26.9.2009 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 233/11 |
Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d’État (France) lodged on 4 August 2009 — Ministre du budget, des comptes publics et de la fonction publique v Société Accor
(Case C-310/09)
2009/C 233/20
Language of the case: French
Referring court
Conseil d’État
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Ministre du budget, des comptes publics et de la fonction publique
Defendant: Société Accor
Questions referred
1. |
|
2. |
If the answer to I1 or I2 is in the affirmative and if Articles 56 and 43 of the Treaty Establishing the European Community are to be interpreted as meaning that they preclude the advance payment tax regime described above and that, therefore, the administration is, in principle, required to reimburse the sums received on the basis of that regime in so far as they were received contrary to Community law, does that duty, in such a regime which does not of itself lead to the passing on of a tax onto a third party by the person liable for the tax preclude:
|
3. |
Taking account of the answer to the questions set out in I and II, do the Community principles of equivalence and effectiveness preclude the reimbursement of sums which ensure the application of the same tax regime to dividends redistributed by the parent company, whether those dividends originate from sums distributed by its subsidiaries established in France in another Member State of the European Community being subject to the condition, (apart, where relevant, in the case of stipulations in a bilateral convention applicable between France and the Member State where the subsidiary is established relating to the exchange of information) that the person liable for the tax furnishes evidence which is in its sole possession and relating with respect to each dividend concerned, in particular to the rate of taxation actually applied and the amount of tax actually paid on profits made by its subsidiaries established in the Member States of the European Community other than France, whereas, with respect to subsidiaries established in France that evidence, known to the administration, is not required? |