- 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-157/17: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden (Netherlands) lodged on 27 March 2017 — X v Staatssecretaris van Financiën
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62017CN0157
62017CN0157
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
29.5.2017
Official Journal of the European Union
C 168/27
(Case C-157/17)
(2017/C 168/35)
Language of the case: Dutch
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: X
Defendant: Staatssecretaris van Financiën
Other parties: Nederlandse Orde van Belastingadviseurs, Loyens en Loeff NV
Questions referred
1.Does Article 56 EC (now Article 63 TFEU) mean that an investment fund established outside the Netherlands cannot be refused, on the ground that it is not subject to an obligation to withhold Netherlands dividend tax, a refund of Netherlands dividend tax which was withheld on dividends which that investment fund received from corporate bodies established in the Netherlands, whereas such a refund is granted to a fiscal investment institution established in the Netherlands, which, subject to the withholding of Netherlands dividend tax, distributes the proceeds of its investments to its shareholders or participants on an annual basis?
2.Does Article 56 EC (now Article 63 TFEU) mean that an investment fund established outside the Netherlands cannot be refused a refund of Netherlands dividend tax — which is, however, granted to a Netherlands fiscal investment institution — in case this might constitute a hindrance to that fund’s efforts to attract investors living or established in the Netherlands?