C-255/81

WyrokTSUE1982-06-10CELEX: 61981CJ0255ECLI:EU:C:1982:225

Analiza orzeczenia

Sekcja wygenerowana przez AI na podstawie treści orzeczenia — nie stanowi cytatu.

Zagadnienie prawne
Czy art. 13 B (d) 1 Szóstej Dyrektywy Rady 77/388/EWG, dotyczący zwolnienia z podatku obrotowego transakcji negocjacji kredytu, może być bezpośrednio powołany przez podatnika od daty jego wejścia w życie, nawet jeśli zwolnienie to nie zostało jeszcze przewidziane w prawie krajowym?
Ratio decidendi
Trybunał stwierdził, że kwestie podniesione w niniejszej sprawie zostały już rozstrzygnięte w jego wyroku z dnia 19 stycznia 1982 r. w sprawie C-8/81 Becker. Zgodnie z tym precedensem, od 1 stycznia 1979 r. przepis art. 13 B (d) 1 dyrektywy 77/388, dotyczący zwolnienia z podatku obrotowego transakcji negocjacji kredytu, mógł być powołany przez negocjatora kredytowego w przypadku braku implementacji dyrektywy. Warunkiem było, że negocjator nie przeniósł tego podatku na osoby następujące po nim w łańcuchu dostaw, a państwo członkowskie nie mogło powoływać się na własne zaniechanie implementacji dyrektywy przeciwko jednostce.
Stan faktyczny
Przedsiębiorstwo R.A. Grendel GmbH, działające w Niemczech jako negocjator kredytowy, zostało w 1980 roku obciążone podatkiem obrotowym za dochody uzyskane w 1979 roku z tytułu prowizji za tę działalność. Obciążenie to nastąpiło zgodnie z niemieckim prawem obowiązującym do 31 grudnia 1979 roku. Przedsiębiorstwo odwołało się od decyzji Finanzamt für Körperschaften w Hamburgu, powołując się na art. 13 Szóstej Dyrektywy VAT, który jego zdaniem był bezpośrednio stosowalny i przewidywał zwolnienie z podatku dla negocjacji kredytu. Finanzamt odmówił zwolnienia, twierdząc, że dyrektywa nie tworzy prawa, które mogłoby być bezpośrednio dochodzone przez jednostkę.
Rozstrzygnięcie
AS FROM 1 JANUARY 1979 IT WAS POSSIBLE FOR THE PROVISION CONCERNING THE EXEMPTION FROM TURNOVER TAX OF TRANSACTIONS CONSISTING OF THE NEGOTIATION OF CREDIT CONTAINED IN ARTICLE 13 B ( D ) 1 . OF THE SIXTH DIRECTIVE 77/388 OF 17 MAY 1977 ON THE HARMONIZATION OF THE LAWS OF THE MEMBER STATES RELATING TO TURNOVER TAXES - COMMON SYSTEM OF VALUE-ADDED TAX : UNIFORM BASIS OF ASSESSMENT - TO BE RELIED UPON , IN THE ABSENCE OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THAT DIRECTIVE , BY A CREDIT NEGOTIATOR WHERE HE HAD REFRAINED FROM PASSING THAT TAX ON TO PERSONS FOLLOWING HIM IN THE CHAIN OF SUPPLY , AND THE STATE COULD NOT CLAIM , AS AGAINST HIM , THAT IT HAD FAILED TO IMPLEMENT THE DIRECTIVE .

Pełny tekst orzeczenia

Avis juridique important | 61981J0255 Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 10 June 1982. - R.A. Grendel GmbH v Finanzamt für Körperschaften de Hambourg. - Reference for a preliminary ruling: Finanzgericht Hamburg - Germany. - Direct effect of directives - Value-added tax - Exemption. - Case 255/81. European Court reports 1982 Page 02301 Summary Parties Subject of the case Grounds Decision on costs Operative part Keywords TAX PROVISIONS - HARMONIZATION OF LAWS - TURNOVER TAX - COMMON SYSTEM OF VALUE-ADDED TAX - EXEMPTIONS PROVIDED FOR IN THE SIXTH DIRECTIVE - EXEMPTION FOR CREDIT NEGOTIATION TRANSACTIONS - POSSIBILITY OF INDIVIDUALS ' RELYING ON THE APPROPRIATE PROVISION IN THE EVENT OF THE DIRECTIVE ' S NOT BEING IMPLEMENTED - CONDITIONS ( COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 77/388 , ART . 13 B ( D ) 1 .) Summary AS FROM 1 JANUARY 1979 IT WAS POSSIBLE FOR THE PROVISION CONCERNING THE EXEMPTION FROM TURNOVER TAX OF TRANSACTIONS CONSISTING OF THE NEGOTIATION OF CREDIT CONTAINED IN ARTICLE 13 B ( D ) 1 . OF DIRECTIVE 77/388 TO BE RELIED UPON , IN THE ABSENCE OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THAT DIRECTIVE , BY A CREDIT NEGOTIATOR WHERE HE HAD REFRAINED FROM PASSING THAT TAX ON TO PERSONS FOLLOWING HIM IN THE CHAIN OF SUPPLY AND THE STATE COULD NOT CLAIM , AS AGAINST HIM , THAT IT HAD FAILED TO IMPLEMENT THE DIRECTIVE . Parties IN CASE 255/81 REFERENCE TO THE COURT UNDER ARTICLE 177 OF THE EEC TREATY BY THE FINANZGERICHT ( FINANCE COURT ) HAMBURG FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING IN THE CASE PENDING BEFORE THAT COURT BETWEEN R . A . GRENDEL GMBH , REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER , RENATE GRENDEL , RESIDING IN HAMBURG , V FINANZAMT FUR KORPERSCHAFTEN IN HAMBURG ( TAX OFFICE FOR CORPORATIONS IN HAMBURG ), HAMBURG , Subject of the case ON THE INTERPRETATION OF ARTICLE 13 B ( D ) 1 . OF THE SIXTH COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 77/388 OF 17 MAY 1977 ON THE HARMONIZATION OF THE LAWS OF THE MEMBER STATES RELATING TO TURNOVER TAXES - COMMON SYSTEM OF VALUE-ADDED TAX : UNIFORM BASIS OF ASSESSMENT , Grounds BY ORDER OF 4 SEPTEMBER 1981 , WHICH WAS RECEIVED AT THE COURT ON 18 SEPTEMBER 1981 , THE FINANZGERICHT ( FINANCE COURT ) HAMBURG REFERRED TO THE COURT FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING UNDER ARTICLE 177 OF THE EEC TREATY A QUESTION ON THE INTERPRETATION OF ARTICLE 13 B ( D ) 1 . OF THE SIXTH COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 77/388/EEC OF 17 MAY 1977 ON THE HARMONIZATION OF THE LAWS OF THE MEMBER STATES RELATING TO TURNOVER TAXES - COMMON SYSTEM OF VALUE-ADDED TAX : UNIFORM BASIS OF ASSESSMENT ( OFFICIAL JOURNAL 1977 , L 145 , P . 1 ). ACCORDING TO ARTICLE 1 OF THE DIRECTIVE THE MEMBER STATES HAS TO ADOPT THE NECESSARY LAWS , REGULATIONS AND ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS BY 1 JANUARY 1978 AT THE LATEST . SINCE SEVERAL MEMBER STATES INCLUDING THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY WERE NOT IN A POSITION TO MAKE , IN GOOD TIME , THE NECESSARY ADAPTATIONS TO THEIR SYSTEM OF VALUE-ADDED TAX , THE COUNCIL , BY THE NINTH COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 77/583 OF 26 JUNE 1978 ON THE HARMONIZATION OF THE LAWS OF THE MEMBER STATES RELATING TO TURNOVER TAXES , EXTENDED THE SAID PERIOD UNTIL 1 JANUARY 1979 . 3 IT WAS NOT UNTIL THE ADOPTION OF THE LAW OF 26 NOVEMBER 1979 ( BUNDESGESETZBLATT I , P . 1953 ), WHICH TOOK EFFECT ON 1 JANUARY 1980 , THAT THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY IMPLEMENTED THE SIXTH DIRECTIVE . IT IS APPARENT FROM THE ORDER MAKING THE REFERENCE THAT THE UNDERTAKING GRENDEL , WHICH CARRIES ON BUSINESS IN GERMANY AS A CREDIT NEGOTIATOR , WAS BY NOTICE OF ASSESSMENT OF 3 SEPTEMBER 1980 ISSUED BY THE FINANZAMT FUR KORPERSCHAFTEN ( TAX OFFICE FOR CORPORATIONS ) IN HAMBURG , ASSESSED TO TURNOVER TAX ON THE INCOME RECEIVED IN 1979 BY WAY OF COMMISSION FOR THAT ACTIVITY , IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE GERMAN LAW IN FORCE UNTIL 31 DECEMBER 1979 . 5 THE UNDERTAKING OBJECTED AND CLAIMED EXEMPTION FORM THE TAX , RELYING ON ARTICLE 13 OF THE SIXTH COUNCIL DIRECTIVE WHICH , IT ALLEGED , WAS DIRECTLY APPLICABLE . ARTICLE 13 B ( D ) 1 . THEREOF PROVIDES THAT ' ' THE GRANTING AND THE NEGOTIATION OF CREDIT ' ' AND ' ' THE MANAGEMENT OF CREDIT BY THE PERSON GRANTING IT ' ' ARE TO BE EXEMPT FROM TAX . THE FINANZAMT TOOK THE VIEW THAT THE DIRECTIVE DID NOT CREATE A RIGHT CAPABLE OF BEING ASSERTED DIRECTLY BY AN INDIVIDUAL AND REFUSED TO GRANT THE EXEMPTION . THE FINANZGERICHT HAMBURG BEFORE WHICH THE MATTER WAS BROUGHT STAYED THE PROCEEDINGS AND REFERRED THE FOLLOWING QUESTION TO THE COURT FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING : ' ' IS ARTICLE 13 B ( D ) 1 . OF THE SIXTH COUNCIL DIRECTIVE OF 17 MAY 1977 ( 77/388/EEC ) TO BE INTERPRETED AS CONFERRING ON A TAXABLE PERSON , AS FROM THE DATE ON WHICH IT TOOK EFFECT , A DIRECT LEGAL RIGHT TO EXEMPTION FROM TAX IN RESPECT OF THE TRANSACTIONS REFERRED TO THEREIN , EVEN WHERE EXEMPTION IS ( NOT YET ) PROVIDED FOR UNDER NATIONAL LAW ON TURNOVER TAX? ' ' 7 THE PLAINTIFF IN THE MAIN ACTION DID NOT APPEAR IN THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COURT . ITS VIEW WAS SUPPORTED BY THE COMMISSION WHICH ARGUED BEFORE THE COURT TO THE EFFECT THAT INDIVIDUALS ARE ENTITLED TO CLAIM THE RELEVANT EXEMPTION FROM TAX . THE COUNCIL TOO , WHICH TOOK PART IN THE ORAL PROCEDURE , SUPPORTED THE PLAINTIFF ' S VIEW , ALBEIT WITH CERTAIN RESERVATIONS . ON THE OTHER HAND THE FINANZAMT , SUPPORTED BY THE GOVERNMENTS OF THE FRENCH AND ITALIAN REPUBLICS EXPOUNDED A NUMBER OF ARGUMENTS DESIGNED TO SHOW THAT FOR THE PERIOD , NAMELY THE TAX YEAR 1979 , DURING WHICH THE NATIONAL LEGAL PROVISIONS IMPLEMENTING THE DIRECTIVE IN THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY HAD NOT YET ENTERED INTO FORCE , IT WAS NOT POSSIBLE TO RELY ON THE PROVISION IN QUESTION . IT MUST BE POINTED OUT THAT THE QUESTIONS RAISED IN THIS CASE HAVE ALREADY BEEN RESOLVED BY THE COURT IN ITS JUDGMENT OF 19 JANUARY 1982 IN CASE 8/81 BECKER ( 1982 ) ECR , WHICH WAS CONCERNED WITH THE SAME ISSUE . THE FRENCH GOVERNMENT AND THE COMMISSION HAVE CONFINED THEMSELVES TO REPEATING THEIR OBSERVATIONS IN CASE 8/81 . THE PARTIES WHO WERE NOT INVOLVED IN CASE 8/81 , NAMELY THE ITALIAN GOVERNMENT AND THE DEFENDANT IN THE MAIN ACTION , HAVE NOT PUT FORWARD IN THEIR PLEADINGS NEW ARGUMENTS WHICH WERE NOT CONSIDERED IN THE ABOVE-MENTIONED JUDGMENT . IN THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES IT IS NECESSARY TO REFER TO THE COURT ' S RULING IN ITS JUDGMENT OF 19 JANUARY 1982 , NAMELY THAT AS FROM 1 JANUARY 1979 IT WAS POSSIBLE FOR THE PROVISION CONCERNING THE EXEMPTION FROM TURNOVER TAX OF TRANSACTIONS CONSISTING OF THE NEGOTIATION OF CREDIT CONTAINED IN ARTICLE 13 OF DIRECTIVE 77/388 TO BE RELIED UPON , IN THE ABSENCE OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THAT DIRECTIVE , BY A CREDIT NEGOTIATOR WHERE HE HAD REFRAINED FROM PASSING THAT TAX ON TO PERSONS FOLLOWING HIM IN THE CHAIN OF SUPPLY , AND THAT THE STATE COULD NOT CLAIM , AS AGAINST HIM , THAT IT HAD FAILED TO IMPLEMENT THE DIRECTIVE . THE JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF 19 JANUARY 1982 IN CASE 8/81 BECKER IS TO BE ANNEXED TO THE PRESENT JUDGMENT BY WAY OF SUPPLEMENT . Decision on costs COSTS 13 THE COSTS INCURRED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF THE FRENCH REPUBLIC , THE GOVERNMENT OF THE ITALIAN REPUBLIC , THE COUNCIL AND THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES , WHICH HAVE SUBMITTED OBSERVATIONS TO THE COURT , ARE NOT RECOVERABLE . AS THESE PROCEEDINGS ARE , IN SO FAR AS THE PARTIES TO THE MAIN ACTION ARE CONCERNED , IN THE NATURE OF A STEP IN THE ACTION PENDING BEFORE THE NATIONAL COURT , THE DECISION ON COSTS IS A MATTER FOR THAT COURT . Operative part ON THOSE GROUNDS , THE COURT ( FIRST CHAMBER ) IN ANSWER TO THE QUESTION SUBMITTED TO IT BY THE FINANZGERICHT HAMBURG BY ORDER OF 4 SEPTEMBER 1981 , HEREBY RULES : AS FROM 1 JANUARY 1979 IT WAS POSSIBLE FOR THE PROVISION CONCERNING THE EXEMPTION FROM TURNOVER TAX OF TRANSACTIONS CONSISTING OF THE NEGOTIATION OF CREDIT CONTAINED IN ARTICLE 13 B ( D ) 1 . OF THE SIXTH DIRECTIVE 77/388 OF 17 MAY 1977 ON THE HARMONIZATION OF THE LAWS OF THE MEMBER STATES RELATING TO TURNOVER TAXES - COMMON SYSTEM OF VALUE-ADDED TAX : UNIFORM BASIS OF ASSESSMENT - TO BE RELIED UPON , IN THE ABSENCE OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THAT DIRECTIVE , BY A CREDIT NEGOTIATOR WHERE HE HAD REFRAINED FROM PASSING THAT TAX ON TO PERSONS FOLLOWING HIM IN THE CHAIN OF SUPPLY , AND THE STATE COULD NOT CLAIM , AS AGAINST HIM , THAT IT HAD FAILED TO IMPLEMENT THE DIRECTIVE .

© Unia Europejska, źródło: EUR-Lex (eur-lex.europa.eu), pozyskano 13.07.2026. Autentyczne są wyłącznie wersje opublikowane w Dz. Urz. UE. · Źródło