26

In those circumstances, the Gyulai Közigazgatási és Munkaügyi Bíróság (Administrative and Labour Court, Gyula) decided to stay the proceedings and to refer the following questions to the Court for a preliminary ruling: ‘1. May Article 55 of the VAT Directive in force until 1 January 2010 be interpreted as referring only to those taxable persons receiving a supply of services who do not have, or are not required to have, an identification number for VAT purposes in the Member State of the place where the services are physically carried out? 2. If the first question is answered in the affirmative, is Article 52 of the VAT Directive exclusively applicable for determination of the place of supply of the services? 3. If the first question is answered in the negative, must Article 55 of the VAT Directive in force until 1 January 2010 be interpreted as meaning that, when the taxable person receiving the services covered by a contract has, or ought to have, a VAT identification number in more than one Member State, the decision of that recipient of the services exclusively determines the fiscal identification number under which he receives the supply of services (including cases in which the taxable person receiving the supply is deemed to be established in the Member State of the place of physical performance of the services, but also has a VAT identification number in another Member State)? 4. If the answer to the third question should be that the right to decide of the recipient of the supply of services is unlimited, must Article 55 of the VAT Directive be interpreted as meaning that: — until 31 December 2009, it may be considered that the supply of services was performed under the VAT identification number indicated by the recipient of that supply, if the recipient also has the status of taxable person registered (established) in another Member State and the goods are dispatched or transported out of the Member State in which the supply has been physically carried out? — the determination of the place of performance of the services is influenced by the fact that the recipient of the supply is a taxable person established in another Member State who delivers the finished goods by dispatching or transporting them out of the Member State in which the services have been supplied to an intermediate purchaser, who in turn resells the goods in a third Member State without the recipient of the contractual services transporting the goods back to his establishment? 5. If the recipient of the supply of services does not have an unlimited right to decide, do the following factors influence the applicability of Article 55 of the VAT Directive, in force until 1 January 2010: — the circumstances in which the recipient of certain works carried out on goods acquires the appropriate raw materials and places them at the disposal of the person carrying them out; — the Member State from which and the fiscal identification number under which the taxable person receiving the services effects delivery of the finished goods resulting from such works; — the fact that — as occurs in the main proceedings — the finished goods resulting from such works are the subject of various deliveries as part of a chain of operations, still within the country in which the works are carried out, and that they are transported directly from that country to the final purchaser?’