Customs Union definition: - Common customs tariff - Free trade area

Free Movement Of Goods - FISCAL Flashcards by Ben Eaves

Article that sets out the internal market

A26(2) TFEU

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

What case defines Goods?

Commission v Italy (Italian Art)

GOODS = products which can be valued in money and which are capable, as such, if forming the subject of commercial transactions

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

A28(1) TFEU

Customs Union definition:

Common customs tariff
Free trade area

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

A30 TFEU

Prohibits customs duties and CEEs

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

A110 TFEU

Prohibits discriminatory taxation

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

A34-36

Prohibits quantitive restrictions and measures having equivalent effect (and derogations)

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

What case established that A30 has direct effect?

VG en Loos

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Italian Art

Tax on the export of objects of artistic, historic etc interest

Safeguarding Italian heritage was seen to hinder export trade in goods

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

What are charges having equivalent effect?

Commission v Italy (Statistical Levy)

Levy on all imports and exports for the purpose of collecting accurate statistical data relating to trade patterns

ANY PECUNIARY CHARGE IMPOSED BECAUSE A FRONTIER IS CROSSED

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Statistical Levy: list of irrelevant considerations

1) Size or Charge
2) Origin
3) Mode of application
4) Not imposed for State benefit
5) Not discriminatory or protective
6) Not in competition

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Which case showed the strictness of what can be see to be seen an CEE?

DIAMANTARBEIDERS

Charges on diamonds to provide to social security to diamond workers

NOT protectionist

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Not all charges constitute a customs duty or a CEE. What was this case and what was the list of three things that don’t come under A30?

C v GERMANY

1) If it is an internal due - governed by A110 instead
2) If a payment for a service is rendered
3) EU required inspections

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

What case determined that internal dues are governed by A110, NOT A30?

What did it determine about the two articles?

LUTTICKE

They are mutually exclusive

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Payments for services rendered = NOT A30

Statistical Levy = NO advantage to importers or exporters

BRESCIANI = cost of vet inspections on cow hides = general interest of public health= not a service

C v BELGIUM (CUSTOMS WAREHOUSE) = service must be provided at the importers request.

Levy for purpose of undergoing compulsory customs clearance operations there = CEE

Charge for temporary storage = NOT

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

C v BELGIUM (CUSTOMS WAREHOUSE)

C v BELGIUM (CUSTOMS WAREHOUSE) = service must be provided at the importers request.

Levy for purpose of undergoing compulsory customs clearance operations there = CEE

Charge for temporary storage = NOT

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

EU required inspections = NOT A30

C v GERMANY (Animal Inspections)

4 requirements for inspection charge NOT to be a CEE

1) NOT exceed inspection cost
2) UNIFORM on all relevant
3) PRESCRIBED by EU law
4) PROMOTES free movement

Can international treaties result in a charge not constituting a CEE?

C v NETHERLANDS

Yes - if it is an internationally required inspection

A110 and A30 relationship

Mutually exclusive and have different effects

What are the two different strands of A110?

(1) discriminatory taxation on similar goods

2) discriminatory taxation on NON similar goods

What case constituted that A110 has direct effect?

LUTTICKE

What case defined A110?

C V FRANCE (REPROGRAPHIC MACHINERY)

“Relates to a general system of internal dues applied systematically to categories of products in accordance with objective criteria irrespective of the origin of the products”

Define A110

Permissible internal tax as long as there is no discrimination to imports to A110 (paragraph 1 or 2)

Differences between A110 and A30

A110:

internal dues
irrespective of origin

A30:

crossing a frontier
either in domestic exports or foreign imports

DANSK DENKAVIT

Charge levied to fund the cost of checking samples of imported foodstuffs containing additives

Applied to domestic products through the same criteria = A110 NOT A30

Shows the difference between the two articles

Compare DANSK and BRESCIANI

B: similar burden BUT they had different charges

REPROGRAPHIC MACHINERY

A110 applies even when domestic production is negligible or non-existence France produced 1% of the relevant market

What case established A101(1) - SIMILAR GOODS

Rewe Zentrale - CDD - At the same stage of production or marketing m, did the products have similar characteristics and meet the same needs from the point of view of the consumer?

A101(1) - do they have to be strictly identical?

No - similar and comparable use C v FRANCE (SPIRITS)

What case determined that A110(1) similarity stemmed from the consumers point of view?

JOHN WALKER

Similar cases relating to A110(1)?

C v DENMARK = Lower tax for fruit wine than grape wine are seen as SIMILAR JOHN WALKER (DEN) = Higher rate for whisky for fruit wine = NOT SIMILAR - looked at product type, manufacturing, alcohol content etc

Direct Discrimination of Similar Goods (A100(1))

C v ITALY - Regenerated Oil To avoid discrimination you must treat equally in all taxation procedures

INDIRECT DISCRIMINATION of similar goods

Effect of discrimination by placing them in a less favourable position (C v DENMARK)

Confusion over Indirect Discrimination - progressive rates of tax

HUMBLOT - unlawful as it cancelled our competitive advantage of larger engines C v GREECE - lawful as consumers still had an imported choice that wasn’t discriminated against

What did HUMBLOT and GREECE share in common

Both based on question of discriminatory effect of tax increase - NOT the magnitude C v DENMARK = A110 not a basis for centring the excessive was of taxation

Can indirect discrimination be justified regarding A110?

Yes through objective non-discriminatory basis CHEMIAL FARMACEUTICI - economic policy objectives - promoting agricultural distillation over petroleum manufacturing C v GREECE - justified car tax on social policy

A110(2)

NON SIMILAR GOODS DISCRIMINATION Need only remove protective effect (not equalise the tax) C v FRANCE (SPIRITS)

C v FRANXE (SPIRITS)

Tax on cereal spirits and not on fruit and grape wine = not similar discrimination Sufficient characteristics to constitute alternative choice for consumers

The two cases that showed that beer and wine WERE in competition

C v UK (Wine and Beer) - Duty on wine had increased 102% compared to 59% beer - Cheapest wine and beer in competition - lowered wine tax and raised beer tax C v BELGIUM - commission time prove protective nature of a 6% difference in taxation - BUT CONFIRMED THE TWO WERE IN COMPETITION