The Boundaries of Sovereignty: The ECJ’s Controversial Role Applying Internal Market Law to Direct Tax Measures

2007 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
pp. 287-311 ◽  
Author(s):  
Suzanne Kingston
Keyword(s):  
Internal Market ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
Movement Rules ◽  
Direct Tax

It is safe to say that any description of tax as ‘exciting’ tends to be greeted with at least mild scepticism by non-tax specialists. Yet the ECJ’s role applying the Treaty free movement rules in the direct tax sphere is one of the most exciting, controversial and seemingly intractable areas of ECJ competence at present. This paper seeks to demonstrate why no Community lawyer should miss out on the drama unfolding in Luxembourg.

The Boundaries of Sovereignty: The ECJ’s Controversial Role Applying Internal Market Law to Direct Tax Measures

2007 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
pp. 287-311
Author(s):  
Suzanne Kingston
Keyword(s):  
Internal Market ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
Movement Rules ◽  
Direct Tax

It is safe to say that any description of tax as ‘exciting’ tends to be greeted with at least mild scepticism by non-tax specialists. Yet the ECJ’s role applying the Treaty free movement rules in the direct tax sphere is one of the most exciting, controversial and seemingly intractable areas of ECJ competence at present. This paper seeks to demonstrate why no Community lawyer should miss out on the drama unfolding in Luxembourg.

The Rationale of State Aid Control: A Return to Orthodoxy

2010 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
pp. 35-52 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrea Biondi
Keyword(s):  
Internal Market ◽  
State Aid ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
Subtle Difference ◽  
Freedom Of Movement ◽  
State Aid Control ◽  
Movement Rules ◽  
Regulatory Restriction ◽  
Prevailing View ◽  
Regulatory Measure

AbstractThe prevailing view on the rationale for State aid control is that it should be the same as, or very similar to, the rationale for competition control. It is certainly true that State aid distorts competition, as the economic definition presupposes. However, there is a subtle difference between the two, and we should return to orthodoxy in our analysis of these two concepts. The rational for State aid control is in fact to be found in the logic of the internal market principles. The tools to be used in analysing it are not identical to those used in the antitrust context. Rather, the free movement perspective should be adopted, and most problems in the arena of State aid can be better understood when approached from that perspective. It is also true that State aid procedures can be used to monitor compliance with free movement rules, and so the functional identity between the two sets of provisions is confirmed. State aid is a regulatory restriction on freedom of movement, and State aid control is an essential part of the functioning of the internal market, and so it makes sense to treat it in the same way as any other regulatory measure which has such an effect.

The Rationale of State Aid Control: A Return to Orthodoxy

2010 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
pp. 35-52
Author(s):  
Andrea Biondi
Keyword(s):  
Internal Market ◽  
State Aid ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
Subtle Difference ◽  
Freedom Of Movement ◽  
State Aid Control ◽  
Movement Rules ◽  
Regulatory Restriction ◽  
Prevailing View ◽  
Regulatory Measure

Abstract The prevailing view on the rationale for State aid control is that it should be the same as, or very similar to, the rationale for competition control. It is certainly true that State aid distorts competition, as the economic definition presupposes. However, there is a subtle difference between the two, and we should return to orthodoxy in our analysis of these two concepts. The rational for State aid control is in fact to be found in the logic of the internal market principles. The tools to be used in analysing it are not identical to those used in the antitrust context. Rather, the free movement perspective should be adopted, and most problems in the arena of State aid can be better understood when approached from that perspective. It is also true that State aid procedures can be used to monitor compliance with free movement rules, and so the functional identity between the two sets of provisions is confirmed. State aid is a regulatory restriction on freedom of movement, and State aid control is an essential part of the functioning of the internal market, and so it makes sense to treat it in the same way as any other regulatory measure which has such an effect.

GMO Reform—The Internal Market as a Site of Diversity

2019 ◽  
pp. 180-224
Author(s):  
Maria Weimer
Keyword(s):  
Genetically Modified Organisms ◽  
Genetically Modified ◽  
Regulatory Reform ◽  
Internal Market ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
Policy Changes ◽  
Risk Regulation ◽  
The Right ◽  
A Site ◽  
Gmo Cultivation

This chapter examines the legal and policy changes brought about by the 2015 reform of the regulatory framework for genetically modified organisms (GMOs). It considers the extent to which Directive 2015/412, introduced to make the 2015 regulatory reform possible and to allow for national opt-outs from GMO cultivation, helps overcome the legitimacy problems of EU risk regulation. The chapter first analyses the new EU approach to GMO cultivation via Directive 2015/412 before discussing the scope of EU harmonization in the field of GMO regulation after the adoption of this Directive. It then explains the constitutional limits of Article 114 TFEU in granting Member States the right to restrict GMO cultivation and concludes by assessing the implications of the 2015 reform for free movement of GMO products as well as highlighting the reform’s shortcomings.

8. The Free Movement of Goods

2019 ◽  
pp. 251-294
Author(s):  
Nigel Foster
Keyword(s):  
Internal Market ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Integration Methods ◽  
Equivalent Effect ◽  
Free Movement Of Goods

This chapter discusses EU law on the free movement of goods. It covers legislative provisions; progress towards the treaty goals; integration methods; the establishment of the internal market; the prohibition of discriminatory taxation; summary on tariff barriers; quantitative restrictions and measures having equivalent effect; the ban of Article 34 TFEU and derogations of Article 36 TFEU; equally applicable measures (indistinctly applicable measures); and notable cases including Dassonville, Cassis de Dijon, Keck, and Mithouard.

16. Exceptions to the free movement rules

2020 ◽  
pp. 510-543
Author(s):  
Niamh Nic Shuibhne
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Public ◽  
Proportionality Test ◽  
Restrictive Measures ◽  
Movement Rules

This chapter examines when Member States can lawfully displace the obligations placed on them by free movement law. Free movement rights can be restricted under EU law in two ways. For discriminatory or distinctly applicable restrictive measures, a derogation ground expressly provided for in the TFEU must be engaged. For indirectly or non-discriminatory measures, that is, indistinctly applicable restrictive measures, if an overriding requirement relating to the public interest can be demonstrated the measure will be lawful. In both cases, the restriction also has to satisfy a proportionality test, that is, it is both appropriate and necessary for achieving the relevant public interest objective.

6. Free movement of persons

2020 ◽  
pp. 121-153
Author(s):  
Matthew J. Homewood
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Member State ◽  
General Principle ◽  
Internal Market ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Scope Of Application ◽  
Free Movement Of Persons ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Eu

This chapter discusses the law on the free movement of persons in the EU. Free movement of persons is one of the four ‘freedoms’ of the internal market. Original EC Treaty provisions granted free movement rights to the economically active—workers, persons exercising the right of establishment, and persons providing services in another Member State. The Treaty also set out the general principle of non-discrimination on grounds of nationality, ‘within the scope of application of the Treaty’. All these provisions are now contained in the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). Early secondary legislation granted rights to family members, students, retired persons, and persons of independent means. The Citizenship Directive 2004/38 consolidated this legislation.

11. Free movement of goods

2020 ◽  
pp. 294-322
Author(s):  
Sylvia de Mars
Keyword(s):  
Member State ◽  
Specific Volume ◽  
Internal Market ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Legal Rules ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
Free Movement Of Goods ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Eu

This chapter explores the free movement of goods, which lies at the very heart of the internal market. The idea of the free movement of goods was the starting point that the EEC Treaty aimed for, and remains one of the greatest achievements of the EU to date. However, as with everything in EU law, there are a lot of legal rules underpinning a fairly straightforward concept. The Treaty contains two separate sets of provisions that address matters of taxation when it comes to trade in products. The first relates to border taxation, while the second relates to internal taxation. With regard to non-taxation issues, the primary issue is quantitative restrictions: situations where a Member State either blocks a specific volume of products from entering its market, or outlaws/bans a product altogether. The chapter then considers the exceptions to free movement of goods, and assesses how Brexit may impact on the free movement of goods between the UK and the EU.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document