Free movement of goods, services, persons and capital are the fundamental
freedoms underlying the European Union. In this context the European Commission
has been working with Member States to dismantle any barriers impeding
completion of the Internal Market and leading to serious inconveniences for
cross-border movements which at times have also financial implications.
In case of VAT a great degree of harmonization has been achieved at the EU
level. New motor vehicles are subject to VAT only in the Member State of
destination and thus any double taxation is precluded.
However, non-harmonized passenger car related taxes remain great obstacles,
which clearly necessitate a common action. This need has been long recognized
by the European Commission. Whilst proposals for European legislation have been
tabled before the Member States, the requirement of the unanimous vote in the
Council obstructs any progress. Nevertheless, the Commission remains hopeful
that Member States will at some point agree on harmonising measures which would
facilitate the life of citizens who are moving within the EU.
Despite the absence of detailed rules, the European Court of Justice has
taken up defending the common market values on the basis of the Treaty on the
Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) (Consolidated version (Official
Journal C 115 of 9 May 2008)) provisions, in particular Articles 45, 49,
56 and 110 TFEU. There is a vast Court case-law regarding discriminatory
taxation of used cars coming from other Member States within the meaning of
Article 110 TFEU. The Court has also ruled on the compliance of passenger car
related taxes with freedom of movement of services, in particular in relation
to taxation of cars leased in other Member States. Finally, there are
judgements enforcing the rights of free movement of establishment and workers,
which, under certain conditions, forbid Member States to require registration
and taxation of company cars already registered in the company's Member
State of establishment. Consequently, below are provided the most frequently
asked questions together with concise answers based on the Court of Justice's
case-law. These answers are based on the general principles of EU law, and thus
in certain instances, given particular circumstances, the answers might
|1. Can Member States
levy car registration or pollution taxes, annual circulation or other taxes
related to the use of motor vehicles within their territory?
There is no EU rule which prohibits the imposition of such taxes. This means
that car taxation policy decisions fall within the discretion of Member States,
who may unilaterally choose the level at which they wish to levy any taxes
relating to motor vehicles' registration or use, or indeed whether they wish to
do so at all.
Some Member States apply an exemption to motor cars which have been owned for a
certain period of time by persons transferring their residence. These measures
are discretionary and do not fall within the scope of EU law.
|2. Are Member States
obliged to refund the residual tax when a car is taken out of the country?
No such obligation exists under EU law, although again certain Member States
grant reimbursement on their own initiative.
|3. Is it contrary to EU
law if car taxation results in double taxation, i.e. when car registration or
pollution tax has already been paid in another Member State?
It may happen that the same car is taxed in several Member States following a
series of changes of residence. However, in the absence of harmonisation at the
Community level there are no common rules to deal with such situations; hence
double taxation of car registration or pollution taxes on motor vehicles is
not, as such, contrary to EU law. (See the EC Court of Justice's judgment in
|4. Can the European
Commission demand that Member States repeal such taxes?
There is no EU rule on the basis of which the Commission can compel Member
States to do such a thing.
|5. Can Member States
impose extremely high car registration taxes?
There are no EU rules that regulate the level of car taxation. According to the
Court of Justice, Article 110 TFEU does not serve to censure excessive tax
levels and thus Member States can set the tax rates at the level they see fit
(C-47/88, Commission vs Denmark).
|6. Can car registration
taxes be considered as customs duties and thus be contrary to Articles 28-30
TFEU as they obstruct the free movement of goods within the Community?
Such charges may not be characterised as customs duties within the meaning of
Articles 28-30 TFEU when they are applied systematically to both domestic and
imported products. Such taxes may be considered contrary to Articles 28-30 TFEU
only if they produce the effect where the trade in the motor vehicles
completely ceases or becomes insignificant (C-383/01, Commission vs
|7. When do car
registration taxes, which are one-off taxes, discriminate against used cars
coming from other Member States and thus conflict with Article 110 TFEU?
|According to the settled case-law the Court of
Justice, when tax is charged in relation to a motor vehicle's registration in
that territory, and is hence applicable to both used and new motor vehicles,
the amount of tax levied on a used motor vehicle must not exceed the residual
tax in the value of a similar car registered on the domestic market as
This means that the tax which was paid in a particular Member State on a
similar car when it was new must be reduced by the percentage of depreciation
that car has undergone on that domestic market.
To establish this depreciation, certain Member States use fixed scales, which
must respect this principle.
|8. Can Member States be
obliged to replace the car registration taxes with annual circulation tax?
This is a tax policy decision of national governments who are free to choose
which taxes on motor vehicles they wish to impose for budgetary, environmental
or other reasons.
However, the latest Commission proposal suggests the introduction of such an
obligation (see COM/2005/261/FINAL).
|9. Must Member State
reimburse taxes collected in breach of EU law?
Article 110 TFEU has a direct effect; therefore, concerned persons may rely on
it before the national judicial bodies.
|10. What procedure
must the concerned parties follow in order to recover the taxes paid in breach
of EU law?
|They must file their claim for reimbursement in
accordance with the national procedural rules laid down for this purpose.
At the present there is no coherent set of substantive or procedural EU rules
governing remedies for the enforcement of EU law. This means that the rights of
the persons concerned which derive from EU law are safeguarded and enforced
according to the procedures established by the national law. Such national
rules must be equivalent to the rules governing similar domestic actions and
they must be effective, i.e. they should not render the exercise of EU law
virtually impossible or excessively difficult (Case 33-76,
|11. Is there
discrimination in terms of Article 110 TFEU if certain motor vehicles
registered under a tax system previously in force were taxed more favourably or
not taxed at all than the cars subject to a new system of taxation?
|In principle, no.
A comparison with used vehicles placed in circulation before the entry into
force of new rules on registration taxes is not relevant for the purposes of
Article 110 TFEU. Article 110 TFEU is not designed to prevent Member States
from introducing new taxes or from changing the rate or basis of assessment of
existing taxes (Case C-290/05, Nádasdi). The tax system, however, must
be based on objective criteria.
|12. Can different tax
rates be applicable to motor vehicles on the basis of their technical
characteristics and environmental classification?
Member States are not precluded, in principle, from introducing differential
taxation on the basis of objective criteria in pursuit of policies compatible
with the requirements of Community law. The tax system certainly must not
discriminate against goods coming from other Member States.
|13. Do I have to
register my motor vehicle in the Member State of my residence?
|Yes. There are harmonised provisions laying down
the definition of Member State of residence in Council Directive 83/182/EEC of
28 March 1983 on tax exemptions within the EU for certain means of transport
temporarily imported into one Member State from another.
As a general rule, the Member State of residence is the place where a person
usually lives, that is for at least 185 days in each calendar year, because of
personal and occupational ties, or, in the case of a person with no
occupational ties because of personal ties which show close links between that
person and the place where he is living. However, the normal residence of a
person whose occupational ties are in a different place from his personal ties
and who consequently lives in different places situated in two or more Member
States shall be regarded as being the place of his personal ties, provided that
such person returns there regularly. This last condition needs not be met where
the person is living in a Member State in order to carry out a task of a
definite duration. Attendance at a university or school shall not imply
transfer of normal residence.
Proof of the place of normal residence can be given by any appropriate means,
such as an identity card or any other valid document.
|14. Am I supposed to
drive my car myself during a visit in another Member State?
|It is advisable. Member States are usually
suspicious when their citizens are driving a foreign registered car and the
real owner is absent. It follows from the Court of Justice's case-law (Case
C-156/04, Commission/Greece), that such cases are not protected by the relevant
provisions of EU law; not even if the car is lent to the owner's family
members, if they are residents in the Member State which he is visiting. In
order to avoid any inconvenience related to proving the ownership and regular
use of a car, it is better that the owner is driving it himself/herself, or at
least is a passenger in the motor vehicle.
|15. If my company is
established in another Member State and it provides me with a company car,
which I use in my Member State of residence, must it be registered in the
latter Member State?
|Yes, if it is essentially used on a permanent basis
in your Member State of residence. If however, your car is essentially used on
a permanent basis in another Member State, for example the Member State where
your company is established, then it must be registered there (C-464/02,
Commission v Denmark).
|16. Am I obliged to
pay the full amount of a car registration/pollution tax on a motor vehicle
leased in another Member State?
|No. The tax amount must be reduced in proportion to
the duration of the lease contract, i.e. to the use of the car in the Member
State of your residence. (C-451/99, Cura Anlagen)
|17. Do car
registration taxes give rise to "border crossing formalities" in the
sense of Article 3(3) of Council Directive 92/12/EEC of 25 February 1992 on the
general arrangements for products subject to excise duty and on the holding,
movement and monitoring of such products (the Excise duty directive), and are
they consequently prohibited?
Article 3(3) of the Excise duty directive gives Member States the right to
introduce or maintain taxes which are levied on inter alia cars, provided,
however, that those taxes do not give rise to border-crossing formalities in
trade between Member States. The Court of Justice has ruled that, even in cases
where a declaration of the car registration tax has to be submitted at the time
of crossing a border, that formality relates not to that crossing, but to the
obligation to settle the tax.
|18. Can a Member State
immobilise my motor vehicle if I have failed to pay the tax?
|No. The temporary immobilisation of a motor vehicle
in order to secure the settling of a tax liability is disproportionate
(C-156/04, Commission v Greece).
For further information you are invited to consult our webpage on the European
Court's of Justice case-law listing regarding passenger car related taxes.