Access to European Union law
<a href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/content/help/eurlex-content/experimental-features.html" target="_blank">More about the experimental features corner</a>
Choose the experimental features you want to try
EUR-Lex
Access to European Union law

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

You are here
Use quotation marks to search for an "exact phrase". Append an asterisk (*) to a search term to find variations of it (transp*, 32019R*). Use a question mark (?) instead of a single character in your search term to find variations of it (ca?e finds case, cane, care).
Search tips
Need more search options? Use the Advanced search

Document 62025CN0287

Case C-287/25, OPmobility: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d’État (France) lodged on 16 April 2025 – Ministre de l’Économie, des Finances et de la Souveraineté industrielle et numérique v OPmobility

OJ C, C/2025/3869, 21.7.2025, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/3869/oj (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, GA, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/3869/oj

European flag

Official Journal
of the European Union

EN

C series

C/2025/3869

21.7.2025

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d’État (France) lodged on 16 April 2025 – Ministre de l’Économie, des Finances et de la Souveraineté industrielle et numérique v OPmobility

(Case C-287/25, OPmobility)

(C/2025/3869)

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Conseil d’État

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant in cassation: Ministre de l’Économie, des Finances et de la Souveraineté industrielle et numérique

Respondent in cassation: OPmobility

Questions referred

1.

(a)

Is the fact that the State in which a company at the head of an integrated tax group is resident has waived, pursuant to the rules on the territoriality of tax laid down in its national law, the exercise of its power to tax the profits of the non-resident subsidiary of that company situated in another Member State capable of calling into question the objectively comparable nature of the situation of a resident parent company wishing to form a single tax entity with a resident subsidiary and the situation of a resident parent company wishing to form a single tax entity with a non-resident subsidiary in so far as each seeks to benefit from the advantages of the tax integration scheme?

(b)

Is the fact that the Member State in which a company at the head of an integrated tax group is resident has waived, pursuant to a double taxation convention, the exercise of its power to tax the profits of the non-resident subsidiary of that company situated in another Member State capable of calling into question the objective comparability of the situation of a resident parent company wishing to form a single tax entity with a resident subsidiary and the situation of a resident parent company wishing to form a single tax entity with a non-resident subsidiary in so far as each seeks to benefit from the advantages of the tax integration scheme?

2.

If the answer to one or other of the parts of the first question is in the negative, does the impossibility, in the context of a tax integration scheme such as that provided for in Article 223 A et seq. of the Code général des impôts (General Tax Code), of offsetting against the overall profit of that group the final losses of a non-resident subsidiary of a company in the group constitute one of the rules on the consolidation of profits and losses within the single tax entity, compatible, on that basis alone, with the freedom of establishment, or, on the contrary, must such an impossibility be regarded as the refusal of a tax advantage distinct from the rules on the consolidation of profits and losses within the group, constituting, in itself, a disproportionate restriction incompatible with that freedom?

ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/3869/oj

ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)

Top