This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62011CO0540
Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber), 19 September 2012.#Daniel Levy and Carine Sebbag v État belge - SPF Finances.#Request for a preliminary ruling — Tribunal de première instance de Bruxelles — Interpretation of Articles 10 EC, 57(2) EC and 293 EC — Permissibility of rules of national law which allow double taxation notwithstanding the existence of a bilateral convention which precludes double taxation — Amendment of national law after the convention had been concluded — Bringing into question of an acquired right — Obstacle to the free movement of capital.#Free movement of capital — Direct taxation — Taxation of dividends — Bilateral convention which precludes double taxation — Subsequent amendment, by one of the two States party to the convention, of its national legislation, having the effect of reintroducing double taxation — Obligations of the Member States under Articles 10 EC and 293 EC.#Case C‑540/11.
Beschluss des Gerichtshofs (Sechste Kammer) vom 19. September 2012.
Daniel Levy und Carine Sebbag gegen État belge - SPF Finances.
Vorabentscheidungsersuchen – Tribunal de première instance de Bruxelles – Auslegung der Art. 10 EG, 57 Abs. 2 EG und 293 EG – Zulässigkeit einer nationalen Regelung, die eine Doppelbesteuerung trotz eines zweiseitigen Abkommens zur Vermeidung der Doppelbesteuerung erlaubt – Änderung durch eine innerstaatliche Rechtsvorschrift nach Abschluss des Abkommens – Infragestellung eines wohlerworbenen Rechts – Beeinträchtigung des freien Kapitalverkehrs.
Freier Kapitalverkehr – Direkte Besteuerung – Dividendenbesteuerung – Bilaterales Abkommen zur Vermeidung der Doppelbesteuerung – Spätere Änderung der Rechtsvorschriften durch einen der beiden Vertragsstaaten des Abkommens, die die Wiedereinführung der Doppelbesteuerung zur Folge hat – Verpflichtungen der Mitgliedstaaten aus den Art. 10 EG und 293 EG.
Rechtssache C‑540/11.
Beschluss des Gerichtshofs (Sechste Kammer) vom 19. September 2012.
Daniel Levy und Carine Sebbag gegen État belge - SPF Finances.
Vorabentscheidungsersuchen – Tribunal de première instance de Bruxelles – Auslegung der Art. 10 EG, 57 Abs. 2 EG und 293 EG – Zulässigkeit einer nationalen Regelung, die eine Doppelbesteuerung trotz eines zweiseitigen Abkommens zur Vermeidung der Doppelbesteuerung erlaubt – Änderung durch eine innerstaatliche Rechtsvorschrift nach Abschluss des Abkommens – Infragestellung eines wohlerworbenen Rechts – Beeinträchtigung des freien Kapitalverkehrs.
Freier Kapitalverkehr – Direkte Besteuerung – Dividendenbesteuerung – Bilaterales Abkommen zur Vermeidung der Doppelbesteuerung – Spätere Änderung der Rechtsvorschriften durch einen der beiden Vertragsstaaten des Abkommens, die die Wiedereinführung der Doppelbesteuerung zur Folge hat – Verpflichtungen der Mitgliedstaaten aus den Art. 10 EG und 293 EG.
Rechtssache C‑540/11.
Sammlung der Rechtsprechung 2012 -00000
ECLI identifier: ECLI:EU:C:2012:581
- Date of document:
- 19/09/2012
- Date lodged:
- 24/10/2011
- Author:
- Gerichtshof
- Country or organisation from which the request originates:
- Belgien
- Form:
- Beschluss
- Authentic language:
- Französisch
- Type of procedure:
- Vorabentscheidung
- Observations:
- Belgien, EU-Mitgliedstaaten, EU-Institutionen und –Einrichtungen, Niederlande, Europäische Kommission
- Judge-Rapporteur:
- Lõhmus
- Advocate General:
- Mengozzi
- National court:
-
*A9* Tribunal de première instance francophone de Bruxelles, 32e chambre, jugement du 30/09/2011 (Nº 405 ; 405/32/11 ; R.G. nº 2008/10243/A)
- Link
- Select all documents mentioning this document
- Case affecting:
- Instruments cited in case law:
-
- 11997E010: N 1 10-12 15 24 26 28 29
- 11997E056: N 1 10 12 15 16 22 29
- 11997E057-P3: N 12 14
- 11997E293: N 1 12 15 16 20 27-29
- 61973CJ0002: N 26
- 61996CJ0336: N 27
- 62004CJ0513: N 11 25
- 62008CJ0128: N 11 16-22 25
- Notes relating to the decision:
-
- 3. De Broe, Luc ; Gernay, Thomas: Belgium: the Imfeld & Garcet case and the Levy case, ECJ - Recent Developments in Direct Taxation 2012 (Ed. Linde - Wien) 2013 p. 9-19 (EN)
- 2. Daskoblet, Katharina ; Huisman, Eline: Levy & Sebbag: The ECJ Has Once Again Been Asked to Deliver Its Opinion on Juridical Double Taxation in the Internal Market, European Taxation 2013 p.400-405 (EN)
- 4. Maitrot de la Motte, Alexandre ; Silberman, Lauren: Les clauses anti-abus, le droit primaire et le droit dérivé de l'Union européenne: presque rien sur presque tout, Revue de droit fiscal 2018 n°4 p.56-65 (FR)
- 1. A., I.: Highlights & Insights on European Taxation 2013 nº 3 p.29-31 (EN)
- Subject matter:
- Case law directory code:
-
Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 19 September 2012 — Levy and Sebbag
(Case C-540/11)
Free movement of capital — Direct taxation — Taxation of dividends — Bilateral convention which precludes double taxation — Subsequent amendment, by one of the two States party to the convention, of its national legislation, having the effect of reintroducing double taxation — Obligations of the Member States under Articles 10 EC and 293 EC
1. References for a preliminary ruling — Response which may be clearly inferred from the case-law — Question referred which is identical to a question in response to which a ruling has been given — Application of Article 104(3) of the Rules of Procedure (Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 104(3)) (see para. 13)
2. Free movement of capital and freedom of payments — Restrictions — Fiscal legislation — Taxation of dividends — Bilateral tax convention which precludes double taxation — Subsequent amendment, by one of the two States party to the convention, of its national legislation, having the effect of reintroducing double taxation — Whether permissible — Measures to prevent double taxation which fall within the competence of the Member States (Arts 10 EC, 56 EC and 293 EC) (see paras 17-19, 21, 22, 26-29, operative part.)
Re:
| Request for a preliminary ruling — Tribunal de première instance de Bruxelles — Interpretation of Articles 10 EC, 57(2) EC and 293 EC — Permissibility of rules of national law which allow double taxation notwithstanding the existence of a bilateral convention which precludes double taxation — Amendment of national law after the convention had been concluded — Bringing into question of an acquired right — Obstacle to the free movement of capital. |
Operative part
In so far as Community law, as applicable at the time of the facts in the main proceedings, does not lay down any general criteria for the attribution of areas of competence between the Member States in relation to the elimination of double taxation within the European Community, Article 56 EC, read in conjunction with Articles 10 EC and 293 EC, is to be interpreted as meaning that it does not preclude a situation in which the Member State, which has undertaken, in a bilateral double taxation convention, to establish a mechanism to eliminate such double taxation of dividends, then abolishes that mechanism by way of a legislative amendment that has the effect of reintroducing a double taxation.
