- 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-56/09: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 20 May 2010 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Commissione tributaria provinciale di Roma — Italy) — Emiliano Zanotti v Agenzia delle Entrate — Ufficio Roma 2 (Freedom to provide services — Citizenship of the European Union — Articles 18 EC and 49 EC — National income tax legislation — Right to deduct total tuition fees from gross tax up to a fixed percentage — University course attended in another Member State — Imposition of a quantitative limit — Deduction up to a maximum amount laid down for registration and course fees paid for similar tuition provided by national State universities — Imposition of a territorial limit — Deduction up to a maximum amount laid down for registration and course fees paid for similar tuition provided by the national State university nearest to the taxpayer’s residence for fiscal purposes)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62009CA0056
62009CA0056
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
3.7.2010
Official Journal of the European Union
C 179/9
(Case C-56/09) (<span class="oj-super oj-note-tag">1</span>)
(Freedom to provide services - Citizenship of the European Union - Articles 18 EC and 49 EC - National income tax legislation - Right to deduct total tuition fees from gross tax up to a fixed percentage - University course attended in another Member State - Imposition of a quantitative limit - Deduction up to a maximum amount laid down for registration and course fees paid for similar tuition provided by national State universities - Imposition of a territorial limit - Deduction up to a maximum amount laid down for registration and course fees paid for similar tuition provided by the national State university nearest to the taxpayer’s residence for fiscal purposes)
(2010/C 179/14)
Language of the case: Italian
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Emiliano Zanotti
Defendant: Agenzia delle Entrate — Ufficio Roma 2
Re:
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Commissione tributaria provinciale di Roma — Interpretation of Articles 149 EC and 151 EC — National income tax legislation — Deduction of the costs of attending secondary and university courses held abroad from the gross tax payable in respect of taxable income — Limitation of the recognition of costs
Operative part of the judgment
1.Article 49 EC must be interpreted as:
—precluding national legislation which allows taxpayers to deduct from gross tax the costs of attending university courses provided by universities situated in that Member State but excludes generally that possibility for university tuition fees incurred at a private university established in another Member State;
—not precluding national legislation which allows taxpayers to deduct from gross tax university tuition fees incurred at a private university established in another Member State up to the maximum amount set for the corresponding costs of attending similar courses at the national State university nearest to the taxpayer’s residence for fiscal purposes.
2.Article 18 EC must be interpreted as:
—precluding national legislation which allows taxpayers to deduct from gross tax the costs of attending university courses provided by universities situated in that Member State but excludes generally that possibility for university tuition fees incurred at a university established in another Member State;
—not precluding national legislation which allows taxpayers to deduct from gross tax university tuition fees incurred at a university established in another Member State up to the maximum amount set for the corresponding costs of attending similar courses at the national State university nearest to the taxpayer’s residence for fiscal purposes.
(<span class="oj-super">1</span>) OJ C 90, 18.04.2009.