Applications by the courts of the Republic of Lithuania for a preliminary ruling in the field of taxation

Prejudicinio sprendimo mechanizmas yra vienas pagrindinių dalykų, kuris užtikrina Europos Sąjungos ir valstybių narių bendradarbiavimą ir tinkamą Europos Sąjungos teisės taikymą. Iš esmės ši priemonė užtikrina vienodą teisės taikymą įvairiose srityse 27 valstybėse. Viena iš sričių priklausanti Europos Sąjungos kompetencijai – apmokestinimas. Netiesioginiai mokesčiai yra harmonizuojami Europos Sąjungos lygiu, todėl valstybės narės privalo šias teisės normas perkelti į nacionalinę teisę. Kaip bebūtų, ne visuomet pavyksta tai padaryti tinkamai. Taip pat pasitaiko atvejų, kad valstybių narių institucijos tiesiog nežino kaip Europos Sąjungos teisės normos turėtų būti taikomas ir aiškinamos. Tokiu atveju pagal SESV 267 straipsnį valstybių narių nacionalinės institucijos gali, o kai kuriais atvejais ir privalo kreiptis dėl prejudicinio sprendimo apmokestinimo srityje. Svarbu paminėti, jog paskutiniu metu Lietuvos institucijos aktyviai naudojasi prejudicinio sprendimo mechanizmu būtent apmokestinimo srityje. Baigiamojo darbo tikslas yra išanalizuoti Lietuvos Respublikos teismų kreipimusis į Europos Sąjungos Teisingumo Teismą dėl prejudicinio sprendimo priėmimo apmokestinimo srityje, siekiant nustatyti priežastis, kurios lemia Lietuvos Respublikos institucijų kreipimąsi į Europos Sąjungos Teisingumo Teismą dėl prejudicinių sprendimų mokestiniuose ginčuose. Pirmiausia darbe apžvelgiama teorinė medžiaga, kuri atskleidžia nagrinėjamos tematikos išsivystymo pagrindą. Kitos dalys skirtos tiriamajai daliai, kurioje siekiama nustatyti kokios institucijos turi pareigą ir teisę kreiptis dėl prejudicinio sprendimo bei analizuojama, kaip šią teisę ir (ar) pareigą jos įgyvendina, analizuojami Lietuvos Respublikos prašymai dėl prejudicinių sprendimų apmokestinimo srityje bei Teisingumo Teismo sprendimai šių prašymų atžvilgiu. Atskleidžiama, kokios priežastys lemia naudojimąsi prejudicinio sprendimo mechanizmu apmokestinimo srityje, kaip dažnai konstatuojama Europos Sąjungos teisės pažeidimai, dėl kokių direktyvų įgyvendinimo kyla daugiausia klausimų. Darbe pateikiama lentelės, kuriose atskleidžiama susisteminta analizės medžiaga. Atlikus tyrimą prieita išvados, kad Lietuvos Respublikos institucijų dažnam kreipimuisi dėl prejudicinių sprendimų apmokestinimo srityje didžiausią įtaką turi institucijų neužtikrintumas dėl atitinkamų pozicijų argumentų svarumo, tačiau tik retais atvejais nustatomas netinkamas direktyvų perkėlimas į nacionalinę teisę.The preliminary ruling mechanism is one of the key elements in ensuring cooperation between the European Union and the Member States as well as the proper application of European Union law. Basically, this measure ensures uniform application of the law in various areas in the 27 countries. One of the areas of competence of the European Union is taxation. Indirect taxes are harmonized at European Union level and therefore Member States must transpose these rules into national law. However, it is not always possible to do this properly. There are also cases where the authorities of the Member States simply do not know how the rules of European Union law should be applied and interpreted. In such a case, in accordance with Article 267 TFEU, the national authorities of the Member States may, and in some cases must, make a reference for a preliminary ruling in the field of taxation. It should be stressed here that the national courts make sufficiently active use of the institute in question in matters relating to the rules of European Union tax law as defined in European Union directives (for example, in order to harmonize VAT and excise duties). In 2019 alone, the national authorities of the Member States made 67 references for a preliminary ruling in the field of taxation, and this indicator ranks third in terms of references in the subject matter of the action. It should be noted that Lithuania is not an exclusive country and also makes references for a preliminary ruling on tax matters. It is important to mention that recently the Lithuanian authorities have been actively using the preliminary ruling mechanism in the field of taxation. From the moment of becoming the member of the European Union until March 2021, the institutions of the Republic of Lithuania applied 19 times for a preliminary ruling in the field of taxation. In a situation where there is a possibility that national legislation conflicts with the uniform interpretation and application of European Union law, it is appropriate to identify in which tax areas such inconsistencies are possible in order to achieve coherence in the European tax system for inclusive growth. For these reasons, the aim of this dissertation was to analyze the references of the courts of the Republic of Lithuania to the Court of Justice of the European Union for a preliminary ruling in the field of taxation in order to determine the reasons for the reference of the Lithuanian authorities to the Court of Justice. In order to answer the hypothesis, the analysis of articles and insights of foreign and Lithuanian researchers was made, legal acts relevant to the chosen topic, requests of the institutions of the Republic of Lithuania for preliminary rulings in the field of taxation and decisions of the Court of Justice of the European Union examined. In this work, another hypothesis was raised that the frequent references of the institutions of the Republic of Lithuania for preliminary rulings in the field of taxation are determined by the uncertainty of the institutions in making a decision caused by unclear and frequently incorrect transposition of directives into national law. First of all, the theoretical material was reviewed, which reveals the basis for the development of the topic. The next part of the chapter was devoted to the research part, which seeks to determine which authorities have the obligation and the right to make a reference for a preliminary ruling and analyzes how they use this right and / or obligation, and provides a table illustrating the structured material. After establishing that these two institutions have the right and one of these two institutions also has the obligation to make a reference for a preliminary ruling, it was revealed that the competent authorities transpose the obligation to the final institution, which may have negative consequences without prior reference for a preliminary ruling. In order to examine the scientific problem raised, in the second part of the paper the requests of the Republic of Lithuania for preliminary rulings in the field of taxation and the decisions of the Court of Justice in relation to these requests were analyzed. It sets out the reasons for using the preliminary ruling mechanism in the field of taxation, how often infringements of European Union law are found, and which directives raise the most questions. As in the above chapters, tables and their comments were presented to systematize the analysis. Each chapter was summarized and the conclusions of the chapters are presented. In the third part of the work a comparative analysis was presented, which reveals the frequency of references from other Member States and a comparison of their situation with the Republic of Lithuania. At the end of the work, a logical method was used, with the help of which the conclusions of the scientific work were formulated. Based on the research, the conclusions were presented that allow answering the question. Thus, the research concluded that the frequent references of the authorities of the Republic of Lithuania for preliminary rulings in the field of taxation are mainly influenced by the uncertainty of the authorities regarding the weight of the arguments and ignorance of how EU law should be properly interpreted, however, only in rare cases the incorrect transposition of directives into national law is identified.Teisės fakulteta