About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

2013-10 E.C.R. 1 (2013)

handle is hein.intyb/rcbjcofi0352 and id is 1 raw text is: 





    VRw                               Reports of Cases




                                         Case  C-322/11
                                                K


                 (Request for a preliminary ruling from the Korkein hallinto-oikeus)


(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Articles 63 TFEU and 65 TFEU -  Free movement   of capital -
Tax legislation of a Member State which does not allow deduction of the loss on the sale of immovable
property situated in another Member State from the gain on the sale of securities in the Member State
                                           of taxation)


               Summary   - Judgment  of the Court (First Chamber), 7 November 2013

Free  movement   of capital and  liberalisation of payments -   Restrictions - Tax   legislation -
Income  tax -   Tax  rules of a Member   State not  allowing deduction of the loss on  the sale of
immovable  property situated in another  Member   State from revenue from  moveable  assets in the
Member   State of taxation - Whether permissible - Justifications - Balanced allocation of the power
to impose taxes between the Member   States - Need  to ensure the cohesion of the tax system of the
Member   State - Proportionality

(Arts 63 TFEU  and 65 TFEU)


Articles 63 TFEU   and 65  TFEU  do  not preclude national tax legislation which does not allow a
taxpayer who  resides in the Member State concerned and is fully liable to income tax there to deduct
the losses arising on a transfer of immovable property situated in another Member  State from the
income  from  moveable assets which is taxable in the first Member State, although that would have
been possible, on certain conditions, if the immovable property had been situated in the first Member
State.

Admittedly, such a difference in treatment on the basis of the place where the immovable property is
situated is liable to deter a taxpayer from investing in immovable property in another Member State
and  therefore constitutes a restriction on the free movement of capital, prohibited in principle by
Article 63 TFEU.

However,  where  the  result of applying the  double-tax convention  in conjunction  with the tax
legislation of the Member State of taxation is that that State does not exercise any tax powers over
the profits deriving from the transfer of immovable property situated in the other Member State, the
refusal to allow deduction  of losses arising from the sale of the immovable  property  concerned
permits  the symmetry   between  the right to  tax profits and the  right to deduct  losses to be
safeguarded. Furthermore, having regard to the objective pursued by the tax legislation concerned, a
direct link exists, in the case of the same taxpayer and the same tax, between, on the one hand, the
tax advantage granted, namely  the taking into account of losses generated by a capital investment,
and, on the other, the taxation of returns on that investment. Consequently, that legislation may be


ECLI:EU:C:2013:716


1

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

profiles profiles most