Available languages

Taxonomy tags

Info

References in this case

Share

Highlight in text

Go

18.1.2014   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 15/8

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tallinna Ringkonnakohus (Estonia) lodged on 28 October 2013 — Statoil Fuel & Retail Eesti AS v Tallinna Ettevõtlusamet

(Case C-553/13)

2014/C 15/10

Language of the case: Estonian

Referring court

Tallinna Ringkonnakohus

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Statoil Fuel & Retail Eesti AS

Defendant: Tallinna Ettevõtlusamet

Question referred

1.

May the funding of the organisation of public transport in the territory of a local authority be regarded as a specific purpose within the meaning of Article 1(2) of Council Directive 2008/118/EC (1) if the performance and funding of such a task is an obligation of the local authority?

2.

If the answer to the preceding question is in the affirmative, must Article 1(2) of Council Directive 2008/118/EC be interpreted as meaning that making provision in national law for an indirect tax which is charged on the sale of excise goods to the final consumer and is used solely for the organisation of public transport is consistent with that provision, if the organisation of public transport is an obligation of the local authority receiving the tax which must be fulfilled regardless of the existence of such an indirect tax, and the level of funding of the organisation of public transport ultimately does not depend automatically on the amount of tax collected, because the amount of the sum allocated to the organisation of public transport is calculated precisely in such a way that if the indirect tax being collected produces more income, the allocation of other funds by the public authorities to the organisation of public transport is reduced to that extent and, conversely, if the sales tax produces less income, the local authority has to increase other funds to that extent for the organisation of public transport, it being possible, however, in the event of the revenue differing from that forecast to change the amount of expenditure on the organisation of public transport by means of amending the local authority’s budget?

3.

If the answer to the preceding question is in the affirmative, must Article 1(2) of Council Directive 2008/118/EC then be interpreted as meaning that the additional taxation of excise goods by an indirect tax, the particular objective of using which is determined after the time of coming into being of the obligation to pay such an indirect tax, is consistent with that provision?

(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).