Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1. Free movement of goods – Community transit – Transport operations carried out under cover of a TIR carnet – Offences or irregularities – Competent Member State for the recovery of duties and other taxes – State where the offence or irregularity occurred – Enforceable judgment establishing the place where the offence was committed in the territory of a Member State other than that which detected the offence

(Commission Regulation No 2454/93, Arts 454 and 455)

2. Free movement of goods – Community transit – Transport operations carried out under cover of a TIR carnet – Offences or irregularities – Competent Member State for the recovery of duties and other taxes – Enforceable judgment identifying as competent to recover the customs debts a Member State other than that which initially detected the offence – Limitation period for the recovery action against the guaranteeing association – Point from which time starts to run

(Commission Regulation No 2454/93, Art. 455(1))

Summary

1. Articles 454 and 455 of Regulation No 2454/93 laying down provisions for the implementation of Regulation No 2913/92 establishing the Community Customs Code are to be interpreted as meaning that, when the presumption that competence to recover a customs debt lies with the Member State in whose territory an offence committed in the course of a TIR transport operation was detected is rebutted following a judgment establishing that that offence was committed in the territory of another Member State, the customs authorities of the latter Member State become competent to recover that debt, provided that the facts giving rise to the offence became the subject of legal proceedings within two years of the date on which the guaranteeing association for the territory in which the offence was detected was notified thereof.

(see para. 39, operative part 1)

2. Article 455(1) of Regulation No 2454/93 laying down provisions for the implementation of Regulation No 2913/92 establishing the Community Customs Code, read in conjunction with Article 11(1) of the Customs Convention on the international transport of goods under cover of TIR carnets, is to be interpreted as meaning that if, following judicial proceedings ending more than a year after the acceptance of a TIR carnet, competence to recover customs duties reverts back to a Member State other than that which initially detected the offence, the guaranteeing association in respect of the transport carried out in the territory of the Member State where the offence was committed cannot rely on the limitation period provided for in those provisions where the customs authorities of the Member State for whose territory it is responsible notify it, within a period of one year from the date on which those authorities were informed of an enforceable judgment identifying them as competent, of the facts which gave rise to the customs debt for which it is liable up to the amount it guarantees.

In such circumstances, in order not to undermine the effectiveness of the system for recovering customs debts established by the TIR Convention, the Customs Code and the implementing regulation, the one-year time-limit for the planned recovery action against the guaranteeing association must begin to run on the date on which the customs authorities of the Member State were informed of the enforceable judgment identifying their territory as that in which the offence was committed. The objective of that time-limit is to ensure the diligent and uniform application of the provisions relating to the recovery of duties and taxes in order to secure rapid and effective availability of the Union’s own resources. In the light of that objective, that time-limit must be regarded as constituting a procedural rule which is directed only at the administrative authorities with a view to encouraging them to intervene as soon as possible.

(see paras 45-46, 49, 52, operative part 2)