CELEX: 62016CN0028
Language: en
Date: 2016-01-18 00:00:00
Title: Case C-28/16: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Kúria (Hungary) lodged on 18 January 2016 — Magyar Villamos Művek Zrt. (MVM) v Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Fellebviteli Igazgatósága

2.5.2016   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 156/21
            
         Request for a preliminary ruling from the Kúria (Hungary) lodged on 18 January 2016 — Magyar Villamos Művek Zrt. (MVM) v Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Fellebviteli Igazgatósága
   (Case C-28/16)
   (2016/C 156/30)
   Language of the case: Hungarian
   
      Referring court
   
   Kúria
   
      Parties to the main proceedings
   
   
      Appellant: Magyar Villamos Művek Zrt. (MVM)
   
      Respondent: Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Fellebviteli Igazgatósága
   
      Questions referred
   
   
               1.
            
            
               May a holding company which plays an active role in the management of certain affairs of its subsidiaries, or of the group of companies as a whole, but which does not pass on to its subsidiaries the cost of the services carried out in relation to its active holding activity or the corresponding VAT be regarded as a taxable person for the purpose of VAT in respect of those services?
            
         
               2.
            
            
               If the first question is answered in the affirmative, may the active holding company exercise the right to deduct the VAT corresponding to the services used by it which are directly related to the taxed economic activity of some of its subsidiaries, and if so in what way?
            
         
               3.
            
            
               If the first question is answered in the affirmative, may the active holding company exercise the right to deduct the VAT corresponding to the services used which are in the interest of the group of companies as a whole, and if so in what way?
            
         
               4.
            
            
               Do the answers to be given to the above question differ if the active holding company bills its subsidiaries in respect of the abovementioned services as intermediary services, and if so to what extent?