Commission v Italy (1968)

Last updated April 27, 2023

Commission v Italy (1968) C-7/68 is an EU law case concerning European Single Market, particularly free movement of goods. In this case, the European Commission asked Italy to abolish the tax on exportation of articles having an artistic, historic, archaeological or ethnographic value. Italy did not do so, claiming that the national law applied only to a specific category of goods. They argued that export restrictions could be justified on grounds of the protection of national treasures possessing artistic, historic or archaeological value. The European Court of Justice had to specify the scope of application of an EEC Treaty provision on customs union and define the term of goods.^[1] According to this ruling, the Court defined the concept of goods as products which can be valued in money and which are capable, as such, of forming the subject of commercial transactions.^[2] Therefore, the articles of an artistic, historic, archaeological or ethnographic nature fall under the concept of goods and under the provisions on customs union. In addition, every tax burden related to the free movement of goods was prohibited according to Article 12 EEC Treaty. This burden did not have to be necessarily characterized directly as “charge” but also burdens that substantially have equivalent effect to charges were not in compliance with Community law.^[3] Article 12 of the EEC Treaty specifically states that Member States shall refrain from introducing between themselves any new customs duties on imports or exports or any charges having equivalent effect^[4]

Facts

Law No 1089 of 1 June 1939 under Italian law on protection of articles of artistic or historic interest contained several provisions related to exportation of such articles. According to the circumstances, it could impose an absolute prohibition on exportation, require a license, vest a pre-emption right in the state, or impose a progressive tax on exportation ranging from 8% to 30%. In January 1960, the Commission asked the Italian Republic to abolish the tax in respect of the other Member states before 1 January 1962. The Commission considered the tax to have an equivalent effect to a customs duty on exportation and therefore was contrary to the Article 16 of the EEC Treaty. After a prolonged exchange of correspondence, on 25 February 1964 the Commission set in motion the procedure laid down by Article 169 of the EEC Treaty. It states that if the Commission considers that a Member State has failed to fulfil an obligation under this Treaty, it shall deliver a reasoned opinion on the matter after giving the State concerned the opportunity to submit its observations.^[5] The observations did not satisfy the Commission, which then by letter of 24 July 1964 delivered the reasoned opinion. The Commission stated its reasons for declaring that the Italian Republic had failed to fulfil the obligations imposed on it by Article 16, and gave it a time-limit of two months in which to abolish the disputed tax on transactions with other Member States. This time-limit was extended to 31 December 1965 after the Commission had been informed by the Italian Government that a parliamentary committee had been set up with the task of studying a system of protection which would take account of the Commission's observations. On 16 May 1966, the Commission, in reply to another request for an extension, informed the Italian Government that it had already granted an extension sufficient to allow for the abolition of the tax and that it reserved the right to bring the matter before the Court of Justice at the appropriate time. A draft law by the Italian Government to exempt exports to Member States of the Communities from payment of the tax was approved by the Italian Senate on 26 July 1967 and passed to the Chamber of Deputies. The draft law lapsed on dissolution of the Italian Parliament on 11 March 1968. Meanwhile, the Commission had brought proceedings before the Court of Justice by an application lodged on 7 March 1968.^[6]

Conclusions of the parties

The applicant (Commission) claims that the Court should:

declare that the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil the obligations imposed on it by Article 16 of the EEC Treaty by continuing to levy the progressive tax against other Member States
order the defendant to pay costs

The defendant(Italian Republic) contends that the Court should:

dismiss the application by the Commission
order it to pay the costs

Grounds of judgment

Admissibility

The defendant(Italian Republic) questioned the admissibility of the application. It submitted that the Commission disregarded the obligation imposed upon the Community institutions under Article 2, that is to 'promote throughout the Community a harmonious development of economic activities'. It supposedly did that by bringing the matter before the Court at a time when the Italian Parliament was on the point of being dissolved and therefore could not pass the draft law which would amend the provision in dispute. The Court ruled that the action of the Commission was admissible, because according to the Article 169 of the EEC Treaty, it is for the Commission to judge at what time it decides to bring an action before the Court. The consideration of time, in which the Commission decides to do so, cannot affect the admissibility of the action. Moreover, in this case the action of the Commission begun before the expiry of the second stage of the transitional period and was preceded by a prolonged exchange of views with the Italian Government. During the transitional period, the Commission tried to persuade the competent authorities in the Italian Republic to amend the provisions which were criticized by the Commission.^[6]

The substance of the case

Scope of the disputed tax

Based on Article 16, the Commission considered articles of an artistic, historic, or archaeological nature, to fall under the provisions relating to the customs union. The Italian Republic on the other hand argued that these articles cannot be considered as 'ordinary merchandise' and for that reason they are excluded from the application of Article 16 of the Treaty. But under Article 9 of the Treaty, the customs union shall cover all trade in goods and the Court ruled that by "goods must be understood products which can be valued in money and which are capable, as such, of forming the subject of commercial transactions". By this logic all the articles covered by the Italian law that can be valued by money, are the subject of commercial transactions regardless of their characteristics. For this reason the rules of the Common Market apply to these goods and the only exceptions applicable are those expressly provided by the Treaty.^[6]

The classification of the disputed tax having regard to Article 16 of the Treaty

The Commission believed that the tax in this dispute had an equivalent effect to a customs duty, therefore violated the Article 16 of the Treaty and for this reason should have been abolished. Italian Republic argued, that this tax should not fall into this category, because its sole purpose was to ensure the protection of national historic and archaeological heritage, hence the tax did not have a fiscal nature. However, the Article 16 of the Treaty prohibits collection of customs duty in dealings between Member States and the Court ruled that altering the price of an article exported, has the same restrictive effect on the free circulation of that article as a customs duty. Under those circumstances the disputed tax falls within Article 16 because export trade was hindered by the burden which it imposed on the price of the exported articles.^[6]

The classification of the disputed tax having regard to Article 36 of the Treaty

The Italian Republic relied on the Article 36 of the Treaty as authorizing export restrictions, which are claimed to be justified on grounds of the protection of national treasures possessing artistic, historic or archaeological value. Article 36 of the Treaty provides that: "The provisions of Articles 30 to 34 shall not preclude prohibitions or restrictions on imports, exports justified on grounds of the protection of national treasures possessing artistic, historic or archaeological value." It refers clearly and solely to prohibitions or restrictions, which are clearly distinguished from customs duties. The provisions of Article 36 do not relate to customs duties and charges having equivalent effect, therefore such measures cannot be used for objectives mentioned above. Consequently, the levy of the disputed tax, is incompatible with the provisions of the Treaty.^[6]

Related Research Articles

Customs is an authority or agency in a country responsible for collecting tariffs and for controlling the flow of goods, including animals, transports, personal effects, and hazardous items, into and out of a country. Traditionally, customs has been considered as the fiscal subject that charges customs duties and other taxes on import and export. In recent decades, the views on the functions of customs have considerably expanded and now covers three basic issues: taxation, security, and trade facilitation.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union</span> Group of rights of the European Union

The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (CFR) enshrines certain political, social, and economic rights for European Union (EU) citizens and residents into EU law. It was drafted by the European Convention and solemnly proclaimed on 7 December 2000 by the European Parliament, the Council of Ministers and the European Commission. However, its then legal status was uncertain and it did not have full legal effect until the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon on 1 December 2009.

The special territories of members of the European Economic Area (EEA) are the 32 special territories of EU member states and EFTA member states which, for historical, geographical, or political reasons, enjoy special status within or outside the European Union and the European Free Trade Association.

The European single market, internal market or common market is a single market comprising the 27 member states of the European Union (EU) as well as – with certain exceptions – Iceland, Liechtenstein, and Norway through the Agreement on the European Economic Area, and Switzerland through sectoral treaties. The single market seeks to guarantee the free movement of goods, capital, services, and people, known collectively as the "four freedoms". This is achieved through common rules and standards that all the EU member states are legally committed to following.

The constitutional basis of taxation in Australia is predominantly found in sections 51(ii), 90, 53, 55, and 96, of the Constitution of Australia. Their interpretation by the High Court of Australia has been integral to the functioning and evolution of federalism in Australia.

Taxes in India are levied by the Central Government and the State Governments by virtue of powers conferred to them from the Constitution of India. Some minor taxes are also levied by the local authorities such as the Municipality.

Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 of 23 July 1987, creates the goods nomenclature called the Combined Nomenclature, or in abbreviated form 'CN', established to meet, at one and the same time, the requirements both of the Common Customs Tariff and of the external trade statistics of the European Union. It is closely related to the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States.

The ATA Carnet, often referred to as the "Passport for goods", is an international customs document that permits the tax-free and duty-free temporary export and import of nonperishable goods for up to one year. It consists of unified customs declaration forms which are prepared ready to use at every border crossing point. It is a globally accepted guarantee for customs duties and taxes which can replace the security deposit required by each customs authority. It can be used in multiple countries in multiple trips up to its one-year validity. The acronym ATA is a combination of French and English terms "Admission Temporaire/Temporary Admission". The ATA carnet is now the document most widely used by the business community for international operations involving temporary admission of goods.

The European Union Customs Union (EUCU), formally known as the Community Customs Union, is a customs union which consists of all the member states of the European Union (EU), Monaco, and the British Overseas Territory of Akrotiri and Dhekelia. Some detached territories of EU states do not participate in the customs union, usually as a result of their geographic separation. In addition to the EUCU, the EU is in customs unions with Andorra, San Marino and Turkey, through separate bilateral agreements.

Bangladesh is a common law country having its legal system developed by the British rulers during their colonial rule over British India. The land now comprises Bangladesh was known as Bengal during the British and Mughal regime while by some other names earlier. Though there were religious and political equipments and institutions from almost prehistoric era, Mughals first tried to recognise and establish them through state mechanisms. The Charter of 1726, granted by King George I, authorised the East India Company to establish Mayor's Courts in Madras, Bombay and Calcutta and is recognised as the first codified law for the British India. As a part of the then British India, it was the first codified law for the then Bengal too. Since independence in 1971, statutory law enacted by the Parliament of Bangladesh has been the primary form of legislation. Judge-made law continues to be significant in areas such as constitutional law. Unlike in other common law countries, the Supreme Court of Bangladesh has the power to not only interpret laws made by the parliament, but to also declare them null and void and to enforce fundamental rights of the citizens. The Bangladesh Code includes a compilation of all laws since 1836. The vast majority of Bangladeshi laws are in English. But most laws adopted after 1987 are in Bengali. Family law is intertwined with religious law. Bangladesh has significant international law obligations.

Van Gend en Loos v Nederlandse Administratie der Belastingen (1963) Case 26/62 was a landmark case of the European Court of Justice which established that provisions of the Treaty Establishing the European Economic Community were capable of creating legal rights which could be enforced by both natural and legal persons before the courts of the Community's member states. This is now called the principle of direct effect. The case is acknowledged as being one of the most important, and possibly the most famous development of European Union law.

Part XII of constitution of India is a compilation of laws pertaining to Finance, Property, Contracts and Suits for Republic of India.

The European Union value-added tax is a value added tax on goods and services within the European Union (EU). The EU's institutions do not collect the tax, but EU member states are each required to adopt in national legislation a value added tax that complies with the EU VAT code. Different rates of VAT apply in different EU member states, ranging from 17% in Luxembourg to 27% in Hungary. The total VAT collected by member states is used as part of the calculation to determine what each state contributes to the EU's budget.

Canton Railroad Company v. Rogan, 340 U.S. 511 (1951), is a case in which the United States Supreme Court held that a state franchise tax upon the services performed by a railroad in handling imported and exported goods did not violate the Import-Export Clause of the United States Constitution.

The Japan-Philippines Economic Partnership Agreement (日本・フィリピン経済連携協定) or in or commonly known as JPEPA is an economic partnership agreement concerning bilateral investment and free trade agreement between Japan and the Philippines. It was signed in Helsinki, Finland on September 9, 2006, by Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi and Philippine President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo. It is the first bilateral trade treaty which the Philippines has entered since the Parity Right Agreement of 1946 with the United States. This treaty consists of 16 Chapters and 165 Articles, with 8 Annexes.

The Treaties of the European Union are a set of international treaties between the European Union (EU) member states which sets out the EU's constitutional basis. They establish the various EU institutions together with their remit, procedures and objectives. The EU can only act within the competences granted to it through these treaties and amendment to the treaties requires the agreement and ratification of every single signatory.

Section 90 of the Constitution of Australia prohibits the States from imposing customs duties and of excise. The section bars the States from imposing any tax that would be considered to be of a customs or excise nature. While customs duties are easy to determine, the status of excise, as summarised in Ha v New South Wales, is that it consists of "taxes on the production, manufacture, sale or distribution of goods, whether of foreign or domestic origin." This effectively means that States are unable to impose sales taxes.

Commission v Italy refers to several different cases heard by the European Court of Justice, which the European Commission brought against Italy for infringing European Union law. This includes breach of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), or a failure to implement European Union Directives:

Article I, § 10, clause 2 of the United States Constitution, known as the Import-Export Clause, prevents the states, without the consent of Congress, from imposing tariffs on imports and exports above what is necessary for their inspection laws and secures for the federal government the revenues from all tariffs on imports and exports. Several nineteenth century Supreme Court cases applied this clause to duties and imposts on interstate imports and exports. In 1869, the United States Supreme Court ruled that the Import-Export Clause only applied to imports and exports with foreign nations and did not apply to imports and exports with other states, although this interpretation has been questioned by modern legal scholars.

References

↑ Vilímková, Veronika (21 March 2016). "The Concept of Good in the Case Law of the Court of Justice". The Lawyer Quarterly. Retrieved 27 October 2019.
↑ Commission of the European Communities v Italian Republic., Judgment of the Court of 10 December 1968. "Document 61968CJ0007". EUR-Lex. Retrieved 26 October 2019.
↑ Margaritis, Konstantinos. "Fundamental Rights in the Eec Treaty and Within Community Freedoms" (PDF). Econstor. University of Iasi. Retrieved 27 October 2019.
↑ The European Commission, Article 12. "The Treaty of Rome" (PDF). Retrieved 27 October 2019.
↑ The European Commission. "The Treaty of Rome" (PDF). Retrieved 26 October 2019.
1 2 3 4 5 Judgment of 10. 12. 1968, The. "Case 7/68". EUR-Lex. Retrieved 27 October 2019. Content is copied from this source, which is © European Union, 1995–2018. Reuse is authorised, provided the source is acknowledged.

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.

[1] Vilímková, Veronika (21 March 2016). "The Concept of Good in the Case Law of the Court of Justice". The Lawyer Quarterly. Retrieved 27 October 2019.

[2] Commission of the European Communities v Italian Republic., Judgment of the Court of 10 December 1968. "Document 61968CJ0007". EUR-Lex. Retrieved 26 October 2019.

[3] Margaritis, Konstantinos. "Fundamental Rights in the Eec Treaty and Within Community Freedoms" (PDF). Econstor. University of Iasi. Retrieved 27 October 2019.

[4] The European Commission, Article 12. "The Treaty of Rome" (PDF). Retrieved 27 October 2019.

[5] The European Commission. "The Treaty of Rome" (PDF). Retrieved 26 October 2019.

[:0-6] 1 2 3 4 5 Judgment of 10. 12. 1968, The. "Case 7/68". EUR-Lex. Retrieved 27 October 2019. Content is copied from this source, which is © European Union, 1995–2018. Reuse is authorised, provided the source is acknowledged.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]