Judgment — ECLI:EU:C:2017:362
Date: 2017-05-11
Language of the case: Dutch
Court formation: Tenth Chamber
Subject matter: Free movement of goods;Customs Union
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: Netherlands

Summary — Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber), 11 May 2017 1. Customs union — Common Customs Tariff — Value for customs purposes — Transaction value — Determination — Account taken of the cost of transport and insurance of the imported goods — Concept of ‘cost of transport’ — Autonomous concept of EU law (Council Regulation No 2913/92, Art. 32(1)(e)(i)) 2. Customs union — Common Customs Tariff — Value for customs purposes — Transaction value — Determination — Account taken of the cost of transport and insurance of the imported goods — Concept of ‘cost of transport’ — Supplement charged by the forwarding agent to the importer, corresponding to that agent’s profit margin and costs, in respect of the service which it provided in organising the transport — Included (Council Regulation No 2913/92, Art. 32(1)(e)(i)) 1. See the text of the decision. (see paras 22, 29) 2. Article 32(1)(e)(i) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code must be interpreted as meaning that the concept of ‘cost of transport’, within the meaning of that provision, includes the supplement charged by the forwarding agent to the importer, corresponding to that agent’s profit margin and costs, in respect of the service which it provided in organising the transport of the imported goods to the customs territory of the European Union. As the Netherlands Government and the European Commission maintain, it follows, first, from paragraph 30 of the judgment of 6 June 1990, Unifert (C‑11/89, EU:C:1990:237) and, in particular, from the Court’s use of the words ‘all’ and ‘main or incidental’, that the concept of ‘cost of transport’ must be interpreted broadly. Second, the decisive criterion for costs to be capable of being regarded as coming within the term ‘cost of transport’ within the meaning of Article 32(1)(e)(i) of the Customs Code is that they are connected with the movement of goods to the customs territory of the European Union, irrespective of whether those costs are inherent in or necessary for the actual transport of those goods. Consequently, the ‘cost of transport’ within the meaning of that provision is not necessarily limited to the amounts charged by the carriers which themselves carry out the transport of the imported goods. Amounts charged by other service providers, such as a forwarding agent, may constitute costs of that kind if they are connected with the movement of the goods to the customs territory of the European Union. (see paras 25, 26, 31, operative part)