CELEX: 62017CA0602
Language: en
Date: 2018-10-24 00:00:00
Title: Case C-602/17: Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 24 October 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal de première instance de Liège — Belgium) — Benoît Sauvage, Kristel Lejeune v État belge (Reference for a preliminary ruling – Freedom of movement for workers – Income received in a Member State other than the Member State of residence – Bilateral convention for the avoidance of double taxation – Allocation of powers of taxation – Member State of residence’s power to tax – Connecting factors)

7.1.2019   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 4/10
            
         
      Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 24 October 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal de première instance de Liège — Belgium) — Benoît Sauvage, Kristel Lejeune v État belge
      (Case C-602/17) (1)
      
      (Reference for a preliminary ruling - Freedom of movement for workers - Income received in a Member State other than the Member State of residence - Bilateral convention for the avoidance of double taxation - Allocation of powers of taxation - Member State of residence’s power to tax - Connecting factors)
      (2019/C 4/13)
      Language of the case: French
      
         Referring court
      
      Tribunal de première instance de Liège
      
         Parties to the main proceedings
      
      
         Applicant: Benoît Sauvage, Kristel Lejeune
      
         Defendant: État belge
      
         Operative part of the judgment
      
      Article 45 TFEU must be interpreted as meaning that it does not preclude a tax scheme of a Member State under a tax convention for the avoidance of double taxation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which makes the exemption of the income of a resident which arises in another Member State and relates to employment in that State subject to the condition that the activity in respect of which the income is paid is actually performed in that State.
      
         (1)  OJ C 437, 18.12.2017.