A federal administrative court in Leipzig

A federal administrative court in Leipzig ruled on Tuesday that collection of municipal betting office taxes could not be allowed. The ruling marks the end of a year-long legal dispute over a cost tax imposed by the city of Dortmund in favor of betting shop operators.

The three plaintiffs were operators of the betting office in Dortmund who arranged racing and sports betting at their betting office. One of the operators also organized horse racing as a betting man. The plaintiffs appealed against the city of Dortmund’s tax assessment of imposing a city betting store tax based on its total betting stake.

Complaints about the area of the betting store on the basis of the assessment were initially dismissed in a lower court ruling. However, the Munster High Administrative Court allowed an appeal. The reason was the issue of prohibiting tax similarities.

This means that local tax may not be similar to the tax regulated by federal law. In 2019, Professor Gregor Kirchhoff, director of the Augsburg Institute for Business and Tax Law, pointed out the violation of the similarity ban on betting petitions in Dortmund.

An expert opinion commissioned by the German Sports Betting Association (DSWV) said the city’s betting tax relies on the same “source of economic efficiency” as the federal sports betting tax, resulting in uniformity that violates basic law. 파칭코

The Federal Administrative Court has now reached this conclusion. Regarding the ruling, he explained that taxes prescribed under federal law in the Race Betting and Lottery Act are of the same kind, so the city betting office tax in Dortmund is not allowed.

The federal administration concluded by emphasizing that each state has the authority to enact a local tax, but this may not be the same type of tax as federal law stipulates.