In a recent decision, the Supreme Tax Court held that the transport of sparkling wine under suspension of the due tax to another Member State is not hindered if the demand for security previously determined by the main customs office and paid by the sender does not cover the full amount of the valid state tax for sparkling wine that may arise.
In a most recent decision, the Supreme Tax Court held that the shares transferred by way of security are attributable to the purchaser ( who is also the secured party) as of the date of transfer of ownership if the purchaser can legally and effectively exercise the material rights associated with the shares (in particular the sale and exercise of voting rights) and regardless whether the security event occurs.
