«(Sixth VAT Directive – Article 13B(h) and Article 4(3)(b) – Supply of building land)»

Tax provisions – Harmonization of laws – Turnover tax – Common system of value added tax – Exemptions provided for by the Sixth Directive – Exemption for the supply of land which has not been built on other than building land – Meaning of building land – To be defined by the Member States (Council Directive 77/388, Arts 4(3)(b) and 13B(h)) Article 13B(h) of the Sixth Directive (77/388) on the harmonization of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes, which provides for tax exemption for the supply of land which has not been built on, excludes from tax exemption building land as described in Article 4(3)(b). Since Article 4(3)(b) refers expressly to the Member States' definitions of building land, it is for the Member States to define what land is to be regarded as being building land, for the purposes of the application both of Article 4(3)(b) and of Article 13B(h), in view of the reference made by the latter provision.It therefore does not fall to the Court to specify what degree of improvement land which has not been built on must exhibit in order to be categorized as building land within the meaning of the directive.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Fifth Chamber) 28 March 1996 (1)

((Sixth VAT Directive – Article 13B(h) and Article 4(3)(b) – Supply of building land))

In Case C-468/93,

REFERENCE to the Court under Article 177 of the EC Treaty by the Gerechtshof te Leeuwarden (Netherlands) for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending before that court between

and

on the interpretation of the combined provisions of Article 13B(h) and Article 4(3)(b) of the Sixth Council Directive (77/388/EEC) of 17 May 1977 on the harmonization of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes ─ Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment (OJ 1977 L 145, p. 1),

THE COURT (Fifth Chamber),,

composed of: D.A.O. Edward, President of the Chamber, J.-P. Puissochet (Rapporteur), J.C. Moitinho de Almeida, C. Gulmann and M. Wathelet, Judges,

Advocate General: N. Fennelly,

after considering the written observations submitted on behalf of:

having regard to the Report for the Hearing,

after hearing the oral observations of the municipality of Emmen, represented by R. Brouwer and W.A. Rouwenhorst, the Netherlands Government, represented by J.S. van den Oosterkamp, Assistant Legal Adviser in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and G.D. van Norden, Director in the Ministry of Finance, and the Commission of the European Communities, represented by B.J. Drijber, at the hearing on 9 November 1995,

after hearing the Opinion of the Advocate General at the sitting on 14 December 1995,

gives the following

On those grounds,

THE COURT (Fifth Chamber)

in answer to the questions referred to it by the Gerechtshof te Leeuwarden, by order of 14 December 1993, hereby rules:

Edward

Puissochet

Moitinho de Almeida

Gulmann

Wathelet

Delivered in open court in Luxembourg on 28 March 1996.

R. Grass

D.A.O. Edward

Registrar

President of the Fifth Chamber