ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Tax provisions - Harmonisation of laws - Indirect taxes on the raising of capital - Directive 69/335 - Capital duty and tax having the same characteristics as such a duty - Concept - Tax on companies' net assets - Excluded

(Council Directive 69/335, Arts 4 and 10(a) and (b))

Summary

Directive 69/335 concerning indirect taxes on the raising of capital, as amended by Directive 85/303, does not preclude the levying on capital companies of a tax on companies' net assets.

Since, unlike capital duty on capital-raising transactions, such a tax does not presuppose any transaction involving the movement of capital or assets and has as its tax base, in addition to the subscribed capital, the sum of several accounting items, it is neither a capital duty nor a tax having the same characteristics as such a duty.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 Tax provisions - Harmonisation of laws - Turnover taxes - Common system of value added tax - Exemptions provided for by the Sixth Directive - Exemption of the leasing and letting of immovable property - Right of option available to taxpayers - National legislation revoking the right of option and reintroducing the exemption - Whether permissible

(Council Directives 67/227, Art. 2, and 77/388, Art. 13B and C)

2 Community law - Principles - Protection of legitimate expectations - Legal certainty - Whether those principles were complied with in the context of the retroactive repeal of a law conferring a right of option on persons liable to pay value added tax - To be determined by the national courts

Summary

1 Article 2 of the First Directive (67/227) on the harmonisation of legislation of Member States concerning turnover taxes does not preclude a Member State which has availed itself of the possibility provided for by Article 13C of the Sixth Directive (77/388) - and which has thus granted its taxpayers the right to opt for taxation of certain lettings of immovable property - from abolishing, by means of a subsequent law, that right of option and thus reintroducing the exemption.

It is for the Member States, who have a wide discretion under Article 13B and C of the Sixth Directive, to assess whether or not they should introduce the right of option, depending on what they consider to be expedient in the situation existing in their country at a given time. The freedom to grant or decline to grant the right of option is not restricted in time; nor is it restricted by the fact that a contrary decision has been adopted in the past. Member States may therefore, within the sphere of their national powers, also revoke the right of option after having introduced it and return to the basic rule that the letting and the leasing of immovable property are exempt from tax.

Where a national legislature has granted taxpayers the right of option, it cannot be inferred from the principle of fiscal neutrality, which is laid down in Article 2 of the First Directive and which is inherent in the common system of value added tax, that its choice is irreversible. Since the implementation by the Sixth Directive of the harmonised system of exemptions, it is no longer possible to derogate from that system on the basis of a provision of the First Directive.

2 Although the principle of protection of legitimate expectations and the principle of legal certainty form part of the Community legal order and must be observed by the Member States when they exercise the powers conferred on them by Community directives, it is not for the Court but for the national court to determine whether a breach of those principles has been committed by the retroactive repeal of a law which introduced a right of option in relation to the taxation of the leasing and the letting of immovable property, but in respect of which the implementing decree was never adopted.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 Tax provisions - Harmonisation of laws - Turnover taxes - Common system of value added tax - Recovery of the tax - Limitation period - National procedural rules - Conditions for application

(Council Directive 77/388, Arts 4 and 10)

2 Tax provisions - Harmonisation of laws - Turnover taxes - Common system of value added tax - Deduction of input tax - Application to benefits in kind granted by an undertaking to its employees irrespective of the State in which the supplier is established

(Council Directives 67/227 and 77/388)

Summary

3 Articles 4 and 10 of the Sixth Directive 77/388 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes do not preclude a national practice which, in the case of transactions subject to value added tax effected by a company before it was registered for value added tax, consists in fixing the starting-point of the limitation period for the recovery of that tax at the 20th of the month following the quarter in which that registration took place.

Since those articles do not determine the point in time from which the limitation period for the recovery of value added tax begins to run and there are no other provisions in the Sixth Directive concerning that question, Member States are authorised to apply their own procedural rules, provided that the latter are not less favourable than those governing similar domestic actions nor arranged in such a way as to render it virtually impossible or excessively difficult to exercise rights conferred by Community law.

4 The principle that taxable persons are authorised to deduct from the value added tax for which they are liable the tax which the goods have already borne on each input transaction is of general application. Thus, neither the First Directive 67/227 nor the Sixth Directive 77/388 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes establishes a distinction according to whether a supply of services is made by a supplier established in the national territory or by one established in another Member State.

Therefore, the First and Sixth Directives preclude the value added tax on a benefit granted by an employer to his employee in the form of the placing of a vehicle at his disposal for private use from being calculated by including in the taxable amount the value added tax paid by the employer in another Member State on the renting of that vehicle, whereas, if the vehicle had been rented in the Member State in question, the taxable amount would not have included the value added tax paid.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Tax provisions - Harmonisation of laws - Turnover taxes - Common system of value added tax - Importation of goods - Entry into the Community - Meaning - Entry into a Member State of goods coming from the Netherlands Antilles - Covered

(EC Treaty, Art. 227; Council Directive 77/388, Art. 7(1); Council Decision 91/482)

Summary

It follows from the provisions of Articles 3 and 7, read together, of the Sixth Directive (77/388) on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes that the terms `Community' and `territory of the Community' relate to the area of application of the Treaty as defined for each Member State in Article 227 of the Treaty. In accordance with Article 227(3), the special arrangements for association set out in Part Four of the Treaty apply to the overseas countries and territories (OCTs), including the Netherlands Antilles. Under those arrangements, failing express reference, the general provisions of the Treaty do not apply to the OCTs. Consequently, the entry into a Member State of goods coming from the Netherlands Antilles cannot be categorised as an intra-Community transaction for the purposes of the Sixth Directive, unless a special provision so prescribes. There is no provision to that effect in the Sixth Directive or in Part Four of the Treaty or in Decision 91/482 on the association of the overseas countries and territories with the European Economic Community. The entry into a Member State of goods coming from the Netherlands Antilles must therefore be regarded as entry into the Community for the purposes of applying Article 7(1) of the Sixth Directive.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Social security for migrant workers - Insurance relating to old age and death - Calculation of benefits - National legislation fixing benefits on the basis of average contributions during a reference period - Detailed rules governing its application to a worker whose working life ended in a Member State applying different legislation and who had not paid contributions under the applicable legislation during the reference period - Calculation of the average contribution basis by reference to contributions actually paid under the applicable legislation and revalorisation of the pension amount - Breach of principles of Community law - No such breach

(EC Treaty, Art. 51; Council Regulation No 1408/71, Art. 47(1)(e) and Heading D, paragraph 4, of Annex VI)

Summary

Article 47(1)(g) of Regulation No 1408/71 implies that, on payment of old-age and invalidity pensions pursuant to the legislation of a Member State under which the amount of the pensions is calculated on an average contribution basis corresponding to the salary received over a certain number of years preceding retirement or the onset of invalidity, the average contribution basis, in the case of workers who, having been subject to the legislation of that Member State, took up paid employment in another Member State and continued to work there until the end of their working life, is calculated by reference only to the amount of the contributions paid under the legislation concerned; it also implies that that amount must be updated and revalorised so as to correspond with what the person concerned would have paid had he continued to work under the same conditions in the Member State in question.

The implementing rules for Spain which Regulation No 1248/92 introduced into heading D, paragraph 4, of Annex VI to Regulation No 1408/71 are consistent with that interpretation: they merely provide additional clarification of the detailed rules set out in that regulation under which the average contribution basis is to be determined by reference exclusively to insurance periods completed under the legislation concerned, whilst leaving the content of Article 47(1)(g) unaltered, and are intended only to ensure the compatibility thereof with the principles set out in Article 51 of the Treaty.

In that respect, there is no need to distinguish, from the point of view of the principles of Community law, between the updating of the contribution basis and the revalorisation of the amount of the pension. In both cases the objective is the same, that is to say, to arrive at a pension amount equivalent to that which the migrant worker would have received had he continued to work under the same conditions in the Member State in question, starting from the basis of the insured person's actual contributions before he went abroad, with effective updating taking account of the rise in the cost of living and the increases in benefits of the same kind.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Industry - Action necessary to ensure the competitiveness of industry - Council decision concerning the adoption of a multiannual programme to promote linguistic diversity of the Community in the information society - Legal basis - Article 130 of the Treaty - Incidental or secondary effects on cultural life - Irrelevant

(EC Treaty, Arts 128 and 130; Council Decision 96/664)

Summary

The Council was entitled to adopt Decision 96/664 on the adoption of a multiannual programme to promote linguistic diversity of the Community in the information society solely on the basis of Article 130 of the Treaty, a provision which enables the Community to decide on specific measures in support of action taken in the Member States to ensure the competitiveness of Community industry.

The wording of the title of a measure cannot by itself determine its legal basis and, in this case, the words `to promote ... linguistic diversity' appearing in the title of the contested decision cannot be isolated from the measure as a whole and interpreted independently. It does not appear from the aim or content of the decision in question that it is concerned, indissociably, with both industry and culture. Although it is not disputed that the programme will have beneficial effects for the dissemination of cultural works, in particular by improving the tools available for the task of translation, these are indirect and incidental as compared with the direct effects sought, which are of an economic nature, and do not justify basing the decision on Article 128 of the Treaty as well.

Moreover, that interpretation conforms with the actual text of Article 128(4) of the Treaty, according to which the Community is to take cultural aspects into account in its action under other provisions of the Treaty. It is clear from that provision that not every description of the cultural aspects of Community action necessarily implies that recourse must be had to Article 128 as the legal basis, where culture does not constitute an essential and indissociable component of the other component on which the action in question is based but is merely incidental or secondary to it.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 Common Customs Tariff - Tariff headings - Classification of goods - Criteria - Objective characteristics and properties of the product - Interpretation of tariff headings - Explanatory notes of the Commission and the Customs Cooperation Council - Authority - Scope

2 Common Customs Tariff - Tariff headings - Dried walnut pieces temporarily stored at a temperature of -24o C - Classification in Heading 0802 of the Combined Nomenclature

Summary

1 The decisive criterion for the classification of goods for customs purposes is in general to be sought in their objective characteristics and properties as defined in the wording of the relevant heading of the Combined Nomenclature. There are also explanatory notes drawn up, as regards the Nomenclature, by the Commission and, as regards the Harmonised Commodity Description and Coding System, by the Customs Cooperation Council, which are an important aid to the interpretation of the scope of the various tariff headings but do not have legally binding force.

2 On a proper interpretation of the Combined Nomenclature, dried walnut pieces, imported from a non-member country, which have been stored in the Community at a temperature of -24o C and which, after thawing out, are cleared through customs to be admitted into free circulation must be classified under tariff heading 0802 as `other nuts, fresh or dried, whether or not shelled or peeled'.

According to the introductory notes to chapter 8 of the Nomenclature, chilled fruit and nuts are to be classified in the same headings as the corresponding fresh fruit and nuts, and according to the general considerations in chapter 8 of the Nomenclature of the Customs Cooperation Council, the expression `frozen' means that the product has been cooled to below its freezing point, whereas a `chilled' product is one whose temperature has been reduced without the product being frozen.

However, dried walnuts do not contain water capable of being frozen; also, the treatment applied to those goods did not lead, when the goods were warmed up by raising the storage temperature, to any changes characteristic of freezing.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 Agriculture - Common organisation of the markets - Beef and veal - Special premium for producers - Undertaking given by the applicant to keep cattle on his holding - Not honoured on account of the transfer of the holding during the currency of the undertaking - Whether this constitutes a case of force majeure justifying continued entitlement to the premium - Not force majeure

(Commission Regulations No 1244/82, Art. 5, and No 714/89, Arts 2 and 9(3))

2 Agriculture - Common organisation of the markets - Beef and veal - Special premium for producers - Transfer of the holding during the currency of undertakings given by the transferor - Entitlement to the premium - Where the transferee has satisfied the required conditions - No entitlement

(Council Regulations No 805/68, Art. 4a(1), as amended by Regulation No 571/89, and No 468/87; Commission Regulation No 714/89)

Summary

1 A transfer of a holding during the currency of an undertaking - provided for in Article 2 of Regulation No 714/89 laying down detailed rules applying to the special premium for beef producers - on the part of the producer to keep the cattle on his holding cannot be assimilated to a case of force majeure, or, in particular, to non-compliance with the undertaking on account of the death of the beneficiary or his inability over a long period to carry out his job, which number among the cases of force majeure in which the right to the premium would be retained (listed in Article 5 of Regulation No 1244/82 laying down detailed rules implementing the system of premiums for maintaining suckler cows and to which Article 9(3) of Regulation No 714/89 refers). Such a transfer does not constitute an unusual and unforeseeable circumstance which was beyond the control of the party by whom it is pleaded and the consequences of which could not have been avoided even if all due care had been exercised.

2 Article 4a(1) of Regulation No 805/68 on the common organisation of the market in beef and veal, as amended by Regulation No 571/89, in conjunction with the provisions of Regulation No 468/87 laying down general rules applying to the special premium for beef producers and Regulation No 714/89 laying down detailed rules applying those arrangements, is to be interpreted as meaning that, where an agricultural holding is transferred by way of `vorweggenommene Erbfolge' (anticipated succession inter vivos) during the currency of undertakings given by the person applying for such a premium, entitlement to the premium does not pass to the new owner, even though the latter has satisfied the conditions laid down with regard to the keeping and fattening of the herd.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1 Acts of the institutions - Directives - Direct effect - Conditions - Legal basis of the directive - Irrelevant

(EC Treaty, Art. 100a (now, after amendment, Art. 95 EC))

2 Acts of the institutions - Directives - Direct effect - Conditions - Notification of a Member State in accordance with Article 100a(4) of the Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 95(4) to (9) EC) - Irrelevant - No confirmation by the Commission - No effect

(EC Treaty, Art. 100a(4) (now, after amendment, Art. 95(4) to (9) EC))

Summary

1 A directive can have direct effect even though its legal basis is Article 100a of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 95 EC) and Article 100a(4) allows Member States to request a derogation from the implementation of that directive. The general potential of a directive to have direct effect is wholly unrelated to its legal basis, depending instead on its intrinsic characteristics.

2 The direct effect of a directive, where the deadline for its transposition into national law has expired, is not affected by the notification made by a Member State pursuant to Article 100a(4) of the Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 95(4) to (9) EC) seeking confirmation of provisions of national law derogating from the directive, even where the Commission fails to respond to that notification.

The aim of the procedure under Article 100a(4) of the Treaty is to ensure that no Member State applies national rules derogating from the harmonised legislation without obtaining due confirmation from the Commission. Article 100a(4) is silent as to the time within which the Commission must adopt a position with regard to provisions of national law which have been notified. However, that does not absolve the Commission from the obligation to act with all due diligence in discharging its responsibilities. Accordingly, although failure on the part of the Commission to act with due diligence following a notification effected by a Member State under Article 100a(4) may therefore constitute a failure to fulfil its obligations, it cannot affect full application of the directive concerned.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Social policy - Men and women - Equal pay - Collective agreement under which persons engaged in `minor employment' are not entitled to a special annual bonus - Where that measure affects a considerably higher percentage of women than men - Not permissible

(EC Treaty, Art. 119 (Arts 117 to 120 of the EC Treaty have been replaced by Arts 136 EC to 143 EC)

Summary

$$Article 119 of the Treaty (Articles 117 to 120 of the EC Treaty have been replaced by Articles 136 EC to 143 EC) must be interpreted as meaning that exclusion by a collective agreement from entitlement to a special annual bonus provided for by that collective agreement of persons in employment which involves a normal working week of less than 15 hours and normal pay not exceeding a fraction of the monthly baseline and which is, on that basis, exempt from compulsory social insurance constitutes indirect discrimination based on sex, where that exclusion applies independently of the sex of the worker but actually affects a considerably higher percentage of women than men.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Tax provisions - Internal taxation - Differential taxation of motor vehicles - Sharp increase in progression coefficient above a cylinder level exceeded only by imported vehicles - Whether permissible - Conditions - Must not favour sales of vehicles of domestic manufacture

(EC Treaty, Art. 95 (now, after amendment, Art. 90 EC))

Summary

$$Article 95 of the Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 90 EC) does not preclude the application of national rules providing for a differential tax on motor vehicles, where the progression coefficient between one band and another rises more sharply in the bands above a certain cylinder power, covering exclusively imported vehicles, than in the lower bands, provided that the increase does not have the effect of favouring the sale of vehicles of domestic manufacture over the sale of vehicles imported from other Member States, in so far as consumers have a wide choice of imported vehicles among the lower-rated vehicles which are considered to be similar.
Keywords

Summary



Keywords

Economic and social cohesion - Projects relating to tourism and the environment - Grant of Community financial assistance - Evidence of interference from officials, likely to have an impact on the smooth running of a project funded by the Commission - Onus on the Commission to prove that the actions in question had no impact on the management of the project

Summary

$$Where the recipient of funding for a project for the creation of an information network on ecological tourism in Europe provides evidence that Commission officials have interfered in the management of the project in a manner likely to have an impact on its smooth running, it is for the Commission to show that, notwithstanding the interference in question, the recipient was still in a position to manage the project in a satisfactory manner. The recipient cannot therefore be required to furnish proof that those actions made it impossible for it to engage in proper cooperation with its partners in the project.