Interpretation of mutual assistance in the recovery of tax debts directive
In Etat belge v Pantochim SA (Case C-19/19) (11 June) the CJEU ruled that a request from one member state (A) to another (B) for assistance in recovering a tax debt is not treated as a claim made by B and so does not acquire the status that a tax claim by B would have had.
The CJEU also considered the application of the language that ‘the claims to be recovered shall not necessarily benefit from the privileges accorded to similar claims arising in the member state in which the requested authority is situated.’ The CJEU ruled that the term ‘privilege’ is to be interpreted as any mechanism which results in the event of concurrent claims in the preferential payment of a claim and that a right of set off by state B should be treated as...
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:
Interpretation of mutual assistance in the recovery of tax debts directive
In Etat belge v Pantochim SA (Case C-19/19) (11 June) the CJEU ruled that a request from one member state (A) to another (B) for assistance in recovering a tax debt is not treated as a claim made by B and so does not acquire the status that a tax claim by B would have had.
The CJEU also considered the application of the language that ‘the claims to be recovered shall not necessarily benefit from the privileges accorded to similar claims arising in the member state in which the requested authority is situated.’ The CJEU ruled that the term ‘privilege’ is to be interpreted as any mechanism which results in the event of concurrent claims in the preferential payment of a claim and that a right of set off by state B should be treated as...
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:
