Hartley Foster and Aaron Stephens DLA Piper Rudnick Gray Cary UK LLP ask whether the ECJ is still the taxpayers' friend
Until recently it was considered relatively easy in direct tax cases where EC law was in issue to predict both the outcome and the way in which it would be expressed by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) and its Advocates-General. Normally the ECJ would adopt the following four-step approach in considering whether a domestic tax provision was contrary to the EC Treaty.
(1) Does a fundamental freedom apply?
(2) Does the domestic provision constitute a restriction of that fundamental freedom?
(3) Is the restriction justified by reference to an 'imperative reason in the public interest'?
If you or your firm subscribes to Taxjournal.com, please click the login box below:
If you do not subscribe but are a registered user, please enter your details in the following boxes:
Hartley Foster and Aaron Stephens DLA Piper Rudnick Gray Cary UK LLP ask whether the ECJ is still the taxpayers' friend
Until recently it was considered relatively easy in direct tax cases where EC law was in issue to predict both the outcome and the way in which it would be expressed by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) and its Advocates-General. Normally the ECJ would adopt the following four-step approach in considering whether a domestic tax provision was contrary to the EC Treaty.
(1) Does a fundamental freedom apply?
(2) Does the domestic provision constitute a restriction of that fundamental freedom?
(3) Is the restriction justified by reference to an 'imperative reason in the public interest'?
If you or your firm subscribes to Taxjournal.com, please click the login box below:
If you do not subscribe but are a registered user, please enter your details in the following boxes:
