# C_2010221EN.01001601.xml

| 14.8.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 221/16 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.8.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 221/16

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Hamburg (Germany) lodged on 6 May 2010 — ADV Allround Vermittlungs AG in liquidation v Finanzamt Hamburg-Bergedorf

(Case C-218/10)

()

2010/C 221/25

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Referring court

Finanzgericht Hamburg

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: ADV Allround Vermittlungs AG in liquidation

Applicant:

Defendant: Finanzamt Hamburg-Bergedorf

Defendant:

Questions referred

Questions referred

| 1. | Is the sixth indent of Article 9(2)(e) of Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment (‘Directive 77/388’) (1) [subsequently, Article 56(1)(f) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax, in the version in force until 31 December 2009 (‘Directive 2006/112’)] to be interpreted as meaning that ‘supply of staff’ also includes the supply of self-employed persons not in the employ of the trader providing the service? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Is the sixth indent of Article 9(2)(e) of Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment (‘Directive 77/388’) (1) [subsequently, Article 56(1)(f) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax, in the version in force until 31 December 2009 (‘Directive 2006/112’)] to be interpreted as meaning that ‘supply of staff’ also includes the supply of self-employed persons not in the employ of the trader providing the service?

1

| 2. | Are Articles 17(1), 17(2)(a), 17(3)(a) and 18(1)(a) of Directive 77/388 [now Articles 167, 168(a), 169(a) and 178(a) of Directive 2006/112] to be interpreted as meaning that provision must be made in national procedural law to ensure that the taxability and liability to tax of one and the same service are assessed in the same way in relation to the trader providing the service and the trader receiving it, even where the two traders fall within the jurisdiction of different tax authorities? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Are Articles 17(1), 17(2)(a), 17(3)(a) and 18(1)(a) of Directive 77/388 [now Articles 167, 168(a), 169(a) and 178(a) of Directive 2006/112] to be interpreted as meaning that provision must be made in national procedural law to ensure that the taxability and liability to tax of one and the same service are assessed in the same way in relation to the trader providing the service and the trader receiving it, even where the two traders fall within the jurisdiction of different tax authorities?

Only if the answer to Question 2 is in the affirmative:

| 3. | Are Articles 17(1), 17(2)(a), 17(3)(a) and 18(1)(a) of Directive 77/388 [now Articles 167, 168(a), 169(a) and 178(a) of Directive 2006/112] to be interpreted as meaning that the period within which the recipient of a service may apply for a deduction of the input tax connected with the service received must not expire before a decision on taxability and liability to tax which is binding on the trader providing the service has been adopted? |
| --- | --- |

3.

Are Articles 17(1), 17(2)(a), 17(3)(a) and 18(1)(a) of Directive 77/388 [now Articles 167, 168(a), 169(a) and 178(a) of Directive 2006/112] to be interpreted as meaning that the period within which the recipient of a service may apply for a deduction of the input tax connected with the service received must not expire before a decision on taxability and liability to tax which is binding on the trader providing the service has been adopted?

---

(1)  OJ 1977 L 145, p. 1.

1

---