- 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-288/19: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht des Saarlandes (Germany) lodged on 9 April 2019 — QM v Finanzamt Saarbrücken
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62019CN0288
62019CN0288
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
17.6.2019
Official Journal of the European Union
C 206/38
(Case C-288/19)
(2019/C 206/43)
Language of the case: German
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: QM
Defendant: Finanzamt Saarbrücken
Question referred
Is Article 56(2) of the VAT Directive (1) to be interpreted as meaning that ‘hiring of a means of transport to a non-taxable person’ should also be understood as referring to the provision of a vehicle (company car) forming part of the assets of the business of a taxable person to his staff, if the employee does not provide consideration for it that does not consist in (part of) the work performed by him, and thus does not make any payment, does not use any of his cash remuneration for it, and also does not choose between various benefits offered by the taxable person under an agreement between the parties according to which the entitlement to use the company car is contingent on the forgoing of other benefits?
(1) Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1) as amended by Council Directive 2008/8/EC of 12 February 2008 (OJ 2008 L 44, p. 11).