Order in Skelleftea Industrihus AB a reversal of the INZO, Ghent Coal Terminal and Breitsohl jurisprudence? Marie Lamensch
By: Lamensch, Marie
.
Material type: 






Item type | Current location | Home library | Call number | Status | Date due | Barcode |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Artículos | IEF | IEF | OP 2141-B/2022/3-7 (Browse shelf) | Available | OP 2141-B/2022/3-7 |
Browsing IEF Shelves Close shelf browser
No cover image available | No cover image available | No cover image available | No cover image available | No cover image available | No cover image available | No cover image available | ||
OP 2141-B/2022/3-4 BEFIT and formulary apportionment | OP 2141-B/2022/3-5 Blocking the gap | OP 2141-B/2022/3-6 Disproportionate taxation and the right to property | OP 2141-B/2022/3-7 Order in Skelleftea Industrihus AB | OP 2141-B/2022/4 EC Tax Review | OP 2141-B/2022/4-1 A Zebra or a Donkey? | OP 2141-B/2022/4-2 Understanding VAT in three-party, platform-based business models |
Resumen.
This article discusses the Order issued by the European Court of Justice on 18 May 2021 in Case C-248/20 (Skatteverket v Skellefteå Industrihus AB). According to the author it is either based on a wrong interpretation of the Court’s case law in the ITH and Stichting Schoonzicht cases, or constitutes nothing less than a reversal of the ECJ landmark INZO and Breitsohl decisions.
There are no comments for this item.