External transit procedure EU VAT case law

3 cases of the Court of Justice and the General Court of the European Union on this point of VAT law, from 2015 to 2017.

Search within this topic The cases ↓

Provisions these cases interpret most

Article 61 of Directive 2006/112/EC Place of importation of goods · 2 of these cases
Article 2 of Directive 2006/112/EC Subject matter and scope · 2 of these cases
Article 168 of Directive 2006/112/EC Origin and scope of right of deduction · 2 of these cases
Article 71 of Directive 2006/112/EC Importation of goods · 1 of these cases
Article 156 of Directive 2006/112/EC Customs warehouses, warehouses other than customs warehouses and similar arrangements · 1 of these cases
Article 70 of Directive 2006/112/EC Importation of goods · 1 of these cases
Article 204 of Directive 2006/112/EC Persons liable for payment of VAT to the tax authorities · 1 of these cases
Article 5 of Directive 2006/112/EC Territorial scope · 1 of these cases

The 3 cases, most recent first

Under each case, what the Court decided, from its summary. The summaries are AI-generated and are not official documents: open the case for the Court’s own text.

C-571/15 Wallenborn Transports

Judgment · 1 June 2017 · Germany

Import VAT on goods removed from customs supervision in a free zone

Free zones fall within the situations referred to in Article 156, so goods placed there are not in principle imported for VAT purposes. Removal from customs supervision in a free zone does not trigger import VAT unless the goods entered the economic network of the European Union. Entry is presumed where the goods leave the zone, but here the national court must verify that they did not. Article 204 cannot be invoked where Article 203 applies, solely to found a VAT charge. Confirms that a customs debt in a free zone does not automatically carry import VAT.

C-226/14 Eurogate Distribution and DHL Hub Leipzig

Judgment · 2 June 2016 · Germany

Import VAT where a customs debt arises from a procedural breach on re-exported goods

No import VAT is due. The goods remained under customs warehousing or external transit until re-exportation and left the arrangement only because of it, so there was no importation under Article 2. That holds even though an Article 204 customs debt was incurred, the breach here being discovered after re-export, with no risk of entry into the EU economic network. Nobody is liable for the VAT, so the question of the debtor does not arise. Article 236 does not apply to VAT repayments.

C-187/14 DSV Road

Judgment · 25 June 2015 · Denmark

Import VAT deduction by the carrier under a transit procedure

No customs debt arises under Article 203 merely from the return and non-presentation, provided the same goods were later carried to destination under a correctly discharged second procedure. If identity cannot be established, a debt arises. Late presentation under the second procedure triggers Article 204 unless Article 356(3), or the no obvious negligence and reasonable time conditions in Article 859, are met. Article 168(e) does not preclude refusing deduction to a carrier that is neither importer nor owner. The value of the goods is not a cost component of its transport charges. Confirms that freight forwarders and hauliers made liable for import VAT under national law cannot deduct it where they merely transport the goods and handle customs formalities, since the goods' value does not enter their pricing. Relevant to logistics operators in Member States designating carriers as persons liable on importation.