This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62008CN0157
Case C-157/08: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden lodged on 16 April 2008 — E.H.A. Passenheim-van Schoot v Staatssecretaris van Financiën
Case C-157/08: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden lodged on 16 April 2008 — E.H.A. Passenheim-van Schoot v Staatssecretaris van Financiën
Case C-157/08: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden lodged on 16 April 2008 — E.H.A. Passenheim-van Schoot v Staatssecretaris van Financiën
OJ C 171, 5.7.2008, p. 17–18
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
5.7.2008 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 171/17 |
Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden lodged on 16 April 2008 — E.H.A. Passenheim-van Schoot v Staatssecretaris van Financiën
(Case C-157/08)
(2008/C 171/30)
Language of the case: Dutch
Referring court
Hoge Raad der Nederlanden
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: E.H.A. Passenheim-van Schoot
Defendant: Staatssecretaris van Financiën
Question referred
Must Articles 49 and 56 EC be interpreted to mean that, where foreign savings balances or income therefrom are not disclosed to the tax authority of a Member State, those articles do not prevent that Member State from applying legislation which, to compensate for the lack of effective means of monitoring foreign balances, provides for a recovery period of twelve years, whereas a recovery period of five years applies in the case of savings balances or income therefrom held in the Member State where such effective means do in fact exist?