Reports of Cases

published in the electronic Reports of Cases (Court Reports - general)

Subject-matter

Reference for a preliminary ruling – Székesfehérvári Törvényszék – Interpretation of Articles 18 TFEU, 26 TFEU, 49 TFEU, 54 TFEU, 55 TFEU, 56 TFEU, 63 TFEU, 65 TFEU and 110 TFEU – National tax legislation creating a special tax on the store retail trade sector – Progressive tax calculated on the basis of net turnover – Threshold tax rate resulting in greater impact on retail food trade undertakings owned by foreigners than on those owned by nationals

Systematic classification scheme

Citations of case-law or legislation

References in grounds of judgment

• TFEU, Article 18 : paragraphs 1, 16, 25, 26
• TFEU, Article 26 : paragraphs 1, 16, 26
• TFEU, Article 49 : paragraphs 16, 20, 22, 24, 25, 28, 29, 41, 45
• TFEU, Article 54 : paragraphs 1, 16, 20, 24, 28, 29, 41, 45
• TFEU, Article 55 : paragraphs 1, 16, 20, 24
• TFEU, Article 56 : paragraphs 1, 16, 20, 24
• TFEU, Article 63 : paragraphs 1, 16, 20, 24
• TFEU, Article 65 : paragraphs 1, 16, 20, 24
• TFEU, Article 110 : paragraphs 1, 16, 27
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -279/93 : paragraph 30
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -35/98 : paragraph 44
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -436/00 : paragraph 44
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -383/05 : paragraph 30
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -384/08 : paragraph 25
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -440/08 : paragraphs 30, 41
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -371/10 : paragraph 42
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -35/11 : paragraphs 21, 23

Operative part

• Interprets : TFEU, Article 49
• Interprets : TFEU, Article 54

Opinion

• EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 90 : points 27, 28
  
• EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 95 : points 28, 38, 39
  
• TFEU, Article 18 : points 10, 87
  
• TFEU, Article 26 : point 10
  
• TFEU, Article 45 : point 38
  
• TFEU, Article 49 : points 10, 30, 32, 34, 37, 81 - 87, 125, 126
  
• TFEU, Article 49 -L2 : point 30
  
• TFEU, Article 54 : points 10, 30, 32, 37, 81 - 86, 125, 126
  
• TFEU, Article 55 : point 10
  
• TFEU, Article 56 : points 10, 38, 86
  
• TFEU, Article 63 : points 10, 86
  
• TFEU, Article 65 : points 10, 86
  
• TFEU, Article 110 : points 10, 26 - 29
  
• TFEU, Article 114 -P2 : point 84
  
• TFEU, Article 115 : point 84
  
• TFEU, Article 173 -P3L2 : point 84
  
• TFEU, Article 192 -P2L1LA : point 84
  
• TFEU, Article 194 -P3 : point 84
  
• TFEU, Article 267 : point 15
  
• TFEU - Protocol No 3 -A23 : point 15
  
• Directive 67/227 -C4 : point 93
  
• Directive 67/227 -C8 : point 93
  
• Directive 2006/112 -A01P2L1 : point 121
  
• Directive 2006/112 -A73 : point 110
  
• Directive 2006/112 -A132 : point 115
  
• Directive 2006/112 -A135 : point 115
  
• Directive 2006/112 -A401 : points 24, 88 - 126
  
• Court of Justice - Rules of Procedure (2012) -A94 : point 14
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -112/84 : points 28, 39
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -295/84 : point 96
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -35/85 : point 24
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -433/85 : point 28
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -252/86 : points 28, 38
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -143/87 : point 38
  
• Court of Justice - Opinion C -93/88 : points 104, 106
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -3/88 : points 34, 39
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -93/88 : points 99, 107
  
• Court of Justice - Opinion C -347/90 : point 117
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -109/90 : point 110
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -200/90 : points 89, 99, 110
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -347/90 : point 91
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -208/91 : points 110, 114
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -330/91 : point 34
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -1/93 : point 31
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -279/93 : points 32, 43
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -316/93 : point 18
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -347/95 : point 89
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -370/95 : point 99
  
• Court of Justice - Opinion C -130/96 : point 95
  
• Court of Justice - Opinion C -318/96 : point 117
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -51/96 : point 19
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -130/96 : point 114
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -318/96 : point 99
  
• Court of Justice - Opinion C -437/97 : point 115
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -338/97 : points 99, 109, 110
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -115/97 : point 19
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -254/97 : points 34, 38, 39
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -338/97 : points 91, 99, 105
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -437/97 : points 91, 114
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -397/98 : point 87
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -101/00 : points 91, 114
  
• Court of Justice - Opinion C -475/03 : points 97, 104, 109
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -475/03 : points 91, 93, 96, 97, 105
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -374/04 : points 32, 47
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -329/05 : point 34
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -383/05 : point 38
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -206/06 : point 27
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -221/06 : points 27, 28
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -283/06 : points 91, 93, 95, 96, 97, 99, 105
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -345/06 : point 19
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -282/07 : points 32, 82
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -303/07 : point 32
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -459/07 : point 32
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -570/07 : points 34, 38, 39, 82
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -97/09 : point 38
  
• Court of Justice - Opinion C -498/10 : point 83
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -242/10 : point 14
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -35/11 : point 86
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -123/11 : point 59
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -172/11 : point 38
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -380/11 : point 82
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -342/12 : point 24
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -370/12 : point 15
  

Dates

Date of the lodging of the application initiating proceedings

• 13/08/2012

Date of the Opinion

• 05/09/2013

Date of the hearing

Information not available

Date of delivery

05/02/2014

References

Publication in the Official Journal

Application: OJ C 366 from 24.11.2012, p.24

Judgment: OJ C 93 from 29.03.2014, p.10

Name of the parties

Hervis Sport- és Divatkereskedelmi

Notes on Academic Writings

1. Picod, Fabrice: Impôt special potentieliement discriminatoire, La Semaine Juridique - édition générale 2014 nº 6 p.269 (FR)
2. Szudoczky, Rita: Hervis Sport - és Divatkeresfedelmi. Taxation with disadvantages undertakings linked, within a group, to companies established in another Member State constitutes indirect discrimination on the basis of the registered office of the companies., Highlights & Insights on European Taxation 2014 nº 4 p.24-26 (EN)
3. Michel, Valérie: Discrimination fiscale indirecte, Europe 2014 Avril Com. nº 4 p.25 (FR)
4. Deák, Dániel: Special Industries Levies under Review from the Perspective of EU Law (C-385/12 Hervis Case), ECJ - Recent Developments in Direct taxation 2013 (Ed. Linde - Wien) 2014 p.83-101 (EN)
5. Martín Jiménez, Adolfo: Jurisprudencia del tribunal de Justicia de la Unión Europea - 2. Libertades fundamentales e impuestos directos - 2.1. Sentencia del TJUE (Gran Sala) de 5 de Febrero de 2014, Hervis Sport—es Divatkereskedelmi Kft., asunto c-385/12, Revista española de Derecho Financiero 2014 n°163 p. 299-302 (ES)
6. Maitrot de la Motte, Alexandre: Cour de justice, gde ch., 5 février 2014, Hervis Sport- és Divatkereskedelmi Kft c/ Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Közép-dunántúli Regionális Adó Főigazgatósága, aff. C-385/12, ECLI:EU:C:2014:47, Jurisprudence de la CJUE 2014 (Ed. Bruylant - Bruxelles) 2014 p.407-408 (FR)
7. Vincze, Attila: Verletzt eine stark progressive Umsatzsteuer, die zwischen verbundenen und nicht verbundenen Unternehmen unterscheidet, die Niederlassungsfreiheit?, Internationale Steuer-Rundschau : ISR 2014 p.103-104 (DE)
8. Petrikova, Viktoriya: Taxation, which disadvantages undertakings linked, within a group, to companies established in another member state, constitutes indirect discrimination and is contrary to the freedom of establishment, Европейски правен преглед 2015 nº 11 p.65-78 (BG)
9. Maitrot de la Motte, Alexandre: XI. Fiscalité - Cour de justice, gde ch., 5 février 2014, Hervis Sport- és Divatkereskedelmi Kft c/ Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Közép-dunántúli Regionális Adó Főigazgatósága, aff. C‑385/12, ECLI:EU:C:2014:47, Jurisprudence de la CJUE 2014. Décisions et commentaires (Ed. Bruylant - Bruxelles) 2015, p. 407-408 (FR)
10. Zorn, Nikolaus: VwGH legt Bankenabgabe dem EuGH vor, Österreichisches Recht der Wirtschaft 2017 p.873 (DE)
11. Acard, Claire: Fiscalité financière (1re partie), Revue de droit fiscal 2018 n°4 p. 43-47 (FR)

Procedural Analysis Information

Source of the question referred for a preliminary ruling

Székesfehérvári Törvényszék (Cour départementale de Székesfehérvár) - Hungary

Subject-matter

• non-discrimination
  
• - Non-discrimination on grounds of nationality
  

Provisions of national law referred to

2010. évi XCIV. törvény az egyes ágazatokat terhelő különadóról, 1., 2. § a

Provisions of international law referred to

Information not available

Procedure and result

• Reference for a preliminary ruling
  

Formation of the Court

grande chambre (Cour)

Judge-Rapporteur

Bonichot

Advocate General

Kokott

Language(s) of the Case

• Hungarian
  

Language(s) of the Opinion

• German