Author: Mattia Rossi
Committee: Academic Committee
Date: 19/11/2025
We are glad to announce the publication of a detailed and insightful article, commenting on the CJEU’s case law on cooperation between the tax authorities of the member States of the EU. The contribution, in Italian, has been published in the “Rivista di diritto tributario internazionale”, and written by Enrico Traversa, Former Director of the Justice Team of the Legal Service of the EU Commission, currently Adjunct Professor of EU Law at the Political Sciences and International Relations Department of the University of Bologna and Chair of the EPPONFI Academic Committee.
The systematic analysis is of considerable importance for those working with the EPPO or doing research about it, as the exchange of information between tax authorities often precedes the discovery of alleged tax fraud also amounting to a “PIF” offence, and is thus often linked to the initiation of investigation by European Delegated Prosecutors.
You can find hereunder an abstract of the contribution in English.
The subject of this study is the case law of the EU Court of Justice concerning the interpretation and the validity of EU directives and regulations governing cooperation between Member States tax administrations. By its long and detailed judgments, the Court has inferred from articles 7 (right to respect of private communications) and 47 (right to an effective judicial remedy) of the Charter of fundamental rights a body of case-law rules that the same Union judges superimposed on the provisions of EU secondary legislation governing administrative cooperation in the tax sector. From this point of view, the judgements concerning the protection of tax lawyers professional secrecy and those relating to judicial protection of private persons involved in information ex- change procedures deserve particular attention. Finally, the analysis of the case law regarding administrative cooperation in the area of VAT and excise duties has highlighted cases of double taxation despite the long-standing existence of harmonization directives. The Court had indeed to admit that EU regulations governing cooperation between VAT and excise duties Member States administrations do not provide for rules to prevent double taxation.