Case C-438/06: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Sozialgericht Würzburg (Germany) lodged on 24 October 2006 — Otmar Greser v Bundesagentur für Arbeit
Date: 2006-12-30
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: interpretation of the law, residence, social legislation, social security, social-security benefit, worker (EU)

C 326/34

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

30.12.2006

Question referred

Is it compatible with Article 56 of the Treaty establishing the
European Community (EC), on the free movement of capital,
that
the profits from a sale of shares in a foreign limited
company in 2001 were subject to tax if the seller held, either
directly or indirectly, a share of at least 1 % of the company's
capital within the previous five years, whereas the profits from
the sale of shares in a (national) limited company subject to
unlimited corporation tax in 2001 were, in otherwise compar-
able circumstances, subject to tax only in the case of a substan-
tial shareholding of at least 10 %?

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Niedersäch-
sisches Finanzgericht (Germany)
lodged on 24 October
2006 — SECURENTA Göttinger Immobilienanlagen und
Vermögensmanagement AG als Rechtsnachfolgerin der
Göttinger Vermögensanlagen AG v Finanzamt Göttingen

applicant submits — a ‘transaction formula’, applying Article
17(5) of Directive 77/388/EEC mutatis mutandis, also appro-
priate?

(1) OJ 1977 L 145, p. 1.

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Sozialgericht
lodged on 24 October 2006 —
Würzburg (Germany)

Otmar Greser v Bundesagentur für Arbeit

(Case C-438/06)

(2006/C 326/72)

Language of the case: German

(Case C-437/06)

(2006/C 326/71)

Referring court

Sozialgericht Würzburg

Language of the case: German

Parties to the main proceedings

Referring court

Niedersächsisches Finanzgericht

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant:
SECURENTA Göttinger
Vermögensmanagement AG als
Göttinger Vermögensanlagen AG

Immobilienanlagen und
der
Rechtsnachfolgerin

Defendant: Finanzamt Göttingen

Questions referred

1. If a taxable person simultaneously engages in a business
activity and a non-business activity,
is the entitlement to
deduct input tax determined according to the proportion of
assessable and taxable transactions, on the one hand, to the
assessable and exempt transactions, on the other hand (the
applicant's view), or is the deduction of tax allowed only to
the extent that the expenditure connected with the issue of
shares and silent partnerships is to be attributed to the appli-
cant's economic activity within the meaning of Article 2(1)
of Council Directive 77/388/EEC (1) of 17 May 1977 on the
harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to
turnover taxes?

2. If the deduction of tax is allowed only to the extent that the
expenditure connected with the issue of shares and silent
partnerships is to be attributed to the applicant's economic
activity, should the apportionment of the input tax between
business activity and non-business activity be carried out
according to a so-called ‘investment formula’ or is — as the

Applicant: Otmar Greser

Defendant: Bundesagentur für Arbeit

Question referred

The preliminary issue in the present case is how Article 71(1)(b)
of Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 (1) is to be interpreted. Under
that provision, must a worker return to his place of residence or
is it sufficient that he returns to another place in the Member
State once a week?

(1) OJ, English Special Edition 1971 (II), p. 416.

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlandesger-
icht Dresden (Germany) lodged on 24 October 2006 —
Staatsministerium für
citiworks AG v

Sächsisches

Wirtschaft und Arbeit als Landesregulierungsbehörde

(Case C-439/06)

(2006/C 326/73)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Oberlandesgericht Dresden