Towards a Court Mandated Harmonization of National Tax Rules Case 552/15, Commission v. Ireland

Yannis Schlüter
{"title":"Towards a Court Mandated Harmonization of National Tax Rules Case 552/15, Commission v. Ireland","authors":"Yannis Schlüter","doi":"10.54648/leie2018024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The CJEU’s judgment in Commission v. Ireland is not just another case concerning a national system of vehicle registration taxes. It is true that the object of the dispute was Ireland’s system of vehicle registration taxes and the way it was applied to vehicles leased in another Member State. The Court confirmed its earlier case law and considered the Irish system contrary to EU law because of a lack of proportionality. The court however went further, and expressly stated how the tax system should have been designed to be proportionate. This approach touches upon the exclusive competence of EU Member States in the designing of their national tax systems. Indeed, it raises the question whether the Court is simply protecting free movement rights or whether it is in fact harmonizing national tax systems through the application of its proportionality test.","PeriodicalId":42718,"journal":{"name":"Legal Issues of Economic Integration","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2018-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Legal Issues of Economic Integration","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54648/leie2018024","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The CJEU’s judgment in Commission v. Ireland is not just another case concerning a national system of vehicle registration taxes. It is true that the object of the dispute was Ireland’s system of vehicle registration taxes and the way it was applied to vehicles leased in another Member State. The Court confirmed its earlier case law and considered the Irish system contrary to EU law because of a lack of proportionality. The court however went further, and expressly stated how the tax system should have been designed to be proportionate. This approach touches upon the exclusive competence of EU Member States in the designing of their national tax systems. Indeed, it raises the question whether the Court is simply protecting free movement rights or whether it is in fact harmonizing national tax systems through the application of its proportionality test.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
走向法院强制统一国家税收规则案552/15,欧盟委员会诉爱尔兰
欧洲法院对欧盟委员会诉爱尔兰案的判决不仅仅是另一个涉及国家车辆登记税制度的案件。确实,争端的对象是爱尔兰的车辆登记税制度及其适用于在另一个会员国租用的车辆的方式。法院确认了其早先的判例法,并认为爱尔兰的制度违反了欧盟法律,因为缺乏相称性。然而,法院更进一步,明确说明了税收制度应该如何设计成比例。这种方法涉及欧盟成员国在设计其国家税收制度方面的专属权限。事实上,它提出了一个问题,即法院是否只是在保护自由流动的权利,还是实际上通过适用其比例性检验来协调各国的税收制度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
5
期刊最新文献
The EU’s Anti-coercion Instrument: A Return of Unlawful Unilateral Trade Countermeasures in Disguise? Editorial: Investment Protection in an Integrated Europe – The Non-Enforcement of Intra-EU Investment Arbitration Awards as the Ultimate Test Case for Strasbourg’s Deference Doctrines Why Do (High-Income) Countries Wish to Green Their Trade Agreements? The Application of Regulation 452/2019 in Response to Chinese Foreign Direct Investment The ESM Reform and Its Missing Legitimacy in Non-Euro Area Member States
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1