Case C-472/12, Panasonic Italia – imported computer monitors or just EU-dumped plasma-TV screens? [judgment 2014, ECLI:EU:C:2014:2082]

When an object is described as a computer monitor screen for the purposes of EU anti-dumping law, should that object really be classified as a plasma-TV screen when it can be easily used to receive television signals and it can also be attached to DVD players or satellite receivers?

Facts
Between 2001 and 2004, the Italian branch of Panasonic was importing plasma screens into the EU from non-EU countries. The imports meant they were governed by the EU’s anti-dumping measures. Accordingly, Panasonic Italia declared to the Italian customs authority in Milan that the imported screens fell under ‘heading 8471′ (which is for monitors used exclusively for the display of images coming from a computer). As a result, the monitors were free from import tax but they were subject to 20% VAT.

The Italian customs authority in Milan disagreed with Panasonic Italia’s designation of the imported screens. Here was a screen that was used for colour images. The screen measured 106.6cm across the diagonal. The screen had two in-built loudspeakers. The screen was even operated by remote control. Equally, the housing of the screen was also furnished with an aperture. Into the aperture, a video card could be inserted. Inserting a cheap video card, the likes of which were widely available in Europe, would allow the purchaser of the screen to receive and process audiovisual signals. Moreover, the purchaser could also attach a whole panoply of electronic equipment to the screen, and thus allow the screen to be used in combination with DVD players, video cameras and even satellite receivers. In light of all this, the Italian customs authority declared the screens as not falling under the heading reserved for computer monitors but rather as screens falling under the heading 8528. Accordingly, Panasonic Italy was deemed to have imported plasma-TV screens, and these were subject to a 14% import tax.

Panasonic Italia stood its ground and the matter went to court. It pointed out that at the moment when the screens were imported there was no video card in the model or the box. At the moment when they were imported, the screens could only be used to display images coming from a computer.

In reply, the Italian customs authority referred the national court to Panasonic’s Instruction Manual, which alerted users to the possibility of introducing a video card into the system so that the product and card could be used for television.

Questions Referred
According to the Official Journal of the EU (OJ [2012] C399), the Italian Court of Cassation has asked:

1. Primarily — was it necessary, before the entry into force of Regulation (EC) No 754/2004, […] to classify under heading 8471, or under heading 8528, a plasma colour monitor with a diagonal measurement of the screen of 106,6 centimetres, equipped with two loudspeakers and a remote control, and with an input device designed for the insertion of a video card (very inexpensive and easy to find and insert) which was not imported with the screen, but which, once inserted, meant that the monitor was capable of receiving composite AV video signals and could be connected, not only to automatic data-processing machines, but also to recording and reproducing apparatus, DVD players, video cameras and satellite receivers?

2. If the answer to Question 1 is in the negative, the Court of Justice is asked to assess and determine whether Regulation No 754/2004 actually requires a monitor of that type to be classified under heading 8528;

3. If the answer to Question 2 is affirmative, the Court is asked whether or not the provisions laid down in that regard by Regulation No 754/2004 have to be regarded as interpretative and, as such, as having retroactive effect save where earlier specific provisions to the contrary apply.