CELEX: 62017CA0039
Language: en
Date: 2018-06-14 00:00:00
Title: Case C-39/17: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 14 June 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation — France) — Lubrizol France SAS v Caisse nationale du Régime social des indépendants (RSI) participations extérieures (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Free movement of goods — Articles 28 and 30 TFEU — Charges having equivalent effect — Article 110 TFEU — Internal taxation — Social solidarity contribution payable by companies — Charge — Basis of assessment — Companies’ overall annual turnover — Directive 2006/112/EC — Article 17 — Transfer of goods to another Member State — Value of the goods transferred — Inclusion in the overall annual turnover)

201807200322013642018/C 276/07392017CJC27620180806EN01ENINFO_JUDICIAL201806145621Case C-39/17: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 14 June 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation — France) — Lubrizol France SAS v Caisse nationale du Régime social des indépendants (RSI) participations extérieures (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Free movement of goods — Articles 28 and 30 TFEU — Charges having equivalent effect — Article 110 TFEU — Internal taxation — Social solidarity contribution payable by companies — Charge — Basis of assessment — Companies’ overall annual turnover — Directive 2006/112/EC — Article 17 — Transfer of goods to another Member State — Value of the goods transferred — Inclusion in the overall annual turnover)
 ---documentbreak--- C2762018EN510120180614EN00075162Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 14 June 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation — France) — Lubrizol France SAS v Caisse nationale du Régime social des indépendants (RSI) participations extérieures
   (Case C-39/17) (
         1
      )
   ‛(Reference for a preliminary ruling — Free movement of goods — Articles 28 and 30 TFEU — Charges having equivalent effect — Article 110 TFEU — Internal taxation — Social solidarity contribution payable by companies — Charge — Basis of assessment — Companies’ overall annual turnover — Directive 2006/112/EC — Article 17 — Transfer of goods to another Member State — Value of the goods transferred — Inclusion in the overall annual turnover)’2018/C 276/07Language of the case: French
      Referring court
   
   Cour de cassation
   
      Parties to the main proceedings
   
   
      Applicant: Lubrizol France SAS
   
      Defendant: Caisse nationale du Régime social des indépendants (RSI) participations extérieures
   
      Operative part of the judgment
   
   Articles 28 and 30 TFEU must be interpreted as not precluding legislation of a Member State which provides that the basis of assessment for contributions levied on the annual turnover of companies, provided that the latter reaches or exceeds a certain amount, is calculated by taking into account the representative value of the goods transferred by or on behalf of a taxable person, for the purposes of his business, from that Member State to another EU Member State, that value being taken into account from the time of that transfer, whereas, in the case where the same goods are transferred by or on behalf of the taxable person, for the purposes of his business, within the territory of the Member State concerned, their value is taken into account in that basis of assessment only at the time of their subsequent sale, on condition that:
   
            —
         
         
            first, the value of those goods is not taken into account in that basis of assessment for a second time at the time of their subsequent sale in that Member State;
         
      
            —
         
         
            secondly, their value is deducted from that basis of assessment when those goods are not intended to be sold in the other Member State or have been transferred back to the Member State of origin without having been sold, and
         
      
            —
         
         
            thirdly, the advantages stemming from the use of those contributions do not offset in full the burden borne by the national product marketed on the national market when it is placed on the market, this being a matter for the referring court to ascertain.
         
      (
         1
      )	OJ C 112, 10.4.2017.