KL and PO v Administrația Județeană a Finanțelor Publice Brașov.

• Jurisdiction: European Union
• ECLI: ECLI:EU:C:2023:715
• Date: 28 September 2023
• Docket Number: C-508/22
• Celex Number: 62022CJ0508
• Court: Court of Justice (European Union)

Provisional text

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Eighth Chamber)

28 September 2023 (*)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling – Internal taxation – Article 110 TFEU – Repayment of a tax levied by a Member State in breach of EU law – Tax on the first registration of a motor vehicle – Incorporation of the tax in the market value of the vehicle in respect of which that tax was paid – Transfer to a subsequent purchaser of the vehicle of the right to reimbursement)

In Case C‑508/22,

REQUEST for a preliminary ruling under Article 267 TFEU from the Curtea de Apel Braşov (Court of Appeal, Braşov, Romania), made by decision of 22 June 2022, received at the Court on 27 July 2022, in the proceedings

KL,

PO

v

Administrația Județeană a Finanțelor Publice Brașov,

THE COURT (Eighth Chamber),

composed of M. Safjan, President of the Chamber, N. Jääskinen (Rapporteur) and M. Gavalec, Judges,

Advocate General: M. Szpunar,

Registrar: A. Calot Escobar,

having regard to the written procedure,

after considering the observations submitted on behalf of:

– KL and PO, by D. Târşia, avocat,

– the Romanian Government, by R. Antonie, E. Gane and O.-C. Ichim, acting as Agents,

– the European Commission, by M. Björkland and T. Isacu de Groot, acting as Agents,

having decided, after hearing the Advocate General, to proceed to judgment without an Opinion,

gives the following

Judgment

1 This request for a preliminary ruling concerns the interpretation of Article 110 TFEU.

2 The request has been made in proceedings between, on the one hand, KL and PO, as the heirs of AX, and, on the other hand, the Administrația Județeană a Finanțelor Publice Brașov (District Finance Administration, Brașov, Romania) (‘the tax authority’), concerning the reimbursement of a tax, which was levied in breach of EU law at the time of the first registration of a vehicle, to a subsequent purchaser of that vehicle.

Legal context

European Union law

3 Article 110 TFEU provides:

‘No Member State shall impose, directly or indirectly, on the products of other Member States any internal taxation of any kind in excess of that imposed directly or indirectly on similar domestic products.

Furthermore, no Member State shall impose on the products of other Member States any internal taxation of such a nature as to afford indirect protection to other products.’

Romanian law

4 The Ordonanța de urgență a Guvernului nr. 52/2017 privind restituirea sumelor reprezentând taxa specială pentru autoturisme și autovehicule, taxa pe poluare pentru autovehicule, taxa pentru emisiile poluante provenite de la autovehicule și timbrul de mediu pentru autovehicule (Emergency Government Order No 52/2017, on the refund of amounts constituting the special tax on passenger cars and motor vehicles, the tax on pollution from motor vehicles, the tax on pollutant emissions from motor vehicles and the environmental vignette for motor vehicles), of 4 August 2017 (Monitorul Oficial al României, Part I, No 644 of 7 August 2017; ‘OUG No 52/2017’), defines the procedure for the reimbursement of several motor vehicle taxes which the Court has held to be contrary to EU law.

5 According to Article 1(1) of OUG No 52/2017:

‘Taxpayers who have paid (i) the special tax on passenger cars and motor vehicles, laid down by Articles 214¹ to 214³ of Law No 571/2003 on the tax code, as subsequently amended and supplemented, (ii) the tax on motor vehicle pollution, laid down by Emergency Government Order No 50/2008, establishing the tax on motor vehicle pollution, approved by Law No 140/2011, (iii) the motor vehicle pollutant emissions tax, laid down by Law No 9/2012, regulating the motor vehicle pollutant emissions tax, as subsequently amended and supplemented, as well as (iv) the motor vehicle environmental vignette laid down by Emergency Government Order 9/2013 regulating the motor vehicle environmental vignette, approved with amendments and additions by Law No 37/2014, as subsequently amended and supplemented, and who have not benefited from reimbursement until the entry into force of the present Emergency Government Order may request the relevant reimbursement, including the interest accrued in the period from the date of collection to the date of reimbursement, by means of an application submitted to the competent central tax body. The interest rate is that provided for in Article 174(5) of Law No 207/2015 on the code of tax procedure, as subsequently amended and supplemented.’

The dispute in the main proceedings and the questions referred for a preliminary ruling

6 On 3 March 2008, SC Zilex Corn SRL purchased, under a lease purchase agreement, a Toyota motor vehicle manufactured in 2007. In order to be able to register that vehicle for the first time in Romania, the leasing company, BCR Leasing IFN SA, had paid to the Romanian authorities a special tax on passenger cars and motor vehicles (‘the special registration tax’), plus value added tax, in the amount of 6 378.23 Romanian lei (RON) (approximately EUR 1 298). The leasing company recovered that sum from Zilex Corn.

7 Ownership of the vehicle was transferred on 12 November 2012 to SC Zaral SRL and then, on 16 May 2016, to AX.

8 On 28 August 2018, AX submitted to the tax authority an application for reimbursement of the special registration tax paid for the vehicle in question, on the basis of Article 1(1) of OUG No 52/2017. The tax authority rejected that application by decision of 5 March 2019, on the ground that it had not been made by the person who had paid that tax. AX lodged a complaint against that decision, which was dismissed by decision of 29 July 2019.

9 AX brought an action before the Tribunalul Brașov (District Court, Braşov, Romania) seeking annulment of those two decisions, and an order that the tax authority reimburse the special registration tax and pay the corresponding interest.

10 By judgment of 23 December 2020, that court dismissed the action on the ground that, in accordance with the applicable national legislation, the right to reimbursement belonged only to the person who paid the special registration tax at the time of the first registration of the vehicle in question and not to subsequent purchasers of that vehicle.

11 AX brought an appeal against that judgment before the Curtea de Apel Braşov (Court of Appeal, Braşov, Romania), the referring court.

12 By judgment of 5 April 2022, that court dismissed the appeal on the...