevant' for the purposes of the tax investigation in the Member State seeking it.



Informatiesoort: Nieuws

Rubriek: Bronbelasting, Europees belastingrecht

H&I: Previews


Gerelateerde artikelen