Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T14:21:42.799Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Witzemann v. Hauptzollamt München Mitte*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2017

Juliane Kokott
Juliane Kokott*
Affiliation:
Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law, Heidelberg
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Max Witzemann had been sentenced to a prison term for counterfeiting in 1982. According to that nonappealable decision, he had imported counterfeit U.S. dollar notes into Germany in 1981. On the basis of the decision, the Hauptzollamt sought to collect customs duties and turnover taxes on the import of the forged notes. Witzemann refused to pay, pleading that the collection of customs duties and import turnover taxes violated Articles 9 and 12-29 of the EEC Treaty, which concern the customs union.

Keywords

Customs unionharmonization of tax lawscustoms and turnover taxes on illegal imports
Type
European Community Case Note
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 85 , Issue 3 , July 1991 , pp. 564 - 567
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1991

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

This summary is based on the French translation of the slip opinion, written originally in German, issued by the Court.

References

1 Treaty Establishing the European Economic Community, Mar. 25, 1957, 1973 Gr. Brit. TS No. 1, pt. II (Cmd: 5179 II), 298 UNTS 11.

2 Directive No. 77/388 (May 17, 1977), 20 O.J. Eur. Comm. (No. L 145) 1 (1977) [hereinafter Directive].

3 Wolf v. Hauptzollamt Düsseldorf, Case 221/81, 1982 ECR 3681.

4 Einberger v. Hauptzollamt Freiburg, Case 240/81, 1982 ECR 3699.

5 International Convention for the Suppression of Counterfeiting Currency, Apr. 20, 1929, 112 LNTS 371.

6 Article 2 of the Directive, supra note 2, reads, in part: “The following shall be subject to value added tax: … 2. the importation of goods.” 20 O.J. Eur. Comm. (No. L 145) at 2–3.

7 Einberger v. Hauptzollamt Freiburg, Case 294/82, 1984 ECR 1177 [hereinafter Einberger II].

8 However, the Directive, supra note 2, does not distinguish between legal and illegal imports. It simply refers to the import of goods.

9 Horvath v. Hauptzollamt Hamburg-Jonas, Case 50/80, 1981 ECR 385.

10 Id. (heroin); Wolf, 1982 ECR 3681 (heroin and cocaine); Einberger, 1982 ECR 3699 (morphine); Einberger II, 1984 ECR 1177 (morphine); Mol v. Inspecteur der Invoerrechten, Case 269/86 (1988), 56 Common Mkt. L.R. 51 (1989) (amphetamines); Vereniging Happy Family v. Inspecteur der Omzetbelasting, Case 289/86 (1988), 56 Common Mkt. L.R. 743 (1989).

11 Cf. Vereniging Happy Family, 56 Common Mkt. L.R. 743 (1989).

12 Cf. Einberger, 1982 ECR 3699; Einberger II, 1984 ECR 1177.