Opinion of the Advocate General — ECLI:EU:C:2012:41
Date: 2012-01-26
Language of the case: Bulgarian
Subject matter: Taxation;Value added tax
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: Bulgaria

summary of the reasoning which follows, in tabular form, see Annex I to this Opinion. 20 – See, for example, Joined Cases C‑395/08 and C‑396/08 Bruno and Others [2010] ECR I‑5119, paragraph 74. 21 – See, to that effect, Case 14/83 von Colson and Kamann [1984] ECR 1891, paragraphs 26 and 27. 22 – See, for example, Bruno and Pettini and Others, cited in footnote 20 above, paragraph 74. 23 – See Case C‑62/00 Marks & Spencer [2002] ECR I‑6325, paragraph 47. 24 – See Campsa Estaciones de Servicio, cited in footnote 16, paragraph 40. 25 – See, for example, Case C‑227/09 Accardo and Others [2010] ECR I‑10273, paragraphs 44 to 47 and case‑law cited. In order to use such an option, Member States must make the choice to rely on it (see Joined Cases C‑180/10 and C‑181/10 Słaby and Others [2011] ECR I‑8461, paragraph 33). 26 – See, for example, Case C‑150/99 Stockholm Lindöpark [2001] ECR I‑493, paragraphs 30 and 31 and case‑law cited. 27 – See, for example, the order in Case C‑155/11 PPU Mohammed Imran [2011] ECR I‑5095, paragraph 21 and case‑law cited. 28 – The requirement to exempt is not absolute in these cases, as, under Article 137(1)(b) to (d), Member States may allow taxable persons a right of option for taxation in each of these cases. For a succinct summary of the reasoning which follows, in tabular form, see Annex II to this Opinion. 29 – Case C‑400/98 Breitsohl [2000] ECR I‑4321, paragraph 50. 30 – See, for example, Joined Cases C‑497/09, C‑499/09, C‑501/09 and C‑502/09 Bog and Others [2011] ECR I‑1457, paragraph 51 et seq. and case‑law cited.