30 September 2019

Online advertising: Protection of personal data
Where a search engine operator grants a request for de-referencing, it is required to carry out that de-referencing on the versions of its search engine corresponding to all the Member States, using, where necessary, measures which, while meeting the legal requirements, effectively prevent or, at the very least, seriously discourage an internet user conducting a search from one of the Member States on the basis of a data subject’s name from gaining access, via the list of results displayed following that search, via a non-EU version of the search engine, to the links which are the subject of that request.
CJEU Case C-507/17 Google LLC, Judgment of 24 September 2019, LawLex201900001132JBJ

Online advertising: Protection of personal data
Where a search engine operator grants a request for de-referencing, it is not required to carry out that de-referencing on all versions of its search engine.
CJEU Case C-507/17 Google LLC, Judgment of 24 September 2019, LawLex201900001132JBJ

State aid: Reduction in charges/Tax exemptions
The arm’s length principle constitutes a benchmark for establishing whether an integrated company received, pursuant to a tax measure determining its transfer pricing, an advantage within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU.
GC, Cases T-760/15 and T-636/16 Netherlands (Starbucks), Judgment of24 September 2019, LawLex201900001131JBJ

State aid: Reduction in charges/Tax exemptions
The mere finding of non-observance of the methodological requirements for the determination of transfer pricing is not sufficient to establish that there is State aid within the meaning of Article 107 TFEU.
GC, Cases T-760/15 and T-636/16 Netherlands (Starbucks), Judgment of24 September 2019, LawLex201900001131JBJ

State aid: Reduction in charges/Tax exemptions
The arm’s length principle is used to establish whether the taxable profit of a company in a group for corporate income tax purposes had been determined on the basis of a methodology that approximated market conditions, so that that company is not treated favorably under the general corporate income tax system as compared to non-integrated companies whose taxable profit is determined by the market.
GC, Cases T-760/15 and T-636/16 Netherlands (Starbucks), Judgment of24 September 2019, LawLex201900001131JBJ

State aid: Indirect advantage
Although direct taxation and specifically the designation of bases of assessment and the spread of the tax burden across the different factors of production and economic sectors, falls, as EU law currently stands, within the competence of the Member States, that does not mean that every tax measure, which affects, inter alia, the basis of assessment taken into account by the tax authorities, will escape the application of Article 107 TFEU.
GC, Case T-755 and T-759/15 Luxembourg (Fiat), Judgment of 24 September 2019, LawLex201900001129JBJ

State aid: Selectivity
The presumption of selectivity – applicable to the dual condition that the disputed measure constitutes an individual aid (and not an aid scheme) and grants a benefit to the recipient undertaking – must relate to a tax ruling which specifically concerns an undertaking and approves a methodology for determining that undertaking’s remuneration on the basis of the segmentation of the capital and the application of different rates of return by reference to that segmentation, which deviates from an arm’s length outcome.
GC, Case T-755 and T-759/15 Luxembourg (Fiat), Judgment of 24 September 2019, LawLex201900001129JBJ

State aid: Restriction of competition
The tax ruling by the national tax authorities reducing the undertaking’s tax burden and providing additional resources to the whole group to which it belongs, is liable to affect competition and distort trade on the market insofar as it has the effect of reducing the pricing conditions of its intra-group loans.
GC, Case T-755 and T-759/15 Luxembourg (Fiat), Judgment of 24 September 2019, LawLex201900001129JBJ