An Austrian company Teatote export specialist tea products to other EU countries. Teatote had to deal with a recent outbreak of flea infestation during the tea production process which has now been dealt with and the all clear has been given by the relevant authorities. Production resumed soon after the issue was dealt with, but when Teatote attempted to import their tea into Poland, the Polish authorities required them to pay for a health inspection. Teatote is objecting to this payment.
Teatote also import their tea into Holland. They agreed with the local port company to pay for their cargo to be stored before onward transit to the distributors. The Dutch authorities also demanded that Teatote must make a payment for “port clearance”.
Teatote also import their tea into Denmark. The Danish authorities levy twice the amount of tax on Teatote loose tea leaves than they do on tea bags sold in Denmark. Also they levy a 10% higher tax on Teatote Special (a tea of average strength) than they do on Danish tea of similar strength, and the tax levied on Teatote Trad (a traditional blend of tea made by traditional methods) is the same as on normal tea, although Denmark made traditional tea rate taxed at a lower rate. Teatote is objecting to the way that these taxes are levied on their tea products.
Critically discuss and advise Teatote as to how the law on the free movement of goods (as applied by Articles 30 and 110 TFEU and case law) can be argued to the various payments and taxes levied in the above scenario.
Assignment status: Solved by our experts