EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 318/30

(Case C-360/22)

(2022/C 318/42)

Language of the case: Dutch

Parties

Applicant: European Commission (represented by: W. Roels, acting as Agent)

Defendant: Kingdom of the Netherlands

Form of order sought

The Commission claims that the Court should:

—declare that, by approving and maintaining in force Articles 85(1)(b) and 87(2)(f) of the Pensioenwet (Law on Pensions), read in conjunction with Article 19b(2) of the Wet op de loonbelasting (Law on Wages Tax), the Kingdom of the Netherlands has failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 45, 56 and 63 TFEU and Articles 28, 36 and 40 EEA;

—order the Kingdom of the Netherlands to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The Commission is of the opinion that the Netherlands legislation concerning the transfer of pension capital accumulated in the so-called ‘second pillar’, the supplementary pension accumulation via the employer, is incompatible with the free of movement of workers, services and capital, since in a cross-border situation an outgoing transfer of pension capital without being taxed is possible only if the possibilities of redeeming the pension as a capital sum are the same as, or more limited than, in the Netherlands. In a number of Member States, pensions can be wholly or partially redeemed in the form of a lump-sum payment whereby mobile workers transferring their pension capital to one of those Member States are taxed. Similar transfers of pension capital within the Netherlands are not taxed.