EY refers to the global organization, and may refer to one or more, of the member firms of Ernst & Young Global Limited, each of which is a separate legal entity. Ernst & Young Global Limited, a UK company limited by guarantee, does not provide services to clients.
European Court of Justice
Overview:
- Opinion from the A-G ECJ (Case C-206/24, Caves Andorranes) regarding the conditions under which customs authorities must repay wrongly collected duties on their own initiative
- Opinion from the A-G ECJ (Case C-125/24, Palmstråle) regarding the relationship between customs legislation and VAT exemptions for re-imported goods
Opinion from the A-G ECJ (Case C-206/24, Caves Andorranes) regarding the conditions under which customs authorities must repay wrongly collected duties on their own initiative
Customs – Opinion A-G in Case C-206/24 (Caves Andorranes) - Reference for a preliminary ruling – Customs union – Repayment or remission of import or export duties – Regulation (EEC) No 1430/79 – Union Customs Code – Regulation (EU) No 952/2013 – Conditions for repayment on own initiative – Time limit of three years from the date of notification of the customs debt – Knowledge by the customs authorities of the identity of the operators concerned and the amount to be repaid to each of them, without it being necessary to carry out extensive research – Right to good administration.
The Advocate General advises the ECJ to rule as follows:
Article 2(2) of Regulation 1430/79 on the repayment or remission of import or export duties, reproduced in the third subparagraph of Article 236(2) of the UCC must be interpreted as meaning that:
in order for the customs authorities to be able to repay on their own initiative wrongly collected customs duties, they must have recognised, within a period of three years from the date on which those duties were entered in the accounts, that those duties were not legally owed. In order for repayment to be made, the finding must include the identity of the operators concerned and the amounts to be repaid to each of them. Research for those purposes must be proportionate to the seriousness of the situation which the competent authority must remedy.
Opinion from the A-G ECJ (Case C-125/24, Palmstråle) regarding the relationship between customs legislation and VAT exemptions for re-imported goods
Customs – Opinion A-G in Case C-125/24 (Palmstråle) - Reference for a preliminary ruling – Tax law – Value added tax (VAT) – VAT Directive – Reimportation of goods – Exemption from VAT – Article 143(1)(e) – Need to comply with customs legislation – Customs union – Customs Code – Relief from customs duty on importation of returned goods – Article 203 – Article 86(6) – Relationship between customs legislation and VAT legislation.
The Advocate General advises the ECJ to rule as follows:
Article 143(1)(e) of the VAT Directive only requires that the substantive conditions laid down in Article 203 of the UCC are fulfilled. In so far as a customs debt under Article 79 of the UCC has only been incurred through non-compliance with the customs declaration obligation under Article 158(1) of the UCC and the presentation obligation under Article 139(1) of the UCC or the lack of an application for relief from customs duty under Article 203 of the UCC, the re-importation of returned goods within the meaning of Article 203 of the UCC is exempt from VAT. For that reason, it is irrelevant for the import VAT exemption under Article 143(1)(e) of the VAT Directive whether the requirements for a relief under Article 86(6) of the UCC (on account of the lack of an attempt at deception) are fulfilled.