0000000001011275
AUTHOR
Franck Le Mentec
Opinion statement ECJ-TF 4/2014 of the CFE on the decision of the European Court of Justice of 23 January 2014 in SCA Group Holding BV et al. (joined cases C-39/13, C-40/13 and C-41/13), on the requirements to form a 'fiscal unity'
This Opinion Statement analyses the Court's decision in Joined Cases C‑39/13, C‑40/13 and C‑41/13, SCA Group Holding BV et al, of 12 June 2014, concerning the question whether the Netherlands violate the provisions on freedom of establishment if they refuse to form a "fiscal unity" ("fiscale eenheid") between domestic companies in cases where one or more intermediate companies are residents of another Member State (C-39/13 and C-41/13) or (2) the common parent company of two domestic sister companies is resident in another Member State (C-40/13). The Dutch "fiscal unity" treats separate entities as one taxable unit for corporate income tax purposes and hence enables, e.g., the full consolid…
Opinion statement ECJ-TF 4/2015 of the CFE on the decision of the European Court of Justice in Groupe Steria SCA (Case C-386/14) on the French Integration Fiscale
This is an Opinion Statement prepared by the CFE ECJ Task Force1 on Case C-386/14, in which the 2nd Chamber of the Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ) delivered its judgment on 2 September 2015, following the opinion of Advocate General Kokott of 11 June 2015.3 The judgment, which has also been the object of an ECJ press release, is a further interpretation of the freedom of establishment in the context of the French "intégration fiscale" and clarifies that taxpayers can claim some benefits of group taxation regime even if EU law would not allow them the full benefit of such regime. It also confirms that an option granted to Member States in secondary EU legislation cannot justify …
Opinion statement ECJ-TF 2/2015 of the CFE on the decision of the European Court of Justice in Commission v. United Kingdomm ('final lossess') (case C-172/13), concerning the 'Marks & Spencer exception'
This is an Opinion Statement prepared by the CFE ECJ Task Force on Case C-172/13, European Commission v United Kingdom, which was decided by the Grand Chamber of the Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ) on February 2015. This case is in some ways a follow-up to the ECJ's decision in Marks & Spencer and comments on whether the legislative amendments introduced by the United Kingdom are sufficient to ensure compliance with European Union law. After illustrating the case, arguments of the parties and decision of the Court, this Opinion Statement will focus on selected critical points from the Courts decision and Advocate General Kokott's opinion.
Opinion statement ECJ-TF 4/2013 of the CFE on the decision of the European Court of Justice in Etwein (Case C-425/11)
This Opinion Statement analyses the ECJ decision on the Case C-425/11 Katja Ettwein, concerning a personal tax advantage for self-employed frontier workers under the 2002 ECSwitzerland Agreement on the free movement of persons (the "Agreement")
Opinion statement ECJ-TF 3/2015 of the CFE on the decision of the European Court of Justice in C.G. Sopora (Case C-512/12) on 'horizontal discrimination'
On 24 February 2015, the Grand Chamber of the ECJ handed down its decision in Case C-512/13, C.G. Sopora, concerning the question of whether a specific requirement to obtain a tax advantage for foreign (incoming) workers violates the freedom of movement of workers (Art. 45 TFEU). This case prominently raises the issue of a differentiation not between nationals and non-nationals (i.e., "vertical discrimination"), but rather between different non-nationals (i.e., "horizontal discrimination") in the context of the taxation of payments of deemed employment expenses ("extraterritorial costs"). By clearly accepting such "horizontal comparison" in the context of Art. 45 TFEU, it resolves a questio…
Opinion statement ECJ-TF 3/2014 of the CFE on the decision of the European Court of Justice of 23 January 2014 in DMC (Case-164/12), concerning taxation of unrealized gains upon a reorganization within the UE
This is an Opinion Statement prepared by the CFE ECJ Task Force1 on Case C-164/12, DMC. After illustrating the facts of the DMC case and the preliminary questions, this document will focus on selected critical points from this case by pointing out some differences between it and its most immediate relevant precedent, National Grid Indus, which has been the subject of a previous Opinion Statement by the CFE.4
Opinion statement ECJ-TF 1/2015 of the CFE on the decision of the European Court of Justice in Commission v. Spain (Case C-127/12) and Commission v. Germany (Case C-211/13) concerning inheritance taxation
The cases Commission v. Spain (C-127/12) and Commission v. Germany (C-211/13) have common features and in both cases the ECJ (second and third chamber) held that the two national measures at issue were contrary to the free movement of capital ensured under Art 63 TFEU and under Art 40 of the EEA Agreement. Both cases were decided without an opinion from the designated Advocates General, Kokott and Mengozzi, respectively.