EuGH-Rechtsprechung - Tarifliche Einreihung
Urteile des Gerichtshofs der EU zur zolltariflichen Einreihung und zur Kombinierten Nomenklatur - verbindliche Rechtsquelle
Urteile des Gerichtshofs der EU zur zolltariflichen Einreihung und zur Kombinierten Nomenklatur - verbindliche Rechtsquelle
5 Urteile - HS 8528
SC Onlineshop SRL v Agenţia Naţională de Administrare Fiscală (ANAF) and Direcţia Generală a Vămilor
On those grounds, the Court (Tenth Chamber) hereby rules: The Combined Nomenclature in Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 of 23 July 1987 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff, in the version resulting from Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/1754 of 6 October 2015, must be interpreted as meaning that a piece of multifunctional apparatus of a kind used in motor vehicles which, like that at issue in the main proceedings, combines, in the same housing, by way of primary function, a radio navigation monitor using pre-installed GPS navigation applications and, by way of ancillary functions, a radio broadcasting apparatus, a sound and video reproducing apparatus and a screen with a diagonal measurement of approximately 5 inches (12.7 cm), must be classified under subheading 85269120 of that nomenclature. [Signatures] ( *1 ) Language of the case: Romanian.
X BV v Staatssecretaris van Financiën
On those grounds, the Court (Tenth Chamber) hereby rules: The Combined Nomenclature set out in Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 of 23 July 1987 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff, as amended by Implementing Regulation (EU) No 927/2012 of 9 October 2012, must be interpreted as meaning that, in order to determine whether LCD (liquid crystal display) flat panel displays designed and manufactured for displaying both data from an automatic data-processing machine and composite video signals from other sources must be classified under subheading 85285100 of the combined nomenclature or under subheading 85285940 of that nomenclature, it is necessary, when examining all their objective characteristics and properties, to assess both the extent to which they are capable of performing several functions and the level of performance attained in performing those functions, in order to determine whether their principal function is to be used in an automatic data-processing system. In that context, particular significance must be attached to the question whether they are intended for viewing close up. The question whether the user of the display and the person who processes and/or enters data in the automatic data-processing machine are one and the same person is not a relevant criterion for the purposes of that determination. [Signatures] ( *1 ) Language of the case: Dutch.
2M-Locatel A/S v Skatteministeriet
Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 20 September 2018.#2M-Locatel A/S v Skatteministeriet.#Reference for a preliminary ruling — Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 — Customs Union and Common Customs Tariff — Tariff classification — Combined Nomenclature — Subheadings 8528 71 13 and 8528 71 90 — Apparatus capable of receiving, decoding and processing live TV signals transmitted using internet technology.#Case C-555/17.
Digitalnet OOD and Others v Nachalnik na Mitnicheski punkt — Varna Zapad pri Mitnitsa Varna
On those grounds, the Court (Sixth Chamber) hereby rules: 1. The Combined Nomenclature set out in Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 of 23 July 1987 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff, as amended, respectively, by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1214/2007 of 20 September 2007, by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1031/2008 of 19 September 2008, and by Commission Regulation (EC) No 948/2009 of 30 September 2009, must be interpreted as meaning that, for the purposes of classification of goods under subheading 8528 71 13, a modem for gaining access to the internet is a device which, alone and without the intervention of any other apparatus or mechanism, is capable of accessing the internet and of ensuring interactivity and an exchange of information in both directions. It is solely the capacity to gain access to the internet, and not the technique used to achieve this, that is relevant for the purposes of classification under that subheading. 2. That Combined Nomenclature must be interpreted as meaning that the reception of television signals and the presence of a modem allowing access to the internet are two equivalent functions that apparatus must perform in order to be classified under subheading 8528 71 13. In the absence of one or other of those functions, that apparatus must be classified under subheading 8528 71 19. 3. Article 78(2) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code must be interpreted as meaning that ex post inspection of goods and the subsequent change in their tariff classification may be made on the basis of written documents without the customs authorities being required to physically check those goods. [Signatures] ( *1 ) Language of the cases: Bulgarian.
Staatssecretaris van Financiën v Kamino International Logistics BV.
On those grounds, the Court (Third Chamber) hereby rules: 1. Monitors such as those at issue in the main proceedings are not excluded from classification in subheading 8471 60 90, as units of the kind used ‘principally’ in an automatic data-processing system within the meaning of Note 5(B)(a) to Chapter 84 of the combined nomenclature constituting Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 of 23 July 1987 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff, as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1789/2003 of 11 September 2003, solely because they are capable of displaying signals coming both from an automatic data-processing machine and from other sources. 2. In order to determine whether monitors such as those at issue in the main proceedings are units of the kind used principally in an automatic data-processing system, the national authorities, including the courts, must refer to the indications given in the Explanatory Notes relating to heading 8471 of the Harmonised System introduced by the International Convention on the Harmonised Commodity Description and Coding System, concluded in Brussels on 14 June 1983, and the Protocol of Amendment thereto of 24 June 1986, in particular to points 1 to 5 of Part One, Chapter I(D), relating to display units of automatic data-processing machines. 3. Commission Regulation (EC) No 754/2004 of 21 April 2000 concerning the classification of certain goods in the Combined Nomenclature is not applicable for the purposes of tariff classification of the monitors at issue in the main proceedings. [Signatures] * Language of the case: Dutch.