This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62023CN0039
Case C-39/23, Keva and Others: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Högsta förvaltningsdomstolen (Sweden) lodged on 26 January 2023 — Keva, Landskapet Ålands pensionsfond and Kyrkans Centralfond v Skatteverket
Case C-39/23, Keva and Others: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Högsta förvaltningsdomstolen (Sweden) lodged on 26 January 2023 — Keva, Landskapet Ålands pensionsfond and Kyrkans Centralfond v Skatteverket
Case C-39/23, Keva and Others: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Högsta förvaltningsdomstolen (Sweden) lodged on 26 January 2023 — Keva, Landskapet Ålands pensionsfond and Kyrkans Centralfond v Skatteverket
OJ C 121, 3.4.2023, p. 7–7
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, GA, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
3.4.2023 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 121/7 |
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Högsta förvaltningsdomstolen (Sweden) lodged on 26 January 2023 — Keva, Landskapet Ålands pensionsfond and Kyrkans Centralfond v Skatteverket
(Case C-39/23, Keva and Others)
(2023/C 121/10)
Language of the case: Swedish
Referring court
Högsta förvaltningsdomstolen
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicants: Keva, Landskapet Ålands pensionsfond and Kyrkans Centralfond
Respondent: Skatteverket
Questions referred
1. |
Does the fact that dividends paid by domestic companies to foreign public pension institutions are subject to withholding tax, whereas the corresponding dividends are not taxed if they accrue to the own State through its general pension funds, constitute such negative differential treatment that it entails a restriction of the free movement of capital prohibited, in principle, by Article 63 TFEU? |
2. |
If Question 1 is answered in the affirmative, what are the criteria that should be taken into account when assessing whether a foreign public pension institution is in a situation which is objectively comparable to that of the own State and its general pension funds? |
3. |
Can a possible restriction be regarded as being justified by overriding reasons of public interest? |