Opinion of the Advocate General — ECLI:EU:C:2005:302
Date: 2005-05-25
Language of the case: English
Based on: Treaty establishing the European Economic Community (1957)
Subject matter: Free movement of goods;Customs Union;Value for customs purposes
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: United Kingdom

Summary of the Judgment 1. Common Customs Tariff – Value for customs purposes – Transaction value – Determination – Buying commission not deducted from the declared value and not distinguished from the sale price of the goods in the import declaration – Included (Council Regulation No 2913/92, Arts 29, 32 and 33) 2. Customs union – Customs declarations – Subsequent verification – Application for revision – Obligations of the customs authorities – Erroneous inclusion of a buying commission in the declared customs value – Repayment of the import duties applied to the commission (Council Regulation No 2913/92, Arts 78 and 236) 1. Articles 29, 32 and 33 of Regulation No 2913/92 establishing the Community Customs Code must be interpreted as meaning that a buying commission included in the declared customs value and not distinguished from the sale price of the goods in the customs declaration is to be regarded as forming part of the transaction value within the meaning of Article 29 of the Code and therefore dutiable. (see para. 38, operative part 1) 2. On a proper interpretation of Articles 78 and 236 of Regulation No 2913/92 establishing the Community Customs Code, after the release of the imported goods, the customs authorities, presented with an application from the declarant seeking revision of his customs declaration in relation to those goods, are required, subject to the possibility of a subsequent court action, either to reject the application by a reasoned decision, as for example where the facts to be verified require physical verification and, following the release of the goods, the latter can no longer be presented to them, or to carry out the revision applied for where, conversely, the verifications to be carried out do not require presentation of the goods, for example where the application for revision envisages only the examination of accounting or contractual documents. In accordance with Article 78(3) of the Customs Code, if the revision indicates that the provisions governing the customs procedure in question were applied on the basis of ‘incorrect or incomplete information’, which terms cover both technical errors and errors of interpretation of the applicable law such as the erroneous inclusion of a buying commission in the declared customs value, the customs authorities must take the measures necessary to regularise the situation, taking account of the new information available to them. Where it finally becomes apparent that the import duties paid by the declarant exceed those that were legally owed at the time of their payment, the measure necessary to regularise the situation can consist only in repayment of the import duties applied to that commission. That reimbursement is to be made in accordance with Article 236 of the Customs Code if the conditions laid down by that provision are fulfilled, in particular that there has been no manipulation by the declarant and that the application for reimbursement has been submitted within the time-limit, which is in principle three years. (see paras 48-49, 51-54, 63, 70-71, operative part 2)