VATcodexEU VAT case law · Court of Justice and General Court

Ne bis in idem EU VAT case law

10 cases of the Court of Justice and the General Court of the European Union on this point of VAT law, from 2013 to 2026.

Search within this topicThe cases ↓

Provisions these cases interpret most

The 10 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-544/24 Nekilnojamojo turto valdymas

Judgment · 30 April 2026

Proportionality of default interest on VAT arrears

The first question is inadmissible because Article 50 does not apply while the criminal proceedings are pending with no final conviction or acquittal. On the second, default interest on VAT arrears is preventive and compensatory, not punitive, so Article 49(3) does not apply, subject to verification by the referring court. Proportionality does not preclude a statutorily fixed rate with no power to reduce, disapply part, or remit outside exhaustively defined cases, including interest accruing during audit and litigation. Confirms that fixed statutory VAT default interest, without modulation for culpability or gravity, survives proportionality review, and that the absence of discretion is itself a safeguard of equal treatment and legal certainty.

C-475/24 Fashion TV RO and Maestro

Order · 12 November 2025 · Romania

Use of criminal evidence in deduction disputes after proceedings against directors are discontinued

By reasoned order under Article 99, the Court held that the national court must verify that the substantive and formal conditions for deduction are met and may, to that end, examine evidence obtained in earlier criminal proceedings against persons distinct from the taxable person, provided the rights guaranteed by EU law, notably equality of arms and the rights of the defence, are respected. Discontinuance of those proceedings is irrelevant. The ne bis in idem question was inadmissible. Directors are not the same person as the company. The legal certainty limb was inadmissible for inadequate reasons. Confirms that a discontinued or time-barred criminal case against directors gives a company no immunity in the parallel VAT assessment.

C-733/23 Beach and bar management

Judgment · 3 July 2025 · Bulgaria

Cumulation of fines and sealing of premises for till receipt failures

Both national rules are precluded. Sealing plus an access ban is criminal in nature for Article 50 purposes because of its intrinsic severity, and it does not lose that character merely because it also serves a preventive aim, nor because it responds to 85 breaches taken together rather than one. Separately, a fine with a high statutory minimum, here nearly 200 times the VAT evaded per breach, breaches proportionality where the court cannot reduce or substitute it. Confirms and extends MV-98 to bulk offences.

C-331/23 Dranken Van Eetvelde

Judgment · 12 December 2024 · Belgium

Joint and several liability for another trader's VAT fraud

Article 205 permits liability for the entire VAT debt, with no apportionment by degree of participation, provided the taxable person can show it took all reasonably required measures to ensure its transactions were not part of the fraud. The underlying presumption must be rebuttable. No account need be taken of the actual debtor's deduction right, since in fraud cases that right is refused anyway. Article 50 does not apply because conduct in different tax years is not the same facts, whatever national law says about a continuing offence. Confirms that Member States may collect the full VAT loss from any knowing or negligent participant in a chain fraud, without civil style apportionment. Relevant to wholesale distribution and any sector exposed to missing trader arrangements.

C-97/21 MV - 98

Judgment · 4 May 2023 · Bulgaria

Cumulation of a fine and sealing of business premises for the same VAT offence

Article 273 and Article 50 of the Charter preclude such legislation where the two measures, both criminal in nature on the Bonda criteria, are imposed automatically for the same offence in separate procedures, are challengeable before different courts, and the legislation neither coordinates those procedures so as to limit the additional burden to what is strictly necessary nor ensures that the combined severity matches the seriousness of the offence. The second question fell away. The third was inadmissible for want of a link to the main proceedings. Relevant to anyone advising on cash register and receipt obligations in Member States that pair fines with business closure, sealing or licence measures.

C-570/20 BV

Judgment · 5 May 2022 · France

Combining tax penalties and criminal sanctions for VAT fraud, ne bis in idem

Article 50 read with Article 52(1) does not preclude the limitation to the most serious cases resting solely on settled restrictive case-law, provided it was reasonably foreseeable when the offence was committed that duplication could follow. Professionals may be expected to take legal advice. But it does preclude legislation that fails to ensure, by clear and precise rules (including as interpreted by the courts), that the total severity of penalties does not exceed the seriousness of the offence where a financial penalty is combined with a custodial sentence. Confirms that Member States may build the "most serious cases" filter for parallel VAT surcharges and prosecutions through case-law rather than statute, so long as the outcome was foreseeable, with a lower foreseeability threshold for taxable persons acting professionally.

C-81/20 Mitliv Exim

Order · 22 June 2021 · Romania

A provisional payment towards a real VAT debt earns no interest

Ruling by order, the Court held that it cannot. Once taxable transactions have taken place and the VAT on them has become chargeable, the tax debt exists. What matters is the occurrence of the chargeable event, not the later confirmation of the amount by an administrative or judicial decision. A payment made to honour that debt is therefore not undue and does not give rise to interest for the taxpayer. The symmetrical counterpart to the refund-interest cases.

C-9/19 Mitliv Exim

Order · 8 May 2019 · Romania

Reference on ne bis in idem and VAT fraud rejected for want of a factual account

The Court does not answer. It holds the reference manifestly inadmissible under Article 53(2) of its Rules of Procedure. The order for reference gave divergent indications about the periods covered, did not say whether the various measures were criminal in nature or final, set out only a chronology without explaining how the two sets of proceedings interact, and said nothing about the national conditions governing a claim for interest. A reminder of how demanding Article 94 of the Rules of Procedure is where Menci type questions are raised.

C-534/16 BB construct

Judgment · 26 October 2017 · Slovakia

Guarantee required on VAT registration where the director has links to a company with tax debts

Article 273 and Article 16 of the Charter do not preclude such a guarantee, provided it goes no further than necessary. That assessment is for the national court. Proportionality requires the amount to correlate with the future risk of non-payment and the earlier debts, and to reflect the person's actual role in both companies. Automatic calculation the taxable person cannot see or contest may exceed what is needed. Equal treatment is not breached because those linked to companies with tax debts differ from those with other debts. Articles 49 and 50 do not apply, as the guarantee is not a penalty. Confirms that Member States may make VAT registration conditional on security based on the registration applicant's directors' history, and that such security is not a penalty, so ne bis in idem and non-retroactivity arguments fail.

C-617/10 Åkerberg Fransson

Judgment · 26 February 2013

When enforcing VAT brings a national penalty regime within the Charter

The Court held that the Charter applies. Tax penalties and criminal proceedings for false VAT declarations are an implementation of EU law, because Articles 2, 250(1) and 273 of the VAT Directive and Article 325 TFEU oblige Member States to take all measures to ensure collection of VAT in full and to counter fraud, and VAT revenue forms part of the Union's own resources. It is irrelevant that the national rules were not adopted to transpose the directive. On the merits, Article 50 does not preclude successive tax and criminal penalties for the same acts provided the first penalty is not criminal in nature, which is for the national court to determine. EU law does not govern the relations between the Convention and national legal systems. EU law precludes a judicial practice conditioning the duty to disapply a provision contrary to the Charter on the infringement being clear from the Charter's text or case law. The judgment fixes the point at which a national penalty regime enters the field of application of the Charter in tax matters.

Related topics

Principles of legality and proportionality of criminal offences and penalties · Proportionality · Obligations of taxable persons · Right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial · Scope of the Charter of Fundamental Rights · Tax evasion and abuse · Origin and scope of right of deduction · Right of deduction · Persons liable for payment of VAT · Direct effect