This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62017CA0607
Case C-607/17: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 19 June 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Högsta förvaltningsdomstolen — Sweden) — Skatteverket v Memira Holding AB (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Corporation tax — Group of companies — Freedom of establishment — Deduction of losses of a non-resident subsidiary — Concept of ‘final losses’ — Merger-absorption of the subsidiary by the parent company — Legislation of the State of establishment of the subsidiary granting the deduction of losses in the context of a merger solely to the entity sustaining those losses)
Case C-607/17: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 19 June 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Högsta förvaltningsdomstolen — Sweden) — Skatteverket v Memira Holding AB (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Corporation tax — Group of companies — Freedom of establishment — Deduction of losses of a non-resident subsidiary — Concept of ‘final losses’ — Merger-absorption of the subsidiary by the parent company — Legislation of the State of establishment of the subsidiary granting the deduction of losses in the context of a merger solely to the entity sustaining those losses)
Case C-607/17: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 19 June 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Högsta förvaltningsdomstolen — Sweden) — Skatteverket v Memira Holding AB (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Corporation tax — Group of companies — Freedom of establishment — Deduction of losses of a non-resident subsidiary — Concept of ‘final losses’ — Merger-absorption of the subsidiary by the parent company — Legislation of the State of establishment of the subsidiary granting the deduction of losses in the context of a merger solely to the entity sustaining those losses)
IO C 270, 12.8.2019, p. 5–5
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
- Date of document:
- 19/06/2019
- Date lodged:
- 24/10/2017
- Author:
- An Chúirt Bhreithiúnais
- Form:
- Faisnéis bhreithiúnach
- Authentic language:
- Sualainnis
- Type of procedure:
- Tarchur le haghaidh réamhrialú
- Link
- Select all documents mentioning this document
- Case affecting:
-
- Related EU case-law document 62017CJ0607
- Instruments cited in case law:
- Link
|
12.8.2019 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 270/5 |
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 19 June 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Högsta förvaltningsdomstolen — Sweden) — Skatteverket v Memira Holding AB
(Case C-607/17) (1)
(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Corporation tax - Group of companies - Freedom of establishment - Deduction of losses of a non-resident subsidiary - Concept of ‘final losses’ - Merger-absorption of the subsidiary by the parent company - Legislation of the State of establishment of the subsidiary granting the deduction of losses in the context of a merger solely to the entity sustaining those losses)
(2019/C 270/05)
Language of the case: Swedish
Referring court
Högsta förvaltningsdomstolen
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Skatteverket
Defendant: Memira Holding AB
Operative part of the judgment
|
1. |
For the purposes of the assessment of the finality of the losses of a non-resident subsidiary, within the meaning of paragraph 55 of the judgment of 13 December 2005, Marks & Spencer (C-446/03, EU:C:2005:763), the fact that the subsidiary’s Member State of establishment does not allow the losses of one company to be transferred, in the event of a merger, to another company liable for corporation tax, whereas such a transfer is provided for by the Member State in which the parent company is established in the event of a merger between resident companies, is not decisive, unless the parent company demonstrates that it is impossible for it to deduct those losses by ensuring, in particular by means of a sale, that they are fiscally taken into account by a third party for future tax periods; |
|
2. |
If the fact referred to in the first question becomes relevant, the fact that there is, in the State of establishment of the subsidiary, no other entity which could have deducted those losses in the event of a merger if such a deduction had been authorised is irrelevant. |
