natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Nævnte artikel 6 indeholder jo følgende bestemmelser: »Tjenesteydelser anses for præsteret, når modydelsen erlægges.« Ifølge Italittica udgjorde proformafakturaen ikke en regning, men alene et dokument, der var udstedt som bevis for skylden for hidtil udført arbejde samt med henblik på at opnå et tilskud fra regionalmyndighederne.
That provision states: The supply of services is regarded as effected upon payment of the consideration.' According to Italittica, the pro forma document was not an invoice but simply a document issued as evidence of the debt corresponding to the state of progress of the works and in order to obtain a grant from the regional authorities.
Italittica, der driver dambrugsanlæg, afsluttede to kontrakter med selskabet Sangiovanni Industrie Riunite (herefter benævnt »Sangiovanni«) om opførelse af en bygning til selskabets drift. Sangiovanni udstedte i forbindelse hermed tre fakturaer og senere en proformafaktura til endelig afregning, der ikke angav det momsbeløb, som skulle betales.
Even if the third subparagraph of Article 10(2) of the Directive should be interpreted strictly, it must be noted that the set of transactions mentioned in that provision comprises supplies of services and deliveries of goods.
Under den af Ufficio anlagte sag til prøvelse af sidstnævnte afgørelse har Commissione tributaria centrale besluttet at udsætte sagen og anmode Domstolen om en præjudiciel afgørelse af følgende spørgsmål:
Does Article 10(2) of Council Directive 77/388/EEC allow the Member States to determine that the "receipt of the price" is to be regarded as the event which, for all supplies of services, renders the tax "chargeable"?
Har medlemsstaterne efter artikel 10, stk. 2, i Rådets direktiv 77/388/EØF
Is a Member State which avails itself of the "derogation" provided for in Article 10(2) required to lay down "a specified
Italittica havde opført værdien af denne bygning under aktiver i årsregnskabet for 1980, hvori skylden til Sangiovanni var opført under rubrikken »ydelser ifølge senere regning« uden angivelse af momsbeløbet.
Article 6(4) of the Second Council Directive of 11 April 1967 on the harmonization of legislation of Member States concerning turnover taxes -Structure and procedures for application of a common system of value-added tax and the Commission's proposal for the Sixth Directive provide for only rare exceptions to the rule that the tax is chargeable at the moment when the service is provided.
Ufficio IVA di Trapani (herefter benævnt »Ufficio«) nåede til det resultat, at Italittica havde overtrådt artikel 41, stk. 4, i dekret fra Republikkens præsident nr. 633 af 26. oktober 1972 om indførelse af moms og regler for betaling heraf (herefter benævnt »dekretet«), hvorfor der blev pålagt selskabet en bøde.
The fact that the Community legislature substantially extended the scope of the permitted derogations suggests that it intended to allow the Member States a wide margin of discretion.
mulighed for at bestemme, at afgiften 'forfalder' for samtlige tjenesteydelser, 'når vederlaget indgår*?
Where a Member State opts for the derogation provided for in the first indent in the third subparagraph of Article 10(2) of the Directive, namely where it makes the tax chargeable no later than the issue of the invoice or the document serving as invoice, it may provide that the tax becomes chargeable "where an invoice or document serving as invoice is not issued, or is issued late, within a specified period from the date of the chargeable event'.
2) merværdiafgiftssystems struktur og de nærmere regler for dets anvendelse kan der — ligesom efter Kommissionens forslag til Rådets sjette direktiv — kun i meget få tilfælde gøres undtagelse fra reglen om, at afgiften forfalder på det tidspunkt, hvor tjenesteydelsen præsteres.
Apart from the general obligation on the taxpayer set out in Article 22(2) of the Directive to keep accounts in sufficient detail to permit application of the tax and inspection by the tax authority, the Directive imposes no obligation on the Member States to require documents or records to be drawn up other than the 'invoice, or other document serving as invoice'.
Det kan på grundlag af den omstændighed, at fællesskabslovgiver har afgrænset området for tilladelige undtagelser vidt, antages, at det var hensigten at levne plads for et vidt skøn for medlemsstaterne.
In accordance with Article 22(8), it is for the Member States to impose such other obligations as they may deem necessary for the correct levying and collection of the tax and for the prevention of fraud.
Har den medlemsstat, som påberåber sig 'undtagelsen' i direktivets artikel 10, stk. 2, pligt til at fastsætte 'en nærmere angivet frist fra afgiftspligtens indtræden', inden for hvilken fakturaen eller det dokument, der tjener som faktura, skal være udstedt, skønt Vederlaget' endnu ikke 'er indgået'?
That there is no such possibility where a Member State opts for the derogation laid down in the second indent is probably due to the fact that the Community legislature considered that a trader's interest in receiving consideration for the service carried out was a sufficient incentive to ensure prompt payment for the service.
Det andet spørgsmål
The Court ruled:
Har den medlemsstat, der påberåber sig ovennævnte 'undtagelse', pligt til at indføre nærmere regler for dokumentation og registrering af leverede tjenesteydelser og betalingen herfor i tilfælde, hvor der ikke er udstedt faktura eller et dokument, som træder i stedet herfor, eller vederlaget ikke er indgået?«
The Member State which avails itself of the derogation in the third subparagraph of Article 10(2) of Directive 77/388 L· not required to lay down detailed rules for documentation and recording of the completed service and the payment for it whenever the invoice or document serving as invoice has not been issued or the price has not been received'
Den forelæggende ret finder det usikkert, om de italienske bestemmelser er lovlige efter direktivet.
Advocate General Jacobs delivered his Opinion at the sitting of the Fifth Chamber on 13 July 1995.
Det tredje spørgsmål
He was of the opinion that the Court should reply as follows:
Disse vide skønsbeføjelser er velbegrundet, for så vidt som medlemsstaterne må tage hensyn til virksomhedernes størrelse og deres virksomheds art samt de krav, der følger af de forskellige lovgivninger om selskabsspørgsmål og direkte skatter.
Artide 10(2) of the Sixth Council Directive (77/388/EEC) of 17 May 1977 on the harmonization of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment allows the Member States to determine that the receipt of the price is to be regarded as the event which, for all supplies of services, renders the tax chargeable.
En medlemsstat, der gør brug af undtagelsen ifølge direktivets artikel 10, stk 2, tredje afsnit, har ikke pligt til at »fastsætte en nærmere angivet frist fra afgiftspligtens indtræden«, inden for hvilken fakturaen eller det dokument, der tiener som faktura, skal være udstedt, skønt vederlaget endnu ikke er indgået
A Member State which avails itself of the derogation provided for in Article 10(2), third subparagraph, second indent, is not required to lay down a specified period from the date of the chargeable event within which the invoice or document serving as invoice must be issued even when the price has not been paid.
En medlemsstat, der benytter sig af nævnte undtagelsesbestemmelse, har ikke pligt til at indføre bestemmelser om udfærdigelse af dokumenter eller opgørelser vedrørende den afsluttede ydelse og det beløb, der skyldes som vedenag, i aüe tilfælde, hvor fakturaen eller det til fakturaen svarende beløb ikke er blevet udstedt eller vederlaget ikke er indgået«
A Member State which avails itself of the abovementioned derogation is not required to lay down detailed rules for documentation and recording of the completed service and the payment for it whenever the invoice or document serving as invoice has not been issued or the price has not been paid.'
Generaladvokat F.G. Jacobs fremsatte forslag til afgørelse i retsmødet (Femte Afdeling) den 13. juli 1995.
Case C-151/94 Commission of the European Communities ν Grand Duchy of Luxembourg Social policy
Han foreslog Domstolen at besvare de forelagte spørgsmål på følgende måde:
(Article 48 of the EC Treaty — Equal treatment — Taxation of income of temporary — Repayment of excess tax) (Sixth Chamber)
»1) Medlemsstaterne kan efter artikel 10, stk. 2, i Rådets direktiv 77/388/EØF bestemme, at den omstændighed, der bringer afgiften til at forfalde for samtlige tjenesteydelser, skal være vederlagets indgang.
Under Article 154(5) of the Loi sur l'Impôt sur le Revenu (Income Tax Law), hereinafter 'the LIR') excess tax paid is set against other tax liabilities or, if there are none, automatically refunded to the taxpayer.
2) En medlemsstat, som benytter sig af undtagelsen ifølge artikel 10, stk. 2, tredje afsnit, andet led, er ikke forpligtet til at fastsætte en nærmere angivet frist fra afgiftspligtens indtræden, inden for hvilken fakturaen eller det dokument, der tjener som faktura, skal være udstedt, skønt vederlaget endnu ikke er indgået.
By application lodged on 3 June 1994, the Commission brought an action for a declaration that, by maintaining in force provisions under which the excess amounts of tax deducted from the wages or salaries of nationals of a Member State who have resided in Luxembourg and/or occupied a salaried position there for only part of the year remain the property of the Treasury and can be neither repaid nor adjusted, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 48(2) of the EC Treaty and Article 7(2) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68.
3) En medlemsstat, der påberåber sig nævnte undtagelsesbestemmelse, har ikke pligt til at indføre nærmere regler for udfærdigelse af dokumentation eller registrering af leverede tjenesteydelser, og betalingen herfor, hver gang der ikke er udstedt faktura eller dokument, som træder i stedet herfor, eller vederlaget ikke er indgået.«
Under Luxembourg tax legislation the method by which excess amounts of income tax are refunded differs according to whether or not the taxpayer is taxed by direct assessment.
Sag C-151/94 Kommissionen for De Europæiske Fællesskaber / Storhertugdømmet Luxembourg Socialpolitik
discriminatory national provisions on income tax. For that reason the Council had laid down, in Article 7 of Regulation No 1612/68, that workers who were nationals of a Member State were to enjoy, in the territory of another Member State, the same tax advantages as national workers.
»EF-traktatens artikel 48 — ligebehandling — indkomstbeskatning hjemmehørende personer — tilbagebetaling af for meget indeholdt skat« (Sjette Afdeling) overstiger et nærmere angivet maksimumsbeløb. I medfør af LIR's artikel 45, stk. 1, foretages der hvert år en regulering af skatten af lønindkomst.
In order that taxpayers not satisfying the abovementioned conditions may nevertheless obtain an 'equitable' refund of the excess amount of tax deducted, they are required to initiate a non-contentious procedure before the Director of Taxes in accordance with Paragraph 131(1) of the Abgabenordnung (Tax Code, 'the AO'), claiming that the taxation was out of proportion to their annual income.
For at blive omfattet af bestemmelserne om tilbagebetaling af overskydende indkomstskat skal den skattepligtige i skatteåret have haft bopæl eller været beskæftiget som lønmodtager i mindst ni måneder på luxembourgsk område.
Even though the criterion of permanent residence in the national territory in connection with obtaining any repayment of excess amounts of tax deducted applied irrespective of the nationality of the taxpayer concerned, there was a risk that it would work in particular against taxpayers who were nationals of other Member States, since it was often those persons who in the course of the year left the country or took up residence there.
Ved stævning indleveret til Domstolens Justitskontor den 3. juni 1994 har Kommissionen anlagt sag med påstand om, at det fastslås, at Storhertugdømmet Luxembourg har tilsidesat de forpligtelser, der påhviler det i henhold til EF-traktatens artikel 48, stk. 2, og Rådets forordning (EØF) nr. 1612/68 om arbejdskraftens frie bevægelighed inden for Fællesskabet, navnlig artikel 7, stk. 2, idet det har opretholdt bestemmelser, hvorefter overskydende skat, der er indeholdt i lønnen for en statsborger i en medlemsstat, der har haft bopæl på Storhertugdømmets område og/eller har haft lønnet beskæftigelse dér, men kun i en del af skatteåret, tilfalder statskassen og hverken kan kræves tilbagebetalt eller reguleret.
The Commission refers to the judgment in Case C-175/88 Biehl νAdministration des Contributions [1990] ECR 1-1779, and states that the effect of Articles 145 and 154(6) of the LIR is to deprive workers who leave the country or take up residence there during a tax year of the right to repayment of excess amounts of tax deducted, a right which permanent residents enjoy. Consequently, the Commission considers that those provisions introduce discrimination, contrary to Article 48(2) of the Treaty and Article 7(2) of Regulation No 1612/68, against taxpayers who have made use of their right to free movement.
For at skattepligtige, der ikke opfylder ovennævnte betingelser, alligevel kan få tilbagebetalt for meget indeholdt skat efter en »rimelighedsvurdering«, skal de indgive en anmodning til direktøren for skattevæsenet, jf. § 131, stk. 1, i Abgabenordnung (skattekontrolloven, herefter benævnt »AO«) og heri henvise til, at den pålignede skat ikke står i et rimeligt forhold til deres indtægter i løbet af året.
The same conclusion must be reached, on the same grounds, as regards legislation under which a taxpayer who has no right to taxation by direct assessment must, during the course of a tax year, have been employed on the national territory for a period of at least nine months in order to become entitled, pursuant to Article 145 of the LIR, to an adjustment on the basis of an annual calculation.
Efter luxembourgsk skattelovgivning sker tilbagebetaling af for meget indeholdt indkomstskat efter forskellige regler, alt efter om der foretages en ansættelse af den skattepligtiges skat eller ej.
In reply to that argument, the Luxembourg Government states that the aim of Articles 145 and 154(6) is to ensure the application of the principle of progressive taxation by preventing the procedure normally followed by the tax offices from leading to the grant to temporary residents of repayments of arbitrary amounts owing to the lack of information in the possession of the tax offices concerning the taxpayer's annual income.
I henhold til artikel 154, stk. 5, i »loi sur l'impôt sur le revenu« (herefter benævnt »LIR«) modregnes i overskydende skat eventuel anden skattegæld. Såfremt der ikke er sådan gæld, udbetales den overskydende skat automatisk til de skattepligtige.
It should first be noted that Article 48(2) of the Treaty provides that the freedom of movement for workers entails the abolition of any discrimination based on nationality between workers of the Member States, inter alia as regards remuneration.
Heroverfor har den luxembourgske regering anført, at formålet med artikel 145 og artikel 154, stk. 6, er at sikre, at princippet om progressivitet i beskatningen finder anvendelse,
The Court has consistently held that the incompatibility of provisions of national law with provisions of the Treaty, even those directly applicable, can be definitively eliminated only by means of binding domestic provisions having the
Den anden situation vedrører de skattepligtige, som i det væsentlige har haft indtægter, hvori der er indeholdt skat ved kilden, og som ikke
In that regard, the Court held in its judgment in Biehl, cited above, that the principle of equal treatment with regard to remuneration would be rendered ineffective if it could be undermined by
således at det undgås, at den fremgangsmåde, skattemyndighederne normalt følger, medfører vilkårlige tilbagebetalinger til midlertidigt hjemmehørende personer som følge af, at myndighederne ikke har de fornødne oplysninger om den skattepligtiges årlige indkomst.
temporary residents it is necessary that the tax authority be informed of foreign income earned by that taxpayer before he took up residence in the Grand Duchy or after he left it, so that it may determine the appropriate tax rate to be applied, under that country's progressive system of taxation, to his Luxembourg income.
Den omstændighed, at der efter luxembourgsk ret består eüßklageadgang, hvorefter midlertidigt hjemmehørende skattepligtige personer kan anmode skattemyndighederne om at få tilbagebetalt overskydende skat, kan ikke under alle omstændigheder råde bod på diskriminerende følger af anvendelsen af de omtvistede nationale bestemmelser.
In the present case, the Luxembourg Government did not amend Articles 145(1) and 154(6) of the LIR in order to eliminate their incompatibility, evident from the judgment in Biehl, with Community law, nor has it demonstrated the existence of a clear and specific national provision conferring on temporary residents, as does the national legislation in point on permanent residents, entitlement to repayment of excess amounts of tax.
Indledningsvis bemærkes, at i henhold til traktatens artikel 48, stk. 2, forudsætter arbejdskraftens frie bevægelighed afskaffelse af enhver i nationaliteten begrundet forskelsbehandling af medlemsstaternes arbejdstagere, bl.a. for så vidt angår aflønning.
In that regard, it must be pointed out that the special situation of temporary residents cannot justify the exclusion of that category of taxpayer from the entitlement, otherwise than by means of a non-contentious procedure, to repayment of tax, where excess amounts of tax deducted are repayable as of right to permanent residents.
Ifølge fast retspraksis kan national lovgivnings uoverensstemmelse med traktatens bestemmelser, også hvor disse sidste er umiddelbart anvendelige, kun fjernes helt ved bindende interne regler med samme retlige karakter som de regler, de ændrer.
The Luxembourg Government has claimed that for the purpose of calculating tax repayments for
I den foreliggende sag har den luxembourgske regering ikke ændret bestemmelserne i LIR's artikel 145, stk. 1, og artikel 154, stk. 6, for at bringe den uforenelighed med fællesskabsretten, der kunne udledes af dommen i Biehl-sagen, til ophør, og regeringen har heller ikke godtgjort, at der findes en klar og specifik national bestemmelse, hvorefter midlertidigt hjemmehørende har ret til tilbagebetaling af for meget indeholdt skat på linje med, hvad der efter national lovgivning gælder for personer med permanent bopæl.
Declared that, by maintaining in force provisions under which excess amounts of tax deducted from the wages or salaries of nationals of a Member State who resided in Luxembourg or occupied a salaried position there for only part of the tax year are to remain the property of the Treasury and are not repayable, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 48(2) of the Treaty and Article 7(2) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 of 15 October 1968 on freedom of movement f or workers within the Community;
Hertil bemærkes, at de særlige forhold, der gør sig gældende for midlertidigt hjemmehørende, ikke kan begrunde, at denne gruppe af skattepligtige afskæres fra at få skat tilbagebetalt, bortset fra gennem den særlige ovenfor nævnte klageadgang, mens overskydende skat uden videre tilbagebetales personer med fast bopæl.
declare that, by maintaining in force provisions under which the excess amounts of tax deducted from the wages or salaries of employees who are nationals of a Member State are not repayable if the employee resided in Luxembourg or occupied a salaried position there for part of the year only, Luxembourg has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 48(2) of the Treaty and under Article 7(2) of Council Regulation 1612/68 of 15 October 1968 on free movement for workers within the Community;
Det hedder i domskonklusionen:
Case T-185/94 Geotronics SA ν Commission of the European Communities External relations
Generaladvokat F.G. Jacobs fremsatte forslag til afgørelse i retsmødet (Sjette Afdeling') den 19. september 1995.
The PHARE Programme, which is based on Council Regulation (EEC) No 3906/89 of 18 December 1989 on economic aid to the Republic of Hungary and the Polish People's Republic, is the means whereby the European Community channels economic aid to the countries of Central and Eastern Europe in order to implement measures intended to support the process of economic and social reform under way in those countries.
2) pålægge Luxembourg at betale sagens omkostninger.«
Under Article 2 of the general conditions of the restricted invitation to tender, the equipment to be supplied had to originate in a Member State of the European Community or in one of the beneficiary countries under the PHARE Programme.
Sag T-185/94 Geotronics SA / Kommissionen for De Europæiske Fællesskaber Forbindelserne udadtil
On 16 July 1993 the French company Geotronics SA submitted a tender and subsequently informed the Commission that the tacheometers were manufactured in the United Kingdom.
»PHARE-program — indkaldelse af tilbud under begrænset udbud — annullationssøgsmål — antagelse til realitetsbehandling — EØS-aftalen — erstatningssøgsmål« (Fjerde Afdeling)
By fax letter to the applicant of 10 March 1994, the Commission rejected its tender on the ground that, contrary to the conditions applicable to the restricted invitation to tender, Geotronics' equipment did not originate in a Member State
PHARE-programmet — som er baseret på Rådets forordning (EØF) nr. 3906/89 af 18. december
By contrast, no legal relationship arises between the tenderers and the Commission, since the latter restricts itself to taking funding decisions on behalf of the Community, and its measures cannot have the effect, in relation to tenderers, of substituting a Community decision for the decision of the beneficiary country under the PHARE Programme.
1989 om økonomisk bistand til Republikken Ungarn og Folkerepublikken Polen, der blev
In this area, therefore, there can be no Commission decision, so far as tenderers are concerned, which is capable of forming the subject-matter of an action under the
i nært samarbejde med modtagerlandet Kommissionen.
fourth paragraph of Article 173 of the EC Treaty.
vedtaget med henblik på en udvidelse af den økonomiske bistand til andre lande i Central- og Østeuropa — er det rammeprogram, hvorigennem Det Europæiske Fællesskab yder økonomisk bistand til visse lande i Central- og Østeuropa ved at iværksætte foranstaltninger, der skal støtte den igangværende økonomiske og sociale reformproces i disse lande.
Therefore, despite the terms used by the Commission, the letter of 10 March 1994 in which it informed the applicant that it was obliged to reject its tender on account of the non-Community origin of the equipment cannot be regarded as a Commission decision which produced binding legal effects capable of affecting the legal position of the applicant.
Det er dog modtagerlandet, som offentliggør udbuddene, modtager de indkaldte tilbud, forestår gennemgangen heraf og fastslår resultaterne af udbudene. Det er også modtagerlandet, som undertegner aftaler, kontrakter, tillægskontrakter og overslag og sender dem til Kommissionen.
The Commission was right, in reliance on the general conditions laid down by it in the restricted invitation to tender and accepted by the applicant before the entry into force of the EEA Agreement, to inform the applicant on 10 March 1994 that its tender had to be rejected on the ground that, contrary to the conditions applicable to the invitation to tender, the equipment tendered by it did not originate in Member States of the Community or in a beneficiary country under the PHARE Programme.
Følgelig er det den stat, der modtager bistanden inden for rammerne af PHARE-programmet, som har beføjelsen til at tilkende kontrakten.
Under the PHARE Programme, responsibility for funding projects is entrusted to the Commission.