CELEX: 62006CB0415
Language: en
Date: 2007-11-06 00:00:00
Title: Case C-415/06: Order of the Court of 6 November 2007 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof (Germany)) — Stahlwerk Ergste Westig GmbH v Finanzamt Düsseldorf-Mettmann (First subparagraph of Article 104(3) of the Rules of Procedure — Answer clearly able to be deduced from case-law — Free movement of capital — Taxation on income — Company having permanent establishments in a non-Member State — Account taken of losses incurred by those establishments)

23.2.2008   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 51/29
            
         Order of the Court of 6 November 2007 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof (Germany)) — Stahlwerk Ergste Westig GmbH v Finanzamt Düsseldorf-Mettmann
   (Case C-415/06) (1)
   
   (First subparagraph of Article 104(3) of the Rules of Procedure - Answer clearly able to be deduced from case-law - Free movement of capital - Taxation on income - Company having permanent establishments in a non-Member State - Account taken of losses incurred by those establishments)
   (2008/C 51/48)
   Language of the case: German
   Referring court
   Bundesfinanzhof (Germany)
   Parties
   
      Applicant: Stahlwerk Ergste Westig GmbH
   
      Defendant: Finanzamt Düsseldorf-Mettmann
   Re:
   Preliminary ruling — Bundesfinanzhof — Interpretation of Articles 56 EC, 57(1) EC and 58 EC — Deduction from the taxable profits of a German company of losses resulting from the activity of a permanent establishment in a non-member country — Deduction refused on the basis of a bilateral double taxation convention concluded with that non-member country
   Operative part of the order
   A national system of taxation under which a company having its head office in a Member State, when determining its results, cannot deduct losses incurred by an establishment in a non-Member State fundamentally affects the exercise of the freedom of establishment within the meaning of Articles 43 EC to 48 EC. Those provisions cannot be relied upon in a situation involving such an establishment in a non-Member State.
   
      (1)  OJ C 326, 31.12.2006.