An adviser to Europe’s top court suggested on Thursday that an EU tribunal had made legal errors in its ruling favouring Apple over a 13 billion EURO (almost ₦11,146,089,988,800) tax order. This development potentially poses a setback for the iPhone maker. The tax case against Apple was a part of EU antitrust chief Margrethe Vestager’s efforts to curb deals between multinationals and EU countries deemed as unfair state aid.
In 2016, the European Commission decided that Apple had benefited from two Irish tax rulings for over two decades, artificially reducing its tax burden to as low as 0.005 percent in 2014. In 2020, the European Union’s General Court upheld Apple’s challenge, stating that regulators failed to meet the legal standard demonstrating that Apple had an unfair advantage.
However, Advocate General Giovanni Pitruzzella at the EU Court of Justice (CJEU) disagreed, asserting that CJEU judges should set aside the General Court ruling and review the case again. In a non-binding opinion, he highlighted that the General Court committed legal errors and failed to properly assess certain methodological errors that, according to the Commission decision, affected the tax rulings.
Pitruzzella emphasized the necessity for the General Court to conduct a new assessment. The CJEU, which is expected to rule in the coming months, typically follows around four in five such recommendations. Ireland reiterated that it did not provide any state aid to Apple, emphasizing that the opinion does not form part of the CJEU judgment.
While Apple and Dublin appealed against the tax order, the tech giant had already handed over the full amount, held in an escrow account by Ireland. The Irish government maintained its position that the correct amount of Irish tax was paid, and no state aid was provided to Apple.
An Apple spokesperson expressed gratitude for the court’s consideration and reiterated the General Court’s ruling that Apple received no selective advantage and no state aid. Meanwhile, EU antitrust chief Margrethe Vestager has experienced a mixed record in defending tax cases in court, with recent victories and challenges against automaker Stellantis, Amazon, and Starbucks. Her ongoing tax crackdown has compelled EU countries to abandon sweetheart deals, and she is currently investigating tax arrangements of companies like IKEA, Nike, and Huhtamaki.
