Reports of Cases

2007 I-02107

Subject-matter

Interpretation of Articles 43, 49 and 56 EC – National tax legislation – Ability of a company established on national territory to deduct for tax purposes interest paid on a loan granted by its parent company – Situation differing according to the State where the parent company established

Systematic classification scheme

Citations of case-law or legislation

References in grounds of judgment

• EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 43 : paragraphs 1, 22 - 102, 104, 117, 121, 126 - 128
• EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 48 : paragraphs 36, 37, 97, 99
• EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 49 : paragraphs 1, 22, 23, 26, 34, 101
• EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 56 : paragraphs 1, 22, 23, 26, 34, 101, 103, 104
• EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 57 : paragraphs 1, 22
• EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 57 -P1 : paragraph 103
• EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 58 : paragraph 1
• Agreement between Member States - 41990A0436 : paragraph 55
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -33/76 : paragraph 111
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -64/76 : paragraph 122
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -95/76 : paragraph 111
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -199/82 : paragraph 110
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -270/83 : paragraph 37
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -6/90 : paragraph 123
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -204/90 : paragraph 68
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -300/90 : paragraph 68
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -330/91 : paragraph 3
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -46/93 : paragraphs 22, 115 - 120, 123, 124, 128
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -392/93 : paragraphs 116, 118
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -484/93 : paragraph 68
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -5/94 : paragraph 118
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -283/94 : paragraph 116
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -192/95 : paragraph 110
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -231/96 : paragraph 111
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -264/96 : paragraph 72
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -336/96 : paragraph 49
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -343/96 : paragraph 111
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -302/97 : paragraph 116
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -307/97 : paragraphs 36, 37, 53
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -424/97 : paragraphs 118, 119
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -251/98 : paragraph 27
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -397/98 : paragraphs 25, 37, 109 - 112, 125
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -478/98 : paragraph 73
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -385/00 : paragraph 53
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -436/00 : paragraphs 27, 73
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -224/01 : paragraphs 115, 123
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -36/02 : paragraph 34
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -319/02 : paragraphs 54, 68
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -334/02 : paragraphs 73, 121
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -446/03 : paragraphs 25, 36, 37, 64, 72, 75, 115 - 120, 122, 123
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -196/04 : paragraphs 27, 33, 34, 36, 64, 72 - 75
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -265/04 : paragraph 54
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -374/04 : paragraphs 25, 89, 90
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -446/04 : paragraphs 33, 54, 109, 110, 112
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -452/04 : paragraph 34
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -470/04 : paragraph 49
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -471/04 : paragraph 68
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -513/04 : paragraph 49
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -170/05 : paragraphs 54, 90

Operative part

• Interprets : EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 43

Opinion

• EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 43 : points 29 - 102, 108, 112, 113
  
• EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 48 : points 94, 97
  
• EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 49 : points 29, 31, 100
  
• EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 56 : points 29 - 31, 35, 36, 100
  
• EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 57 : points 29, 31, 100
  
• EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 58 -P2 : point 32
  
• Directive 88/361 : point 31
  
• Directive 90/435 : point 5
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -199/82 : point 104
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -205/84 : point 35
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -309/85 : point 104
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -204/90 : point 87
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -300/90 : point 87
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -267/91 : point 48
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -46/93 : points 29, 108
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -48/93 : point 108
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -62/93 : point 104
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -484/93 : point 35
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -28/95 : points 62, 67
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -192/95 : point 104
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -264/96 : points 62, 63
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -336/96 : points 48, 53
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -343/96 : point 104
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -367/96 : points 62, 66
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -294/97 : point 63
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -311/97 : point 58
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -35/98 : points 87, 89
  
• Court of Justice - Opinion C -251/98 : point 35
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -251/98 : points 32, 87
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -397/98 : points 47, 104
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -441/98 : point 104
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -110/99 : point 62
  
• Court of Justice - Opinion C -515/99 : point 35
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -62/00 : point 104
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -324/00 : points 2, 47, 62, 63, 67, 71, 108
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -436/00 : points 62, 63
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -168/01 : point 87
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -255/02 : points 62, 63, 66, 67
  
• Court of Justice - Opinion C -319/02 : point 88
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -319/02 : points 88, 89
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -376/03 : point 53
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -446/03 : points 39, 60, 62, 88, 89, 106, 109
  
• Court of Justice - Opinion C -196/04 : point 63
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -196/04 : point 2
  
• Court of Justice - Opinion C -374/04 : points 40, 56, 69
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -374/04 : points 48, 53
  
• Court of Justice - Opinion C -446/04 : point 40
  
• Court of Justice - Opinion C -513/04 : points 40, 55
  
• Court of Justice - Opinion C -170/05 : points 40, 55, 56, 69
  

Dates

Date of the lodging of the application initiating proceedings

• 31/12/2004

Date of the Opinion

• 29/06/2006

Date of the hearing

Information not available

Date of delivery

13/03/2007

References

Publication in the Official Journal

Application: OJ C 57 from 05.03.2005, p.20

Judgment: OJ C 95 from 28.04.2007, p.5

Name of the parties

Test Claimants in the Thin Cap Group Litigation

Notes on Academic Writings

1. Gammie, Malcolm: Pending Cases Filed by UK Courts II: The ACT, FII, and Thin Cap Group Litigations and the Marks & Spencer Case, ECJ : recent developments in direct taxation (Ed. Linde - Wien) 2006 p.323-348 (EN)
2. Müller, Welf: EU-Grundfreiheiten und Doppelbesteuerungsrecht, Der Betrieb - Status: Recht 2007 Heft 4 p.119 (DE)
3. Fontaneau Vandoren, Françoise: La Cour de justice européenne se prononce sur les règles de la "sous capitalisation" en Grande Bretagne, Fiscalité européenne 2007 nº 149 p.3-8 (FR)
4. Mariatte, Flavien: Sous-capitalisation et droit communautaire, Europe 2007 Mai Comm. nº 140 p.16-17 (FR)
5. Mok, M.R.: Nederlandse jurisprudentie ; Uitspraken in burgerlijke en strafzaken 2007 nº 290 (NL)
6. Perrotin, Frédérique: Un élargissement inattendu de la notion communautaire d'abus de droit, Petites affiches. La Loi / Le Quotidien juridique 2007 nº 66 p.3-5 (FR)
7. Kruger, Hervé: Non-conformité d'une législation restreignant la faculté de déduire les intérêts versés à une société mère non résidente, Revue de droit fiscal 2007 Comm. nº 764 p.45-49 (FR)
8. X: Le disposizioni nazionali che fanno dipendere l'applicazione del trattamento fiscale favorevole dalla sede del contribuente contrastano con il trattato CE, Diritto comunitario e degli scambi internazionali 2007 p.519-520 (IT)
9. Tronnet, Jean: La décision CJCE Test Claimants in the Thin Group Cap Litigation (13 mars 2007, aff. C-524/04): un plaidoyer "indirect" en faveur de l'"euro-compatibilité" de l'article 57 du CGI?, Revue de droit fiscal 2008 Etude 327 p.9-11 (FR)
10. Martín Jiménez, Adolfo J.: Jurisprudencia del Tribunal de Justicia de las Comunidades Europeas, Revista española de Derecho Financiero 2008 p.193-199 (ES)
11. Donnat, Francis: Chronique annuelle 2007 de jurisprudence communautaire, Revue juridique de l'Economie publique 2008 nº 655 p.15-16 (FR)
12. Ruiz Almendral, Violeta: Subcapitalización y libertad de establecimiento: el caso "Test Claimants in the Thin Cap Group Litigation" como una oportunidad para rehabilitar el artículo 20 del TRLIS, Noticias de la Unión Europea 2008 nº 283 p.121-134 (ES)
13. Godeanu, Narcis: Condițiile antrenării răspunderii juridice a statelor membre ale Uniunii Europene pentru nerespectarea regulilor de drept european. Unele soluții adoptate de Curtea de Justiție a Uniunii Europene în domeniul fiscal, Revista de drept public 2017 n°3 p.150-153 (RO)

Procedural Analysis Information

Source of the question referred for a preliminary ruling

High Court of Justice (England & Wales), Chancery Division - United Kingdom

Subject-matter

• Freedom of establishment
  

Provisions of national law referred to

Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988, sections 209, 212, 788, 808A, Schedule 28AA

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

Lenaerts

Advocate General

Geelhoed

Language(s) of the Case

• English
  

Language(s) of the Opinion

• English