- Query in any language with multilingual search
- Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
- See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Similar Documents
Explore similar documents to your case.We Found Similar Cases for You
Case C-568/17: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 8 May 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden — Netherlands) — Staatssecretaris van Financiën v L.W. Geelen (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Value added tax (VAT) — Sixth Directive 77/388/EEC — Article 9(2)(c) and (e) — Directive 2006/112/EC — Article 52(a) — Article 56(1)(k) — Supply of services — Place of taxable transactions — Connecting factor for tax purposes — Interactive sessions of an erotic nature filmed and broadcast live on the internet — Entertainment activity — Definition — Place where the services are physically carried out)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62017CA0568
62017CA0568
With us you find everything. Try it now!
I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!
Valentina R., lawyer
Official Journal of the European Union
C 230/7
(Case C-568/17) (<span class="super note-tag">1</span>)
(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Value added tax (VAT) - Sixth Directive 77/388/EEC - Article 9(2)(c) and (e) - Directive 2006/112/EC - Article 52(a) - Article 56(1)(k) - Supply of services - Place of taxable transactions - Connecting factor for tax purposes - Interactive sessions of an erotic nature filmed and broadcast live on the internet - Entertainment activity - Definition - Place where the services are physically carried out)
(2019/C 230/08)
Language of the case: Dutch
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Appellant: Staatssecretaris van Financien
Respondent: L.W. Geelen
Operative part of the judgment
1.Article 9(2)(c), first indent, of Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonization of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment, as amended by Council Directive 2002/38/EC of 7 May 2002, and Article 52(a) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax, must be interpreted as meaning that a complex service, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which consists in offering interactive sessions of an erotic nature filmed and broadcast live on the internet constitutes an ‘entertainment activity’, within the meaning of those provisions, which must be considered as being ‘physically carried out’, within the meaning of those same provisions, in the place where the service provider has established his place of business or a permanent establishment whence that service is provided or, failing that, in the place of his domicile or habitual residence.
2.Article 9(2)(e), twelfth indent, of Sixth Directive 77/388, as amended by Directive 2002/38, and Article 56(1)(k) of Directive 2006/112, read in conjunction with Article 11 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1777/2005 of 17 October 2005 laying down implementing measures for Directive 77/388, must be interpreted as meaning that a supply of services, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which consists in offering interactive sessions of an erotic nature filmed and broadcast live on the internet, does not come within the scope of those provisions when that service has been provided to beneficiaries who are all situated in the Member State of the provider of those services.
Language of the case: Dutch
(1) OJ C 424, 11.2.2017.