This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62017CN0598
Case C-598/17: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Gerechtshof ’s-Hertogenbosch (Netherlands) lodged on 16 October 2017 — A-Fonds v Inspecteur van de Belastingdienst
Case C-598/17: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Gerechtshof ’s-Hertogenbosch (Netherlands) lodged on 16 October 2017 — A-Fonds v Inspecteur van de Belastingdienst
Case C-598/17: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Gerechtshof ’s-Hertogenbosch (Netherlands) lodged on 16 October 2017 — A-Fonds v Inspecteur van de Belastingdienst
OJ C 22, 22.1.2018, p. 20–21
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
22.1.2018 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 22/20 |
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Gerechtshof ’s-Hertogenbosch (Netherlands) lodged on 16 October 2017 — A-Fonds v Inspecteur van de Belastingdienst
(Case C-598/17)
(2018/C 022/30)
Language of the case: Dutch
Referring court
Gerechtshof ’s-Hertogenbosch
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: A-Fonds
Defendant: Inspecteur van de Belastingdienst
Questions referred
|
1) |
Is the extension of the scope of an existing system of aid as a result of a taxable person successfully invoking the right to the free movement of capital as laid down in Article 56 of the EC Treaty (now: Article 63 TFEU) to be regarded as a new system of aid resulting from an alteration to existing aid? |
|
2) |
If so, does the task to be performed by the national court under Article 108(3) TFEU preclude the taxable person from being granted a tax advantage which that taxable person claims under Article 56 of the EC Treaty (now: Article 63 TFEU), or should a proposed judicial decision to grant that advantage be notified to the Commission, or should the national court take any other action or implement any other measure, in view of the supervisory task assigned to it under Article 108(3) TFEU? |