Request for a preliminary ruling from the Helsingin hallinto-oikeus (Finland), lodged on 26 September 2023 – B UG

(Case C-596/23, Pohjanri ¹ )

Language of the case: Finnish

Referring court

Helsingin hallinto-oikeus

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: B UG

Other party to the proceedings: Veronsaajien oikeudenvalvontayksikkö

Questions referred

Does Directive 2008/118/EC, ¹ in particular Article 36 thereof concerning distance selling, preclude an interpretation of national law according to which a vendor of excise goods established in another Member State is regarded as involved in the transport of the goods to the Member State of destination and liable for excise duty in the Member State of destination from distance sales solely because the vendor, on its website, directs the purchaser to use a particular transport company?

Did the vendor of excise goods dispatch or transport goods to another Member State directly or indirectly within the meaning of Article 36(1) of Directive 2008/118/EC and was it subject to duty from distance sales within the meaning of the directive if the vendor’s website recommended particular transport companies and gave information on the transport costs arising for the purchaser and the transport costs were charged by a transport company to which the information on the goods to be transported had been transmitted without the intervention of the purchaser? Is the fact that the purchaser concluded a separate contract for the carriage of the goods with the transport company mentioned on the vendor’s website of relevance to the assessment of that question?

____________

¹ The name of the present case is a fictitious name. It does not correspond to the real name of any party to the proceedings.

¹ Council Directive 2008/118/EC of 16 December 2008 concerning the general arrangements for excise duty and repealing Directive 92/12/EEC (OJ 2009 L 9, p. 12).