CELEX: 62013CA0133
Language: en
Date: 2014-12-18 00:00:00
Title: Case C-133/13: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 18 December 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Raad van State — Netherlands) — Staatssecretaris van Economische Zaken, Staatssecretaris van Financiën v Q (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Free movement of capital — Tax legislation — Gift tax — Exemption in respect of an ‘estate’  — No exemption in respect of property situated in the territory of another Member State)

23.2.2015   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 65/5
            
         Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 18 December 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Raad van State — Netherlands) — Staatssecretaris van Economische Zaken, Staatssecretaris van Financiën v Q
   (Case C-133/13) (1)
   
   ((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Free movement of capital - Tax legislation - Gift tax - Exemption in respect of an ‘estate’ - No exemption in respect of property situated in the territory of another Member State))
   (2015/C 065/06)
   Language of the case: Dutch
   
      Referring court
   
   Raad van State
   
      Parties to the main proceedings
   
   
      Applicants: Staatssecretaris van Economische Zaken, Staatssecretaris van Financiën
   
      Defendant: Q
   
      Operative part of the judgment
   
   Article 63 TFEU must be interpreted as not precluding legislation of a Member State, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, under which an exemption from gift tax relating to certain properties that are protected on account of their forming part of the national cultural and historical heritage is limited to those properties situated in the territory of that Member State, provided that that exemption is not excluded in the case of properties that may form part of the cultural and historical heritage of that Member State despite being located in the territory of another State.
   
      (1)  OJ C 171, 15.6.2013.