Nach dieser Meldung haben Zeugen Jehovas in Frankreich einen Rechtsstreit mit den Steuerbehörden jetzt (endgültig? Wer weiß? Wahrscheinlich ist noch eine Revisionsmöglichkeit bei der großen Kammer des Gerichtshofes aus) gewonnen. Der Europäische Gerichtshof entschied, dass die Finanzbehörde keine Rechtsgrundlage für ihre Steuernachforderung im Jahre 1998 hatte, da die entsprechenden Gesetze erst 2005 entsprechend präzisiert wurden, dass sie auch für juristische Personen gelten.

Über den Schadenersatz wurde noch nicht entschieden, da die Parteien erst Gelegenheit bekommen, diesen Punkt einvernehmlich zu regeln. Der Rechtsstreit läuft bereits über zehn Jahre.

Hier eine englische Presseerklärung der Zeugen Jehovas zum Prozessauftakt in Straßburg aus 2010.

---

[update]
Weitere englische Berichte hier und hier.

Das vollständige Urteil in französisch.

Englische Presseerklärung der Zeugen Jehovas (Text siehe ganz unten.)^a

(und jetzt unten auch die deutsche Übersetzung)^b

Was bedeutet das nun?

Zum ersten bedeutet es, dass der Gerichtshof (zum ersten mal) klar gesagt hat, dass die Maßnahmen der französischen Finanzverwaltung Unrecht sind. Die Formulierung in der Presseerklärung umschreibt mit etwas freundlicheren Worten eine Willkürmaßnahme, bei der ein Gesetz entgegen dem Gesetzestext angewendet wurde.

Zum zweiten bedeutet es noch nichts endgültiges. Der französische Staat hat jetzt drei Monate, um Revision einzulegen. Falls er sich dazu entschließt, wird ein Gremium aus fünf Richtern entscheiden, ob die Revision angenommen wird; falls ja, dann wird die "große Kammer" bestehend aus allen Richtern des Gerichtes sich noch einmal mit dem Fall befassen. Falls der Staat keine Revision einlegt, hat er Gelegenheit, sich mit der Religionsgemeinschaft einvernehmlich über die Rückzahlung und Entschädigung zu einigen. Erst danach werden die Richter über die genaue Höhe der finanziellen Entschädigung entscheiden.

Die abweichende Entscheidung eines Richters betrifft übrigens keine grundsätzliche Ablehnung sondern lediglich die Frage, wie wichtig diese Entscheidung ist. In Bezug darauf, dass das Gesetz willkürlich angewandt wurde, steht er hinter der Entscheidung.

Müssen die Zeugen Jehovas ab 2005 jetzt Steuern zahlen? Ich halte das für unwahrscheinlich, da ja nur Steuern fällig werden für Spenden, deren Daten gesammelt, gespeichert, und dem Staat zur Kenntnis gegeben werden. Es ist unwahrscheinlich, dass Zeugen Jehovas diese Daten jetzt noch weiter speichern, bloß um hinterher Steuern zahlen zu dürfen.

[/update]

---

Die englische Presseerklärung des Europäischen Gerichtshofes für Menschenrechte (pdf-Datei!):

Gifts received by “Association of Jehovah’s Witnesses” were taxed under a law that was too imprecise

In today’s Chamber judgment in the case Association Les Témoins de Jéhovah v. France (application no. 8916/05), which is not final¹, the European Court of Human Rights held, unanimously, that there had been:
A violation of Article 9 (right to freedom of religion) of the European Convention on Human Rights. The case concerned a supplementary tax demand for several dozen million euros, claimed from the association Les Témoins de Jéhovah. According to the association, the procedure in question had been flawed, and, given its scale, had infringed its freedom of religion.

Principal facts

The applicant, Association Les Témoins de Jéhovah (Association of Jehovah’s Witnesses), is a French association with its headquarters in Boulogne-Billancourt (France). Its main objective is to “support the maintenance and practice of the Jehovah’s Witnesses movement”. The Jehovah’s Witnesses movement, which claims to have more than 17 million followers across the world, including more than 250,000 in France, identifies itself as a Christian religion, the beliefs of which are based entirely on the Bible. Their movement is financed by “donations”. In a 1995 parliamentary report entitled "Sects in France", the Jehovah’s Witnesses were classified as a sect. The applicant association alleges that, following that report, steps were taken to marginalise it. In particular, the tax authorities carried out an audit. On the basis of the information gathered in that audit, it was given notice to declare the gifts that it had received from 1993 to 1996. The association refused and asked that the tax exemption applicable to gifts and legacies to liturgical associations, unions of liturgical associations and authorised religious congregations be applied to it (Article 795-10o of the General Tax Code, the CGI). As the applicant association had not submitted the declaration requested by the tax authorities, it was subjected to an automatic taxation procedure in respect of manual gifts which it had received and “which [had been] disclosed to the tax authorities in the course of the accounting audits to which it [had been] subjected” within the meaning of Article 757 of the CGI. In May 1998 it was notified of a supplementary tax assessment for the equivalent of about 45 million euros (about 23 million euros for the principal and 22 million in default interest and surcharges). The association stressed that the tax claimed concerned “donations” by 250,000 persons over four years (or an average of 4 euros per person per month for the period 1993- 1996).


In January 1999 the applicant association submitted an official complaint to the tax authorities, which was dismissed in September 1999. The association brought proceedings before the Nanterre tribunal de grande instance against the director of the revenue department which had dismissed its complaint. On 4 July 2000 the court dismissed the applicant association’s claims. It held that Article 757, on which the automatic taxation procedure had been based, applied both to individuals and legal entities, and that therefore it had been correctly applied to the applicant association. It also held that the latter had not been justified in alleging that it was entitled to the exemptions in question. On 28 February 2002 the Versailles Court of Appeal upheld that judgment. On 5 October 2004 the Court of Cassation dismissed an appeal on points of law submitted by the applicant association.

According to the most recent information submitted by the French Government, the amount claimed from the Association Les Témoins de Jéhovah was more than 57.5 million euros. Complaints, procedure and composition of the Court Relying in particular on Article 9, the association Les Témoins de Jéhovah complained that the disputed tax proceedings had infringed its freedom of religion. The application was lodged with the European Court of Human Rights on 24 February 2005 and declared partially inadmissible on 17 June 2008. The complaint under Article 9 was declared admissible on 29 September 2010. The European Association of Jehovah’s Witnesses was authorised to submit observations.

Judgment was given by a Chamber of seven, composed as follows:
Dean Spielmann (Luxembourg), President,
Elisabet Fura (Sweden),
Jean-Paul Costa (France),
Karel Jungwiert (the Czech Republic),
Mark Villiger (Liechtenstein),
Isabelle Berro-Lefèvre (Monaco),
Ganna Yudkivska (Ukraine), Judges,
and also Claudia Westerdiek, Section Registrar.

Decision of the Court

Article 9
The Court had already held in several cases that Article 9 protected the free exercise of the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ right to freedom of religion. With regard to the applicant association’s case, the Court therefore examined, firstly, whether the disputed supplementary tax assessment had amounted to interference in its right to freedom of religion, and, if so, whether that interference was acceptable in the light of the Convention.

It noted that the supplementary tax assessment in question had concerned the entirety of the manual gifts received by the association, although they represented the main source of its funding. Its operating resources having thus been cut, it had no longer been able to guarantee to its followers the free exercise of their religion in practical terms. There had therefore indeed been interference in the applicant association’s right to freedom of religion.

For such interference to be acceptable from the perspective of Article 9, it had above all be “prescribed by law”, and the law in question had to be formulated with sufficient clarity to be foreseeable: the citizen had to be able to regulate his or her conduct accordingly. The “law” under which the gifts to the association Les Témoins de Jéhovah were automatically taxed was Article 757 of the CGI, under which manual gifts “disclosed” to the tax authorities were subject to gift tax. The Court identified two reasons why that Article and its application to the case of the applicant association had not been sufficiently foreseeable.

Firstly, the disputed Article gave no details about the targeted “donee”; as a result, it was impossible to know whether it was applicable to legal entities and thus to the applicant association. In the light of the relevant legislative history, the Court noted that the text in question had been drawn up to regulate the transmission of property within families and concerned only individuals. It was not until in 2005 that an instruction (published in the Official Journal of the Revenue Department) specified that, by virtue of a ministerial response in 2001, that Article was applicable to manual gifts to associations. Yet the supplementary assessment in respect of the association Les Témoins de Jéhovah predated that instruction (1998).

Secondly, with regard to the concept of the “disclosure” of gifts within the meaning of Article 757, the Court noted that today’s case was the first in which it had been argued that submission of the required accounting records in the context of a tax audit was the equivalent of “disclosure". Such an interpretation of the Article – which itself gave no detail on the circumstances of “disclosure” – would have been difficult for the association to foresee, in that manual gifts had until then been exempt from any obligation to declare them. As the taxation of manual gifts to the applicant association had depended on the conduct of a tax audit, the application of the tax law had not been foreseeable.

In conclusion, the interference in the applicant association’s right to respect for its freedom of religion had not been “prescribed by law” in violation of 9..

Article 41
The association requested the cancellation of the supplementary tax assessment, restitution of the amounts seized on the occasion of the tax audit (more than 4.5 million euros, plus interest) and amounts in respect of non-pecuniary damage and costs and expenses. The Court found that the matter was not ready for decision and reserved it. It would be decided at a later date in the light of additional observations from the parties and/or an agreement reached by them.

Separate opinion
Judge Costa expressed a separate opinion, which is annexed to the judgment. The judgment is available only in French.

This press release is a document produced by the Registry. It does not bind the Court. Decisions, judgments and further information about the Court can be found on its Internet site. To receive the Court’s press releases, please subscribe to the Court’s RSS feeds.

---

¹ Under Articles 43 and 44 of the Convention, this Chamber judgment is not final. During the three-month period following its delivery, any party may request that the case be referred to the Grand Chamber of the Court. If such a request is made, a panel of five judges considers whether the case deserves further examination. In that event, the Grand Chamber will hear the case and deliver a final judgment. If the referral request is refused, the Chamber judgment will become final on that day.

Once a judgment becomes final, it is transmitted to the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe for supervision of its execution. Further information about the execution process can be found here.

---

^a Presseerklärung der Zeugen Jehovas:

EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS VINDICATES JEHOVAH’S WITNESSES IN FRANCE

STRASBOURG, France––Today the European Court of Human Rights ruled that the government of France violated the rights of Jehovah’s Witnesses when it attempted to impose a retroactive 60% tax on all religious donations made by Jehovah’s Witnesses in France between 1993 and 1996.

In total, the French government sought to obligate the Association of Jehovah’s Witnesses of France to pay 58 million Euros (over $82,000,000 US), which far exceeds all the assets of the Association. No other major religion in France has ever been submitted to such excessive taxation.

The unanimous court decided that the government’s actions violated the religious freedom of Jehovah’s Witnesses as guaranteed by the European Convention of Human Rights. It ruled that the contested tax resulted in the Association’s “essential funding having been cut, and thus it was no longer able to guarantee to its followers the free exercise of their religion in practical terms.” The tax threatens the survival or “at least seriously interfered with the internal organization, the operation of the association and its religious activities.” The court also found that because the law relied upon by the tax authorities in France was “imprecise” and its application “unforeseeable,” the violation with religious freedom could not be justified.

Throughout this case, Jehovah’s Witnesses argued that the discriminatory taxation had been imposed with the purpose to cripple the worship practiced by over 123,000 of Jehovah’s Witnesses in France. It was one of the many steps taken by anti-sect parliamentarians to mischaracterize and marginalize Jehovah’s Witnesses. Today’s decision by the court sends a strong message to the government of France that it must uphold the right to religious freedom for all its citizens.

The Witnesses expect that the honest-minded people of France will see beyond the campaign of misrepresentation perpetrated by a few parliamentarians motivated by virulent hatred of those who choose to think differently and manifest their religion as a way of life. Members of the religious community living in Louviers at the Association’s headquarters obviously welcomed the news of the victory.

“We have always been confident that our position in this matter was correct. It was unjust for the government to use taxation as a weapon against the fifth largest religion in France,” said Michel Blaser, president of the Association of Jehovah’s Witnesses of France. Mr. Blaser also noted, “Jehovah’s Witnesses are scrupulously honest when it comes to paying taxes. The donations Jehovah’s Witnesses give to their religion should not be taxed any more than the offerings at any other church. This case is a victory for the human rights of all who live in France and hopefully will mark the end of religious harassment for residents of France who are Jehovah’s Witnesses.”

---

^bUnd jetzt noch die deutsche Übersetzung der Presseerklärung:

Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte gibt Jehovas Zeugen in Frankreich Recht

Straßburg, Frankreich — Gestern hat der Europäische Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte entschieden, dass der französische Staat die Rechte von Jehovas Zeugen verletzt hat. Er hatte die Glaubensgemeinschaft rückwirkend für die Zeit von 1993 bis 1996 mit einer 60-prozentigen Steuer auf alle Spenden belegt.

Insgesamt verlangte Frankreich von der Rechtskörperschaft Association Les Témoins de Jéhovah 58 Millionen Euro — eine Summe, die deren Gesamtvermögen weit übersteigt. Noch niemals zuvor ist eine andere große Religionsgemeinschaft in Frankreich derart überzogen besteuert worden.

Das Gericht entschied einstimmig, dass das Vorgehen der Regierung die Religionsfreiheit von Jehovas Zeugen verletzt hat, die durch die Konvention zum Schutze der Menschenrechte und Grundfreiheiten garantiert wird. Die Richter stellten fest, dass die strittige Steuer der Glaubensgemeinschaft die „notwendigen finanziellen Mittel entzogen hat, so dass diese praktisch nicht mehr in der Lage war, für ihre Anhänger die freie Ausübung ihrer Religion zu sichern“. Die Steuer gefährdet die Existenz der Religionsgemeinschaft — oder zumindest „beeinträchtigt sie in höchstem Maß die interne Organisation und die Handlungsfähigkeit der Vereinigung sowie ihre religiösen Aktivitäten“. Überdies ist das Gesetz, auf das sich die französische Steuerbehörde beruft, „unpräzise“. Es war für die Religionsgemeinschaft „unvorhersehbar“, dass es auf sie angewendet werden würde. Vor diesem Hintergrund lässt sich also, so das Gericht, die Verletzung der Religionsfreiheit nicht rechtfertigen.

Während des Verfahrens führten Jehovas Zeugen ins Feld, dass die diskriminierende Steuer eigens zu dem Zweck erhoben worden sei, die über 123 000 Zeugen Jehovas in Frankreich in ihrer Religionsausübung zu behindern. Das war nur einer von vielen Schritten, mit denen Parlamentarier aus der Anti-Sekten-Szene versucht haben, Jehovas Zeugen falsch darzustellen und zu marginalisieren. Die gestrige Entscheidung ist eine unmissverständliche Botschaft des Europäischen Gerichtshofs an die französische Regierung: Frankreich muss allen seinen Bürgern dauerhaft die Religionsfreiheit garantieren.

Jehovas Zeugen sind zuversichtlich, dass aufrichtige Franzosen die Verleumdungskampagne durchschauen, die von einigen wenigen Parlamentariern angezettelt wurde. Deren Motiv ist abgrundtiefer Hass auf diejenigen, die es wagen, anders zu denken und ihre religiöse Überzeugung ernsthaft auszuleben. Die Mitarbeiter der Religionsgemeinschaft in ihrem Zweigbüro in Louviers haben die Nachricht über den Erfolg sehr begrüßt.

„Wir waren immer davon überzeugt, die Sache richtig zu sehen. Es war rechtswidrig, dass der Staat die Besteuerung als Waffe gegen die fünftgrößte Glaubensgemeinschaft in Frankreich einsetzte“, sagte Michel Blaser, Vorsitzender der Religionsgemeinschaft Jehovas Zeugen in Frankreich. Blaser stellte auch fest, dass „Jehovas Zeugen beim Zahlen ihrer Steuern durch und durch ehrlich sind. Die Spenden der Zeugen Jehovas an ihre Gemeinschaft sollten nicht anders besteuert werden als die Spenden von Mitgliedern anderer Kirchen. Diese Entscheidung ist ein Triumph für die Menschenrechte aller Bürger in Frankreich — und hoffentlich auch der Schlussstrich unter die Schikane, die alle in Frankreich lebenden Zeugen Jehovas bislang auszuhalten haben.“