Judgment — ECLI:EU:C:2017:820
Date: 2017-10-26
Language of the case: Slovak
Court formation: Ninth Chamber
Subject matter: Taxation;Value added tax;Fundamental rights;Charter of Fundamental Rights
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: Slovakia

Summary — Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber), 26 October 2017 1. Harmonisation of fiscal legislation — Common system of value added tax — Obligations of persons liable for the tax — Inclusion in the register of taxable persons for VAT — Taxable person of which a director was formerly connected with another person who had not complied with his tax obligations — National law requiring that taxable person to provide a guarantee — Measure seeking to ensure payment of the correct amount of VAT and to prevent fraud — Lawfulness — Condition — Observance of the principle of proportionality (Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Art. 16; Council Directive 2006/112, Art. 273) 2. Union law — Principles — Equal treatment — Obligations of persons liable for the tax — Inclusion in the register of taxable persons for VAT — National law requiring a taxable person to provide a guarantee owing to his links with another person who has tax arrears — Measure seeking to ensure payment of the correct amount of VAT and to prevent fraud — No breach of the principle of equal treatment (Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Art. 21; Council Directive 2006/112, Art. 273) 1. Article 273 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax and Article 16 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union must be interpreted as not precluding, at the time of the registration for the purposes of value added tax of a taxable person, of which the director was formerly the director or associate member of another person who had not complied with his tax obligations, the tax authority from requiring that taxable person to provide a guarantee, the amount of which could reach EUR 500 000, provided that the guarantee required from that taxable person does not go further than is necessary in order to attain the objectives of Article 273, which it is for the referring court to determine. (see para. 47, operative part 1) 2. The principle of equal treatment must be interpreted as not precluding a tax authority from requiring a new taxable person, at the time of his registration for the purposes of value added tax, to provide, owing to his links with another person who has tax debts, such a guarantee. (see para. 47, operative part 2)