<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0">
    <channel>
        <title>KluwerLawOnline.com - EC Tax Review</title>
        <link>https://kluwerlawonline.com/Journals/EC+Tax+Review/19</link>
        <description>Up-to-date coverage of developments in Europe-wide tax law and practice.</description>
        <language>en-gb</language>
        <pubDate>Wed, 23 Apr 2025 00:01:07 GMT</pubDate>
        <lastBuildDate>Wed, 23 Apr 2025 00:01:07 GMT</lastBuildDate>
        <docs>http://www.rssboard.org/rss-specification</docs>
        <item>
            <title>Forum Contribution Directors: To Be or not to Be Independent? That Is the Question. A Critical Analysis of CJEU TP (C-288/22)</title>
            <link>https://kluwerlawonline.com/JournalArticle/EC+Tax+Review/34.2/ECTA2025010</link>
            <category>EC Tax Review</category>
            <description>&lt;p class="MsoNormal"&gt;&lt;i&gt;In this paper, the
author analyses the CJEU’s decision in the case TP (Case C-288/22) focusing on
the acting ‘independently’ requirement. In the author’s opinion, the decision
leaves important questions unanswered, commits interpretative faults that
incorrectly deprive TP from the taxable person status and is suitable to
generate impactful consequences for both the EU VAT system and Member States.&lt;o:p&gt;&lt;/o:p&gt;&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/p&gt;Volume 34 Online ISSN 0928-2750</description>
            <pubDate>Wed, 23 Apr 2025 00:01:07 GMT</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="true">https://kluwerlawonline.com/JournalArticle/EC+Tax+Review/34.2/ECTA2025010</guid>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Conference Report: Recent and Pending Cases at the Court of Justice of the European Union on Direct Taxation: Conference in Vienna 2024: Current Trends in Direct Taxation</title>
            <link>https://kluwerlawonline.com/JournalArticle/EC+Tax+Review/34.2/ECTA2025011</link>
            <category>EC Tax Review</category>
            <description>&lt;p class="MsoNormal"&gt;&lt;i&gt;From 15 to 17 December
2024, the annual Conference on Recent and Pending Cases at the Court of Justice
of the European Union (CJEU) on Direct Taxation took place in Vienna. The
conference focused on the most significant pending and decided cases of the
CJEU in the field of direct taxation over the past year. A book based on the
conference proceedings will be published by Linde Verlag in spring 2025. This
report provides a summary of the key insights from the concluding session,
which traditionally examines current developments and future trends at the
CJEU. The session was chaired by Rita Szudoczky (Associate Professor at the WU
Institute for Austrian and International Tax Law) and featured a panel
discussion with the following experts: Andreas Kumin (Judge at the CJEU), Bernd
Hammermann (Judge at the EFTA-Court), Melchior Wathelet (former Judge and
Advocate General at the CJEU), Richard Lyal (European Commission), Philip Baker
(Visiting Professor at the University of Oxford), Servatius van Thiel
(Professor at Vrije Universiteit Brussel) and David Hummel (Référendaire in the
cabinet of AG Kokott at the CJEU and Professor at Universität Leipzig).&lt;o:p&gt;&lt;/o:p&gt;&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/p&gt;Volume 34 Online ISSN 0928-2750</description>
            <pubDate>Wed, 23 Apr 2025 00:01:07 GMT</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="true">https://kluwerlawonline.com/JournalArticle/EC+Tax+Review/34.2/ECTA2025011</guid>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Binding Nature of Court Judgments in Light of Fundamental Rights and EU Law</title>
            <link>https://kluwerlawonline.com/JournalArticle/EC+Tax+Review/34.2/ECTA2025012</link>
            <category>EC Tax Review</category>
            <description>&lt;p class="MsoNormal"&gt;&lt;i&gt;The article examines
the extent to which courts and tax authorities should rely on the outcomes of
prior judgments, particularly in the context of tax law. First, it explores how
final court judgments can be binding in subsequent related proceedings in some
countries. Second, it discusses how the right to a fair trial limits the
ability to invoke previous court judgments in ongoing proceedings without
allowing parties to conduct evidentiary hearings on facts adjudicated in those
prior judgments. Third, the authors analyse situations where final judgments
should be considered binding due to the principles of legal certainty and the
presumption of innocence. Finally, they discuss whether a breach of EU law
provides grounds to refrain from applying the res judicata principle. The
article concludes that while the binding nature of court judgments presents a
multifaceted legal challenge, the core principles of fairness, legal certainty,
and the presumption of innocence must be respected. The interplay between these
principles underscores the need for careful consideration and potential
refinements in national legislation and judicial practice to ensure that the
pursuit of justice aligns with fundamental rights.&lt;o:p&gt;&lt;/o:p&gt;&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/p&gt;Volume 34 Online ISSN 0928-2750</description>
            <pubDate>Wed, 23 Apr 2025 00:01:07 GMT</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="true">https://kluwerlawonline.com/JournalArticle/EC+Tax+Review/34.2/ECTA2025012</guid>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title>DAC 6 and the European Rejection of Professional Secrecy Beyond That of Lawyers: The CJEU Judgment of 29 July 2024</title>
            <link>https://kluwerlawonline.com/JournalArticle/EC+Tax+Review/34.2/ECTA2025013</link>
            <category>EC Tax Review</category>
            <description>&lt;p class="MsoNormal"&gt;&lt;i&gt;The CJUE decided in
its judgment of 29 July 2024 in answer to a question of the Belgian
Constitutional Court that lawyers but not other persons having the right to
represent taxpayers in court could be exempted from the obligation to notify
other intermediaries that they were claiming legal privilege exempting them
from the obligation to report certain cross-border tax arrangements under DAC
6. They had to inform their clients that this obligation rested on them.&lt;/i&gt;&lt;i&gt;Is the
exclusion from this right of other professionals subject to professional secrecy
under national law justified? The author analyses the opinion of the advocate
general and the judgment. He submits that this restriction is not justified in
view of the evolution of society and of national legislations. DAC 6 endorsed
the judgment and confirmed the exemption as applicable to registered lawyers
only.&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/p&gt;Volume 34 Online ISSN 0928-2750</description>
            <pubDate>Wed, 23 Apr 2025 00:01:07 GMT</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="true">https://kluwerlawonline.com/JournalArticle/EC+Tax+Review/34.2/ECTA2025013</guid>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Editorial: And They Lived Happily Ever After? Future Challenges for E-invoicing and Digital Reporting After the Adoption of the ViDA Package</title>
            <link>https://kluwerlawonline.com/JournalArticle/EC+Tax+Review/34.2/ECTA2025014</link>
            <category>EC Tax Review</category>
            <description>&lt;p class="MsoNormal"&gt;The rules on e-invoicing and digital reporting contained in
the VAT in the Digital Age (ViDA) package, are both ground-breaking and timely.
Nevertheless, in order to make them a success, remaining challenges need to
addressed.&lt;o:p&gt;&lt;/o:p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;Volume 34 Online ISSN 0928-2750</description>
            <pubDate>Wed, 23 Apr 2025 00:01:07 GMT</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="true">https://kluwerlawonline.com/JournalArticle/EC+Tax+Review/34.2/ECTA2025014</guid>
        </item>
    </channel>
</rss>