Judgment;Summary — ECLI:EU:C:2023:312
Date: 2023-04-20
Language of the case: Polish
Court formation: Tenth Chamber
Subject matter: Taxation;Value added tax
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: Poland

Summary C-282/22 – 1 
Case C-282/22 
Summary of the request for a preliminary ruling pursuant to Article 98(1) of 
the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice 
Date lodged: 
26 April 2022 
Referring court: 
Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny (Poland) 
Date of the decision to refer: 
23 February 2022 
Applicant at first instance: 
P. in W. 
Defendant at first instance: 
Dyrektor Krajowej Informacji Skarbowej 
  
Subject matter of the main proceedings 
Individual interpretation of the provisions of tax law concerning the classification 
of activities carried out at recharging points for electric vehicles. 
Subject matter and legal basis of the request 
The question whether activities carried out at recharging points for electric 
vehicles must be classified as a supply of goods under Article 14(1) of the VAT 
Directive or as a supply of services under Article 24(1) thereof. 
EN 
SUMMARY OF THE REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING – CASE C-282/22 
 
2  
Question referred for a preliminary ruling 
Does a complex supply made to electric vehicle users at recharging points which 
encompasses: 
(a) the provision of recharging devices (including integration of the charger 
with the vehicle operating system), 
(b) the supply of electricity, within duly adjusted parameters, to the batteries 
of the electric vehicle, 
(c) the necessary technical support for vehicle users, and 
(d) the provision of a special platform, website or application whereby users 
may reserve a particular connector and view their transaction and payment history, 
and of the option to use an ‘e-wallet’ to pay the balance due for individual 
recharging sessions 
- constitute a supply of goods within the meaning of Article 14(1) of Council 
Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value 
added tax […], or a supply of services within the meaning of Article 24(1) 
thereof? 
Provisions of European Union law relied on 
Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of 
value added tax (‘the VAT Directive’): Article 14(1), Article 24(1). 
Provisions of national law relied on 
Ustawa z dnia 11 marca 2004 r. o podatku od towarów i usług (Law of 11 March 
2004 on the tax on goods and services) (‘the VAT Law’): Articles 7 and 8. 
Succinct presentation of the facts and procedure in the main proceedings 
1 The company P. in W. (‘the applicant at first instance’ [or ‘the company’]) lodged 
a request with the Dyrektor Krajowej Informacji Skarbowej (Director of National 
Tax Information) [(‘the tax authority’ or ‘the authority’)] for an individual 
interpretation of the provisions of tax law relating to the tax on goods and 
services. In that request for interpretation, the applicant at first instance stated that 
it intended to engage in activity relating to ‘publicly accessible recharging stations 
DYREKTOR KRAJOWEJ INFORMACJI SKARBOWEJ 
 
3 
for electric vehicles’. As part of that activity, the company may install and provide 
for consideration recharging stations at which electric vehicle users will be able to 
recharge those vehicles from stations with different recharging standards and 
speeds. 
2 The company envisages that the recharging stations will be equipped with ‘multi-
standard chargers’, which have both DC quick-charge connectors and an AC slow 
charger. The standard time for recharging a vehicle to 80% battery capacity using 
DC quick-charge connectors is, as a rule, around 20 to 30 minutes. The vehicle 
recharging time using slow-charge AC connectors, by contrast, is normally around 
four to six hours (depending on the power of the connector). 
3 The price will depend in particular on the recharging time and the standard of the 
connector used by the user concerned. Depending on the recharging standard, the 
price will be calculated on the basis of the recharging time expressed in hours (in 
the case of slow-charge connectors) or minutes (in the case of quick-charge 
connectors). 
4 The supplies made by the company each time as part of the recharging session 
may, depending on the needs of the user concerned, encompass, as a rule, the 
following activities: 
5 - the provision of recharging devices (including integration of the charger with the 
vehicle operating system), 
6 - the supply of electricity, within duly adjusted parameters, to the batteries of the 
electric vehicle, as well as 
7 - the necessary technical support for vehicle users. 
8 In addition, the company also intends to create a special platform, website or 
application through which individual users will be able, when using the 
company’s recharging stations, to reserve a particular connector and view their 
transaction and payment history. 
9 Settlement for vehicle recharging will be effected on the basis of the recharging 
time – depending on the arrangements with the user concerned, payments may be 
made after each recharging session or at the end of the agreed settlement period. 
In addition, it is possible that the company will, in future, also introduce the 
option for users to use an ‘e-wallet’ through which they will be able to pay for 
individual recharging sessions. The company envisages that users using an ‘e-
wallet’ will deposit the amounts they select, which they will then be able to use to 
pay the balance due to the company. As part of this settlement system, the 
company would also provide a website or application which would make it 
possible to identify the user concerned, who would then be able to check the 
current status of the funds in his or her e-wallet. It is possible that the company 
will also issue users with a card enabling them to be identified before each 
individual recharging session begins. 
SUMMARY OF THE REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING – CASE C-282/22 
 
4  
10 All the above supplies will be covered by a single charge paid by users, calculated 
solely on the basis of the duration of the individual recharging sessions. The 
company does not intend to impose a separate charge for the additional activities 
carried out in connection with a particular recharging session – including technical 
support, reservation of a particular device or access to the abovementioned 
platform, website or application. Use of those facilities will be included in the 
price of the recharging session concerned. 
11 In the light of the above description, the tax authority was asked the following 
question: 
‘Does the entirety of the described supplies made by the company to electric 
vehicle users constitute a single taxable activity, that is to say a supply of services 
for consideration, as referred to in Article 8(1) of the VAT Law?’ 
12 In the view of the company, the entirety of the supplies made by the company to 
users of vehicle recharging stations must be regarded as constituting a single 
taxable activity, that is to say a supply of services for consideration, as referred to 
in Article 8(1) of the VAT Law. 
13 In the contested interpretation, the Director of National Tax Information stated 
that the position of the applicant at first instance, as set out in the request for an 
individual interpretation, is incorrect. 
14 As a result of an action brought by the applicant at first instance, by judgment of 
6 June 2018, the Wojewódzki Sąd Administracyjny w Warszawie (Regional 
Administrative Court, Warsaw, Poland) annulled the individual interpretation 
described above. 
15 The tax authority appealed the judgment of the court of first instance in its 
entirety. 
The essential arguments of the parties in the main proceedings 
16 The company has put forward the following arguments in support of its position: 
17 - from the users’ point of view, the individual activities carried out by the 
company constitute a single service purchased from that company, 
18 - the principal aim pursued by individual users is to use the specialist recharging 
station devices, thus enabling them to recharge a battery quickly and more 
efficiently, 
19 - all the additional activities are aimed exclusively at facilitating the use of the 
recharging station devices or enhancing the attractiveness of what the company 
has to offer in terms of recharging services, 
DYREKTOR KRAJOWEJ INFORMACJI SKARBOWEJ 
 
5 
20 - users are not charged in any way for the additional supplies which accompany 
recharging at the recharging station. 
21 The Director of National Tax Information takes the view that, on the basis of 
Article 5(1), Article 7(1) and Article 8(1) of the VAT Law, as well as the case-law 
of the Court of Justice of the European Union [(‘the Court of Justice’)], the supply 
of the electricity necessary to recharge an electric vehicle must be regarded as the 
principal supply in the present case, and the other services offered by the company 
must be regarded as ancillary. 
22 In the view of that authority, the activities carried out by the company should be 
divided into two parts – those related to the supply of electricity (that is to say the 
provision of recharging devices, the supply of the electricity itself, and the 
technical support) and those unrelated to the supply of electricity (that is to say the 
provision of a platform/website/application or of an e-wallet). 
23 However, the Wojewódzki Sąd Administracyjny w Warszawie, ruling at first 
instance, began by drawing attention to Directive 2014/94/EU of the European 
Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2014 on the deployment of 
alternative fuels infrastructure (‘Directive 2014/94’), pointing out that that 
directive does not link the recharging of an electric vehicle at a station to the sale 
of electricity as goods. 
24 That court agreed with the applicant at first instance that the main intention of 
individual users of recharging stations is to use the devices that enable them to 
recharge their vehicles quickly and efficiently. Thus, from the user’s point of view 
the principal supply made by the company is the provision of vehicle recharging 
station devices (together with the necessary integration of the charger with the 
vehicle’s operating system). The purpose of the supply is not to offer electricity 
but the technically advanced recharging devices with which the stations are 
equipped. 
25 In the view of the above court, the purpose of the supply is not the purchase of 
electricity, since, if that were so, each electric vehicle owner would, instead of 
using a recharging station, use his or her home network or that of his or her 
workplace, which contains the same electricity as the network covering the 
stations of the applicant at first instance. The customer would have no reason to 
use a recharging station. The fundamental difference therefore lies in the 
recharging infrastructure. 
26 That court also finds convincing the claim made by the applicant at first instance 
that customers, when deciding to use a recharging station, are primarily interested 
in accessing the devices at that station, without which they would be unable to 
power their vehicles or recharge them within a relatively short amount of time. It 
is therefore the possibility of using the specialist and technologically advanced 
devices equipped with charging connectors with different standards and not the 
supply of electricity to batteries that must be regarded as the fundamental need of 
SUMMARY OF THE REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING – CASE C-282/22 
 
6  
customers which is satisfied by the company. In the case of a recharging station, 
the supply of electricity to batteries is secondary to the provision of devices 
enabling electric vehicles to be recharged quickly and more efficiently. 
27 That court also held that the facts of the case did not show that the price was 
calculated on the basis of the amount of electricity drawn (when stating in the 
request what the price will depend on ‘in particular’, no mention was made of 
electricity). The facts of the case show that the supplier (the applicant at first 
instance) is above all engaged in providing access to chargers with the appropriate 
technical parameters. However, there is no basis for finding that the supplier is 
substantially engaged in the purchase and subsequent resale of electricity. 
28 In that court’s view, the fact that electricity constitutes goods within the meaning 
of Article 2(6) of the VAT Law does not mean that in all cases where electricity is 
used to supply a service there will be a supply of goods as the principal supply. 
The attractiveness of what the vehicle recharging station offers is reflected 
principally in the recharging time and not the access to electricity. Regardless, 
recharging a vehicle at home involves the purchase of goods, namely electricity, 
as the key and sole element of the supply. 
29 According to that court, the supply of charging at the recharging station, as 
described in the request, is a broader concept than the sale of electricity. The 
access to electricity itself is relevant but it is not the drawing of the electricity 
which is the dominant element of the supply, but the way in which it is drawn. 
The court held that it is the element relating to the provision of technological 
solutions for consideration, that is to say the service of providing the relevant 
infrastructure, that is of decisive importance and that determines the nature of the 
supply of electrical vehicle recharging as a service. This is indicated by the 
usefulness of the supply from the customer’s point of view, the way in which the 
price is calculated and the extent to which the supplier’s involvement in providing 
the recharging infrastructure dominates the activities connected with the sale of 
electricity. 
30 According to that court, the interpreting authority’s comparison of the facts of that 
case with the situation of filling up with fuel at a petrol station is inaccurate. From 
the point of view of an electrical vehicle user, it is not the type of fuel which is 
important (because it is the same everywhere) but the standard of the vehicle 
recharging device which is on offer. Therefore, unlike traditional service stations, 
in the case of recharging stations for electric vehicles it is the individual 
recharging devices which act as the element that distinguishes the offer of a 
particular entity. The effectiveness of a connector is of vital importance to vehicle 
battery recharging time, unlike in the case of a fuel pump. 
31 Consequently, that court held that, in the circumstances described by the 
company, its supply does not constitute a supply of goods, but a service 
encompassing also – contrary to the position taken by the authority – the provision 
of a specialist platform, website or application for reserving a particular connector 
DYREKTOR KRAJOWEJ INFORMACJI SKARBOWEJ 
 
7 
and viewing transaction and payment history, and of the option to use an ‘e-
wallet’. 
Succinct presentation of the reasoning in the request for a preliminary ruling 
32 In the view of the referring court, in order for it to rule on the appeal on a point of 
law brought by the tax authority, it is necessary that the Court of Justice answer a 
question relating to the interpretation of and rules for implementing Article 14(1) 
of the VAT Directive and Article 24(1) thereof. 
33 According to the case-law of the Court of Justice, every transaction must normally 
be regarded, for VAT purposes, as distinct and independent but, on the other hand, 
a transaction which comprises a single supply from an economic point of view 
should not be artificially split, so as not to distort the functioning of the VAT 
system. 
34 That position was expressed in the judgment of the Court of Justice of 27 October 
2005 in Case C-41/04, Levob Verzekeringen [and OV Bank], which confirmed the 
position expressed in the judgments of 25 February 1999 in Case C-349/96, Card 
Protection Plan Ltd (CPP), and of 2 May 1996 in Case C-231/94, Faaborg-
Gelting Linien. 
35 In the present case, the purpose of the company’s supply is: 
(1) the provision of recharging devices (including integration of the charger 
with the vehicle operating system), 
(2) the supply of electricity, within duly adjusted parameters, to the batteries of 
the electric vehicle, 
(3) the necessary technical support for vehicle users, and 
(4) the provision of a special platform, website or application whereby users 
may reserve a particular connector and view their transaction and payment history, 
and of the option to use an ‘e-wallet’ to pay the balance due for individual 
recharging sessions. 
It follows from the foregoing that the first three elements of the supply made by 
the company are certainly necessary to carry out the vehicle recharging activity 
since they are closely linked. Consequently, the supply of electricity and the 
provision of recharging devices together with technical support must, in the 
circumstances of the present case, be regarded as elements forming a single 
transaction, for the purposes of VAT. 
The activities which comprise the fourth element do not have such a close 
connection with the vehicle recharging activity, although they may, as ancillary 
activities, undoubtedly make it easier for customers to carry out that activity. 
SUMMARY OF THE REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING – CASE C-282/22 
 
8  
36 Next, in order to determine whether the above complex transaction is to be 
classified as a supply of goods or a supply of services, it is vital to identify the 
predominant elements thereof (see, inter alia, judgments in Faaborg-Gelting 
Linien, paragraphs 12 and 14, and in Levob Verzekeringen and OV Bank, 
paragraph 27). 
37 It is necessary to answer the question as to what constitutes, for the average 
consumer, the dominant element in the transaction at issue. 
38 In the view of the referring court, the authority’s position is more convincing, 
since a vehicle user does not go to a recharging point (station) for the purpose of 
using a recharging device, but for the purpose of recharging the battery of his or 
her vehicle with electricity so that he or she may use it. There he or she has a 
choice of slow and quick recharging points which he or she uses not only on 
account of the recharging time, but also having regard to the characteristics of his 
or her vehicle’s battery. Thus, it would appear that the provision of recharging 
devices does not constitute for the vehicle user an aim in itself, but a means of 
better enjoying the principal activity, which is the drawing (supply) of electricity, 
by means of those devices. Therefore, use of the recharging device would be only 
a means for the user to recharge the battery of his or her vehicle with electricity. 
39 However, the Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny (Supreme Administrative Court, 
Poland) notes that Article 4(8) of Directive 2014/94 provides that: ‘Member States 
shall ensure that operators of recharging points accessible to the public are free to 
purchase electricity from any Union electricity supplier, subject to the supplier’s 
agreement. The operators of recharging points shall be allowed to provide electric 
vehicle recharging services to customers on a contractual basis, including in the 
name and on behalf of other service providers.’ 
40 It follows from that provision that the EU legislature regards the recharging of 
electrical vehicles (at recharging points) as a service (at least, it uses that 
terminology). It should also be borne in mind that current economic practice 
shows that, in calculating the charge for recharging, account is taken of both the 
measurement of the electricity consumed and the fee for the standing time during 
recharging. 
41 Therefore, the referring court considers that, having regard to the importance of 
the matter at issue not only for national operators of recharging points, but the 
entire EU market (that is to say as regards determining the place of supply in 
respect of those activities), it is essential to resolve the question of how the supply 
at issue is to be classified under Directive 2006/112/EC – either as a supply of 
goods within the meaning of Article 14(1) of that directive, or as a supply of 
services within the meaning of Article 24(1) thereof.