# C_2014282EN.01000901.xml

| 25.8.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 282/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.8.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 282/9

---

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 12 June 2014 (requests for preliminary rulings from the Gerechtshof Amsterdam — Netherlands) — Inspecteur van de Belastingdienst/Noord/kantoor Groningen v SCA Group Holding BV (C-39/13), X AG and Others v Inspecteur van de Belastingdienst Amsterdam (C-40/13), Inspecteur van de Belastingdienst Holland-Noord/kantoor Zaandam v MSA International Holdings BV, MSA Nederland BV (C-41/13)

(Joined Cases C-39/13 to C-41/13) (1)

1

((Freedom of establishment - Corporation tax - Single tax entity formed by companies in the same group - Request - Grounds for refusal - Seat of one or more intermediate companies, or of the parent company, located in another Member State - No permanent establishment in the State of taxation))

2014/C 282/12

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Referring court

Gerechtshof te Amsterdam

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellants: Inspecteur van de Belastingdienst/Noord/kantoor Groningen (C-39/13), X AG, X1 Holding GmbH, X2 Holding GmbH, X3 Holding GmbH, D1 BV, D2 BV, D3 BV (C-40/13), Inspecteur van de Belastingdienst Holland-Noord/kantoor Zaandam (C-41/13)

Appellants:

Respondents: SCA Group Holding BV (C-39/13), Inspecteur van de Belastingdienst Amsterdam (C-40/13), MSA International Holdings BV, MSA Nederland BV (C-41/13)

Respondents:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

| 1) | In Cases C-39/13 and C-41/13, Articles 49 TFEU and 54 TFEU must be interpreted as precluding legislation of a Member State under which a resident parent company can form a single tax entity with a resident sub-subsidiary where it holds that sub-subsidiary through one or more resident companies, but cannot where it holds that sub-subsidiary through non-resident companies which do not have a permanent establishment in that Member State. |
| --- | --- |

1)

In Cases C-39/13 and C-41/13, Articles 49 TFEU and 54 TFEU must be interpreted as precluding legislation of a Member State under which a resident parent company can form a single tax entity with a resident sub-subsidiary where it holds that sub-subsidiary through one or more resident companies, but cannot where it holds that sub-subsidiary through non-resident companies which do not have a permanent establishment in that Member State.

| 2) | In Case C-40/13, Articles 49 TFEU and 54 TFEU must be interpreted as precluding legislation of a Member State under which treatment as a single tax entity is granted to a resident parent company which holds resident subsidiaries, but is precluded for resident sister companies the common parent company of which neither has its seat in that Member State nor has a permanent establishment there. |
| --- | --- |

2)

In Case C-40/13, Articles 49 TFEU and 54 TFEU must be interpreted as precluding legislation of a Member State under which treatment as a single tax entity is granted to a resident parent company which holds resident subsidiaries, but is precluded for resident sister companies the common parent company of which neither has its seat in that Member State nor has a permanent establishment there.

---

(1)  OJ C 123, 27.4.2013.

1

---