CELEX: 62019CA0544
Language: en
Date: 2021-10-06 00:00:00
Title: Case C-544/19: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 6 October 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Administrativen sad — Blagoevgrad — Bulgaria) — ‘ECOTEX BULGARIA’ EOOD v Teritorialna direktsia na Natsionalnata agentsia za prihodite — Sofia (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Article 63 TFEU — Free movement of capital — Directive (EU) 2015/849 — Scope — National legislation requiring payments exceeding a certain amount to be made only by transfer or deposit into a payment account — Article 65 TFEU — Justification — Combating tax evasion and tax avoidance — Proportionality — Administrative penalties of a criminal nature — Article 49 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Principles of legality and proportionality of criminal offences and penalties)

29.11.2021   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 481/10
            
         
      Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 6 October 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Administrativen sad — Blagoevgrad — Bulgaria) — ‘ECOTEX BULGARIA’ EOOD v Teritorialna direktsia na Natsionalnata agentsia za prihodite — Sofia
      (Case C-544/19) (1)
      
      (Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 63 TFEU - Free movement of capital - Directive (EU) 2015/849 - Scope - National legislation requiring payments exceeding a certain amount to be made only by transfer or deposit into a payment account - Article 65 TFEU - Justification - Combating tax evasion and tax avoidance - Proportionality - Administrative penalties of a criminal nature - Article 49 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Principles of legality and proportionality of criminal offences and penalties)
      (2021/C 481/14)
      Language of the case: Bulgarian
      
         Referring court
      
      Administrativen sad — Blagoevgrad
      
         Parties to the main proceedings
      
      
         Appellant in cassation:‘ECOTEX BULGARIA’ EOOD
      
         Respondent in cassation: Teritorialna direktsia na Natsionalnata agentsia za prihodite — Sofia
      
         Interested party: Prokuror ot Okrazhna prokuratura — Blagoevgrad
      
         Operative part of the judgment
      
      
                  1.
               
               
                  Legislation of a Member State which, for domestic payments the amount of which is equal to or exceeds a set threshold, prohibits natural and legal persons from making payments in cash and requires them to make a transfer or deposit into a payment account does not come within the scope of Directive (EU) 2015/849 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2015 on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purposes of money laundering or terrorist financing, amending Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council, and repealing Directive 2005/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Commission Directive 2006/70/EC.
               
            
                  2.
               
               
                  Article 63 TFEU, read in conjunction with Article 49(3) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, must be interpreted as not precluding legislation of a Member State which, with a view to combating tax evasion and tax avoidance, first, prohibits natural and legal persons from making domestic payments in cash where the amount of the payment is equal to or exceeds a set threshold and requires, to that end, a transfer or deposit into a payment account, including as regards the distribution of dividends of a company, and second, provides for a system of penalties for infringing that prohibition in the context of which the amount of the fine that may be imposed is calculated as a fixed percentage of the total amount of the payment made in breach of that prohibition, without it being possible to adjust that fine depending on the particular circumstances of the case, provided that that legislation is appropriate for securing attainment of those objectives and does not go beyond what is necessary for attaining them.
               
            
         (1)  OJ C 357, 21.10.2019.