Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62016CN0292

    Case C-292/16: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Helsingin hallinto-oikeus (Finland) lodged on 25 May 2016 — A Oy

    OJ C 270, 25.7.2016, p. 31–31 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    25.7.2016   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 270/31


    Request for a preliminary ruling from the Helsingin hallinto-oikeus (Finland) lodged on 25 May 2016 — A Oy

    (Case C-292/16)

    (2016/C 270/35)

    Language of the case: Finnish

    Referring court

    Helsingin hallinto-oikeus

    Parties to the main proceedings

    Applicant: A Oy

    Other parties: Veronsaajien oikeudenvalvontayksikkö

    Questions referred

    1.

    Does Article 49 TFEU preclude Finnish legislation under which, where a Finnish company by way of a transfer of business disposes of assets of a permanent establishment situated in another EU Member State to a company established in that State in return for new shares, the transfer of the assets is taxed immediately in the year of transfer, but in a corresponding national situation is not taxed until the time of realisation?

    2.

    Is there indirect or direct discrimination if Finland levies tax immediately in the year of the transfer of business before the income has been realised, and in a domestic situation not until the time of realisation?

    3.

    If the answer to Questions 1 and 2 is in the affirmative, may the restriction of the right of establishment be justified on grounds such as an overriding reason of the public interest or the preservation of the national power of taxation? Does the prohibited restriction comply with the principle of proportionality?


    Top