CELEX: 62013CA0489
Language: en
Date: 2014-09-11 00:00:00
Title: Case C-489/13: Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 11 September 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the hof van beroep te Antwerpen (Belgium)) — Ronny Verest and Gaby Gerards v Belgische Staat (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Income tax — Legislation for the avoidance of double taxation — Taxation of income from immovable property received in a Member State other than the Member State of residence — Method of exemption with maintenance of progressivity in the Member State of residence — Difference in treatment between immovable property situated in the Member State of residence and in another Member State)

17.11.2014   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 409/17
            
         Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 11 September 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the hof van beroep te Antwerpen (Belgium)) — Ronny Verest and Gaby Gerards v Belgische Staat
   (Case C-489/13) (1)
   
   ((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Income tax - Legislation for the avoidance of double taxation - Taxation of income from immovable property received in a Member State other than the Member State of residence - Method of exemption with maintenance of progressivity in the Member State of residence - Difference in treatment between immovable property situated in the Member State of residence and in another Member State))
   2014/C 409/24
   Language of the case: Dutch
   
      Referring court
   
   hof van beroep te Antwerpen
   
      Parties to the main proceedings
   
   
      Appellants: Ronny Verest and Gaby Gerards
   
      Respondent: Belgische Staat
   
      Operative part of the judgment
   
   Article 63 TFEU must be interpreted as precluding legislation of a Member State, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, in so far as it is liable to lead, when a progressivity clause contained in a convention for the prevention of double taxation is applied, to a higher rate of tax on income merely because the method for determining income from immovable property results in income deriving from immovable property that is not rented out situated in another Member State being assessed at a higher amount than income from such property situated in the first Member State. It is for the referring court to ascertain whether that is in fact the effect of the legislation at issue in the dispute in the main proceedings.
   
      (1)  OJ C 352, 30.11.2013.