- The case involves a request for a refund of rest-BPM (vehicle tax) due to the export of a car to Poland.
- The request is declared inadmissible because it was not submitted within thirteen weeks after the car was deregistered from the Dutch vehicle register.
- The court determines that the request was correctly declared inadmissible and that EU law does not change this decision.
- The court grants compensation for immaterial damage and a fixed amount for legal costs, but rejects a request for a reimbursement of €83,677 in legal costs.
- The court examines the inadmissibility of the refund request based on the arguments presented by the appellant.
- The main point of contention between the parties is whether EU law has been violated.
- The appellant refers to a ruling by the Court of Justice of the EU in a Finnish case, arguing that the BPM tax in this case is in violation of EU law.
- The court concludes that under certain circumstances, EU law, including Article 110 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, can also apply to export situations.
- However, the court determines that in this case, there is no violation of Article 110 of the Treaty.
- In the Finnish case, the taxpayer was not entitled to a refund of motor vehicle tax because the vehicle had been in use for at least ten years before export, and Finnish law did not provide for export refunds in such cases.
Source: uitspraken.rechtspraak.nl
Note that this post was (partially) written with the help of AI. It is always useful to review the original source material, and where needed to obtain (local) advice from a specialist.
