欧洲法院的解释方法与财政中立原则的含义:C-366/12多特蒙德Klinikum案评析

Terence Tervoort
{"title":"欧洲法院的解释方法与财政中立原则的含义:C-366/12多特蒙德Klinikum案评析","authors":"Terence Tervoort","doi":"10.1080/20488432.2015.1072418","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The CJEU constitutes the essential institution in interpreting the European VAT Directive. Recently, in the Case C-366/12 Klinikum Dortmund, the Court had to decide on how to interpret the VAT exemptions of hospital and medical care and closely related activities due to Article 132 (1) (b) as well as the provision of medical care in the exercise of the medical and paramedical professions based on Article 132 (1) (c) of the VAT Directive. The present paper focuses on the literal and the purposive interpretation method applied by the Court and, based on a case-law study, finds that the literal method does not necessarily lead to a restriction and, in the same manner, that the purposive approach does not automatically implies an extension of VAT exemptions. As one argument of the plaintiff concerned the principle of fiscal neutrality, which represents the general principle of equal treatment in the VAT Directive, this principle is, again, investigated on a case-law basis, which will disclose the limited impact of the principle of fiscal neutrality and, what is more, will lead to the conclusion that the relation between the EU Treaty and the VAT Directive is not free of discrepancies.","PeriodicalId":114680,"journal":{"name":"World Journal of VAT/GST Law","volume":"32 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Interpretation methods of the CJEU and the meaning of the principle of fiscal neutrality: a commentary on the Case C-366/12 Klinikum Dortmund\",\"authors\":\"Terence Tervoort\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/20488432.2015.1072418\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The CJEU constitutes the essential institution in interpreting the European VAT Directive. Recently, in the Case C-366/12 Klinikum Dortmund, the Court had to decide on how to interpret the VAT exemptions of hospital and medical care and closely related activities due to Article 132 (1) (b) as well as the provision of medical care in the exercise of the medical and paramedical professions based on Article 132 (1) (c) of the VAT Directive. The present paper focuses on the literal and the purposive interpretation method applied by the Court and, based on a case-law study, finds that the literal method does not necessarily lead to a restriction and, in the same manner, that the purposive approach does not automatically implies an extension of VAT exemptions. As one argument of the plaintiff concerned the principle of fiscal neutrality, which represents the general principle of equal treatment in the VAT Directive, this principle is, again, investigated on a case-law basis, which will disclose the limited impact of the principle of fiscal neutrality and, what is more, will lead to the conclusion that the relation between the EU Treaty and the VAT Directive is not free of discrepancies.\",\"PeriodicalId\":114680,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"World Journal of VAT/GST Law\",\"volume\":\"32 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-07-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"World Journal of VAT/GST Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/20488432.2015.1072418\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Journal of VAT/GST Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/20488432.2015.1072418","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

欧洲法院是解释欧洲增值税指令的重要机构。最近,在c -366/12多特蒙德Klinikum案中,法院必须决定如何解释根据《增值税指令》第132条第1款(b)项规定的医院和医疗服务及密切相关活动的增值税豁免,以及根据《增值税指令》第132条第1款(c)项规定的医疗和辅助医疗专业提供的医疗服务。本文着重讨论了法院采用的字面解释法和目的解释法,并在案例法研究的基础上发现,字面解释法不一定会导致限制,同样,目的解释法也不会自动意味着增值税豁免的延长。原告的一个论点是关于财政中立原则,这代表了增值税指令中的一般平等待遇原则,这一原则再次在判例法的基础上进行调查,这将揭示财政中立原则的有限影响,更重要的是,将得出结论,欧盟条约和增值税指令之间的关系并非没有差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Interpretation methods of the CJEU and the meaning of the principle of fiscal neutrality: a commentary on the Case C-366/12 Klinikum Dortmund
The CJEU constitutes the essential institution in interpreting the European VAT Directive. Recently, in the Case C-366/12 Klinikum Dortmund, the Court had to decide on how to interpret the VAT exemptions of hospital and medical care and closely related activities due to Article 132 (1) (b) as well as the provision of medical care in the exercise of the medical and paramedical professions based on Article 132 (1) (c) of the VAT Directive. The present paper focuses on the literal and the purposive interpretation method applied by the Court and, based on a case-law study, finds that the literal method does not necessarily lead to a restriction and, in the same manner, that the purposive approach does not automatically implies an extension of VAT exemptions. As one argument of the plaintiff concerned the principle of fiscal neutrality, which represents the general principle of equal treatment in the VAT Directive, this principle is, again, investigated on a case-law basis, which will disclose the limited impact of the principle of fiscal neutrality and, what is more, will lead to the conclusion that the relation between the EU Treaty and the VAT Directive is not free of discrepancies.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信