CELEX: 62018CN0075
Language: en
Date: 2018-02-06 00:00:00
Title: Case C-75/18: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Fővárosi Közigazgatási és Munkaügyi Bíróság (Hungary) lodged on 6 February 2018 — Vodafone Magyarország Mobil Távközlési Zrt. v Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Fellebbviteli Igazgatósága

201806080461931632018/C 221/03752018CJC22120180625EN01ENINFO_JUDICIAL201802062322Case C-75/18: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Fővárosi Közigazgatási és Munkaügyi Bíróság (Hungary) lodged on 6 February 2018 — Vodafone Magyarország Mobil Távközlési Zrt. v Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Fellebbviteli Igazgatósága
 ---documentbreak--- C2212018EN220120180206EN00032232Request for a preliminary ruling from the Fővárosi Közigazgatási és Munkaügyi Bíróság (Hungary) lodged on 6 February 2018 — Vodafone Magyarország Mobil Távközlési Zrt. v Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Fellebbviteli Igazgatósága
   (Case C-75/18)2018/C 221/03Language of the case: Hungarian
      Referring court
   
   Fővárosi Közigazgatási és Munkaügyi Bíróság
   
      Parties to the main proceedings
   
   
      Applicant: Vodafone Magyarország Mobil Távközlési Zrt.
   
      Defendant: Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Fellebbviteli Igazgatósága
   
      Questions referred
   
   
            1.
         
         
            Must the provisions of Articles 49, 54, 107 and 108 TFEU be interpreted as precluding a national measure pursuant to which a Member State’s legislation (Law establishing liability to a special tax on telecommunications) has the effect that the actual tax burden falls on foreign-owned taxable persons? Is that effect indirectly discriminatory?
         
      
            2.
         
         
            Do Articles 107 and 108 TFEU preclude a Member State’s legislation imposing a tax liability on turnover calculated on the basis of a progressive tax rate? If the effect of that legislation is that the actual tax burden, for the highest tax band, falls mainly on foreign-owned taxable persons, is that legislation indirectly discriminatory? Does that effect amount to prohibited State aid?
         
      
            3.
         
         
            Must Article 401 of the VAT Directive (
                  1
               ) be interpreted as precluding legislation of a Member State that gives rise to a distinction between foreign-owned taxable persons and national taxable persons? Must the special tax be considered a tax on turnover? In other words, is this tax compatible or not with the VAT Directive?
         
      (
         1
      )	Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1).