# C_2016048EN.01001002.xml

| 8.2.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 48/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.2.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 48/10

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Varese (Italy) lodged on 9 November 2015 — Criminal proceedings against Mauro Scialdone

(Case C-574/15)

(2016/C 048/18)

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Referring court

Tribunale di Varese

Criminal proceedings against

Criminal proceedings against

Mauro Scialdone

Questions referred

Questions referred

| 1. | May EU law, and more particularly Article 4(3) TEU, in conjunction with Article 325 TFEU and Directive 2006/112/EC (1), which lay down for the Member States the duty of equal treatment so far as concerns policies relating to penalties, be interpreted as precluding the enactment of a provision of national law providing that the penal consequences of failure to pay VAT follow once a financial threshold is crossed greater than the threshold provided for in the case of failure to pay income tax? |
| --- | --- |

1.

May EU law, and more particularly Article 4(3) TEU, in conjunction with Article 325 TFEU and Directive 2006/112/EC (1), which lay down for the Member States the duty of equal treatment so far as concerns policies relating to penalties, be interpreted as precluding the enactment of a provision of national law providing that the penal consequences of failure to pay VAT follow once a financial threshold is crossed greater than the threshold provided for in the case of failure to pay income tax?

1

| 2. | May EU law, and more particularly Article 4(3) TEU in conjunction with Article 325 TFEU and Directive 2006/112/EC, which oblige the Member States to provide effective, dissuasive and proportionate penalties to protect the financial interests of the European Union, be interpreted as precluding the enactment of a national provision which exempts the defendant (whether a director, legal representative, person to whom responsibility for fiscal matters has been delegated or an accessory to the offence) from liability to punishment, if the entity with legal personality concerned has made late payment both of the tax itself and of the administrative penalties owed in connection with VAT, even though the tax assessment has already been made, criminal proceedings and indictment initiated, and the establishment of inter partes proceedings duly confirmed, but before trial proceedings have been declared opened, in a system that does not impose on that director, legal representative, or delegate and accessory to the offence any other penalty, not even an administrative penalty? |
| --- | --- |

2.

May EU law, and more particularly Article 4(3) TEU in conjunction with Article 325 TFEU and Directive 2006/112/EC, which oblige the Member States to provide effective, dissuasive and proportionate penalties to protect the financial interests of the European Union, be interpreted as precluding the enactment of a national provision which exempts the defendant (whether a director, legal representative, person to whom responsibility for fiscal matters has been delegated or an accessory to the offence) from liability to punishment, if the entity with legal personality concerned has made late payment both of the tax itself and of the administrative penalties owed in connection with VAT, even though the tax assessment has already been made, criminal proceedings and indictment initiated, and the establishment of inter partes proceedings duly confirmed, but before trial proceedings have been declared opened, in a system that does not impose on that director, legal representative, or delegate and accessory to the offence any other penalty, not even an administrative penalty?

inter partes

| 3. | Must the concept of fraud governed by Article 1 of the PFI Convention be interpreted as encompassing cases of failure to pay or of partial or late payment of VAT and, consequently, does Article 2 of that Convention require the Member State to punish with a term of imprisonment failure to pay or partial or late payment of VAT in relation to sums in excess of EUR 50 000? |
| --- | --- |

3.

Must the concept of fraud governed by Article 1 of the PFI Convention be interpreted as encompassing cases of failure to pay or of partial or late payment of VAT and, consequently, does Article 2 of that Convention require the Member State to punish with a term of imprisonment failure to pay or partial or late payment of VAT in relation to sums in excess of EUR 50 000?

If the answer is in the negative, it will be necessary to determine whether the rule under Article 325 TFEU, which requires the Member States to provide penalties, including criminal penalties, which are dissuasive, proportionate and effective, must be interpreted as precluding national legislation which exempts from criminal and administrative liability the directors and legal representatives of legal persons, or the persons to whom the functions of those legal persons are delegated and persons who are accessories to the offence, for failure to pay or partial or late payment of VAT in relation to sums equivalent to three or five times the minimum threshold laid down in case of fraud, that is to say, EUR 50 000.

---

(1)  Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1).

1

---