1 | EC Tax Review 欧盟税法评论

院校资讯君

EC Tax Review
Volume 32 Issue 5
欧盟税法评论 第32卷第5期
本期目录
1.
Editorial: Curia Locuta, Causa Finita: Some Further Conclusions from WAG
社论：Curia Locuta, Causa Finita：WAG案的拓展结论
2.
A governance analysis of BEFIT: How the member states’ wish to obtain more regulatory authority is driving a revolution
欧盟BEFIT提案的生成机理与制度逻辑：成员国扩张监管权的愿望如何推动一场革命
3.
The Charter of Fundamental Rights and EU Tax Directives
《欧盟基本权利宪章》与欧盟税收指令
4.
The principle of legality of taxation as a general principle of EU Law: National and supranational differences of interpretation and potential difficulties
作为欧盟法律一般原则的税收合法性原则：国家和超国家差异所引发的解释论困境
5.
Forum Contribution: Tax penalty regimes, a call for harmonization
论坛：统一税收处罚制度的呼吁
部分文章摘要
01
The Charter of Fundamental Rights and EU Tax Directives
Abstract: In Germany, it is undisputed that the fundamental rights of the German constitution, the Basic Law (Grundgesetz), set limits for tax legislation at the national level. It has not yet been fully clarified whether and to what extent legal acts of the European legislator in the field of taxation must be measured against the standard of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU (CFR). In a ground-breaking ruling of 8 December 2022 (C-694/20), the CJEU has now affirmed this in relation to Directive (EU) 2018/822, which provides for an EU-wide reporting obligation with regard to cross-border tax arrangements. The CJEU declared a specific provision of the said directive invalid due to a violation of the fundamental right under Article 7 CFR to respect for private communications. This paper sets out the far-reaching consequences of the CJEU’s ruling for the directive in question in particular, and for EU tax directives in general.

摘要：德国宪法《基本法》（Grundgesetz）中规定的基本权利为德国税收立法设定了限制，这一点毋庸置疑，但欧盟成员国在税收领域的法律行为是否必须以及在多大程度上必须以《欧盟基本权利宪章》（CFR）所规定的标准来衡量，这一点尚未完全明确。在2022年12月8日的一项开创性判决（C-694/20）中，欧盟法院援引《欧盟第2018/822号指令》予以明确，该指令规定了欧盟范围内有关跨境税务安排的报告义务。欧盟法院宣布该指令中的一项具体规定因违反了《欧盟基本权利宪章》第7条规定的保护私人通信的基本权利而无效。本文阐述了欧盟法院的裁决对有关指令，特别是对欧盟税收指令的深远影响。
02
The principle of legality of taxation as a general principle of EU Law: National and supranational differences of interpretation and potential difficulties
Abstract：The principle of legality of taxation has gained a supranational status by means of its transplantation out of the national setting to a general principle of EU law by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). In this article the two cases in which the Court has given a first supranational interpretation of the principle are discussed, as well as the Research Note the Court published before rendering its judgment in these two cases. This European translation contains an uncertainty as to the representative democratic elements of the principle that are closely connected to its historical development in several national legal contexts of Member States. With the European principle being rooted in the national legal orders of the Member States, this current discrepancy stands at odds with the material scope in several Member States, which ascribes clear democratic elements to the principle. Thus, the main question addressed after taking a look at the national interpretations and the representative democratic elements contained therein in the Netherlands, France, Italy and Germany, is if the omission of these democratic elements can prove to become an obstacle for future harmonization or integration in taxation. The focus will lie on the current mode of norm-creation in above-state settings and the creation of ‘genuine’ own resources for the EU.

摘要：欧盟法院（CJEU）将税收合法性原则从国内法扩展到欧盟法律的一般原则中，使其获得超国家地位。本文讨论了欧盟法院首次对税收合法性原则作出超国家解释的两个案例，及欧盟法院在对该等案例作出判决前所发表的说明。欧盟法院的说明反映出税收合法性原则所包含的代议制民主要素的不确定性，而这些要素与该原则在不同法律背景成员国中的发展历程密切相关。由于欧盟法律的一般原则植根于成员国的国内法律秩序，目前尚存的国家和超国家解释差异与少数成员国的国内法实质相悖，而后者赋予了该原则明确的民主要素。因此，在考察了荷兰、法国、意大利和德国的国家解释及其所包含的代议制民主要素后发现，亟需解决的问题是，欧盟一般原则中有关民主要素的缺失是否会成为未来欧盟税收协调或一体化的障碍。改革重点应为如何在超国家的背景下创建一个规范模式，以及为欧盟创建“真正的”自有资源。
03
Forum Contribution: Tax penalty regimes, a call for harmonization
Abstract: Recent Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) judgments imply that some form of ‘European Intervention’ providing for a coordinated approach towards the determination, and quantification of tax penalties has become necessary. Disproportionate tax penalties and concurrent penalties pose a serious hurdle to achieving the European Commission’s political mission to put a tax system in place ‘where everybody pays their fair share’ of taxation. Given current judicial trends, the situation calls for the creation of an ad hoc taxpayers’ charter which imposes red lines for tax penalty regimes. Matters such as ultra duplum, minimus vitalis, non bis in idem, ceiling rates for cumulative penalties and the coordination of punitive measures call for an element of harmonization.

摘要：欧盟法院 (CJEU) 和欧洲人权法院 (ECtHR)的近期判决表明，有必要采取某种形式的“欧洲干预措施”，以协调的方式确定和量化税收处罚。不成比例的税收处罚和并行处罚严重阻碍了欧盟委员会实现其政治使命，即建立一个“人人都能公平纳税”的税收体系。鉴于当前的司法趋势，呼吁制定一个特别纳税人宪章，为税收处罚制度设置红线，例如“超重处罚”（ultra duplum）、“最低处罚”（minimus vitalis）、“一罪不二罚”（non bis in idem）、“累计处罚”（cumulative penalties）的上限以及统一处罚措施的协调等问题。
整理 | 寇韵楳
排版、审核 | 寇韵楳、薛榆淞



北京大学税法研究中心
Peking University
Center for Tax Law


长按二维码关注我们