- Details
On December 19, 2018 the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) judged in Case C-552/17, Alpenchalets Resorts GmbH versus Finanzamt München Abteilung Körperschaften (ECLI:EU:C:2018:1032).
This request for a preliminary ruling concerns the interpretation of the first subparagraph of Article 98(2) and Article 306 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1, ‘the VAT Directive’).
The request has been made in the context of proceedings between Alpenchalets Resorts GmbH (‘Alpenchalets’) and the Finanzamt München (Munich Tax Office, Germany) concerning the taxation of the supply of holiday accommodation.
- Details
On December 19, 2018 the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) judged in Case C-422/17, Szef Krajowej Administracji Skarbowej versus Skarpa Travel sp. z o.o. (ECLI:EU:C:2018:1029).
This request for a preliminary ruling concerns the interpretation of Articles 65 and 308 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1), as amended by Council Directive 2010/45/EU of 13 July 2010 (OJ 2010 L 189, p. 1) (‘the VAT Directive’).
The request has been made in the context of proceedings between the Szef Krajowej Administracji Skarbowej (Head of the National Revenue Administration, Poland) and Skarpa Travel sp. z o.o. (‘Skarpa’) concerning a tax opinion issued by the Minister Finansów (Minister for Finance, Poland; ‘the Minister’) relating to the chargeability and method of calculation of value added tax (VAT) in the event of the receipt of a payment on account for a tourist service supplied by a travel agent.
- Details
On December 19, 2018 the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) judged in Case C-17/18, Virgil Mailat, Delia Elena Mailat, Apcom Select SA (ECLI:EU:C:2018:1038).
This request for a preliminary ruling concerns the interpretation of Articles 19 and 29 and Article 135(1)(l) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1, ‘the VAT Directive’).
The request has been made in criminal proceedings brought against Mr Virgil Mailat, Mrs Delia Elena Mailat and the commercial company Apcom Select SA, of which they were the managers, for tax avoidance, on the ground that, after having deducted input value added tax (VAT) on works carried out in the immovable property used for their commercial activity, they did not adjust the VAT at the time of letting the building in question together with the movable property necessary to pursue that activity.
- Details
On September 19, 2018 the European Commission issued a press release announcing that following an in-depth investigation which was launched in December 2015, based on doubts that Luxembourg might have misapplied its Double Taxation Treaty with the United States, the Commission has concluded that Luxembourg's tax treatment of McDonald's Europe Franchising does not violate the Double Taxation Treaty with the United States. On that basis the tax rulings granted to McDonald's do not infringe EU State aid rules.
- Details
On December 6, 2018 on the website of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) the opinion of Advocate General Sharpston in the Case C-566/17, Związek Gmin Zagłębia Miedziowego w Polkowicach versus Szef Krajowej Administracji Skarbowej (ECLI:EU:C:2018:995) was published.
The present request for a preliminary ruling arises in the context of a dispute concerning the scope of the right to deduct input VAT incurred on goods and services used indissociably by taxable persons for the purposes of both their economic and non-economic activities.
Whilst it appears to follow from the scheme of Directive 2006/112 that that right can be claimed only in so far as the goods and services are used for the purpose of the former type of activity, that directive does not provide for methods or criteria for apportionment of input tax in such situations. The referring court seeks guidance on whether the fact that national law also lacks specific rules addressing that issue affects the extent to which a taxable person may exercise the right to deduct input VAT in relation to such goods and services. In particular, the question arises whether there is in EU law a general principle or a fundamental right that would preclude the national court in such circumstances from applying those limitations on the right to deduct in the case in the main proceedings.
Page 2 of 2
