EU single Market law

EU SINGLE MARKET LAW EXA, By [Name] Class Name Professor University State and City Date Scottish Whisky Thrills (chocolate liqueurs) in Austria Before Brexit, Austria was a European Union (EU) member. Therefore, the country was obliged to follow the requirements of the single market principles. This saw the elimination of product movement barriers imposed by the EU. Whether a specific tax is beneficial or not, any tax targeting imported items, especially breaking this rule, breached this principle. As a result, it can be argued that the rule would require Daisy to pay the same amount of tax as a retail price equal to thirty percent of the recommended retail price upon entrance. This is because the whiskey liqueur tax applies to whisky liqueurs from outside or inside the EU.[Stefano Fella, “The UK-EU Trade and Cooperation Agreement: governance and dispute settlement” (2021) MLR 1, 70.] [Jon Henry, “Brits are suffering but for us it’s boom time’: how Brexit boosted French and Irish ports” (The Guardian, 25 September, 2023) https://www.theguardian.com/business/2024/mar/17/britain-doesnt-need-reform-it-just-needs-to-rejoin-the-eu. Accessed 3/5/2024.] [European Union, “Introductory Guide for Traders to the Rules of Origin provisions of the EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement” (2021) MLR 1, 44.] [John McCormick, “Why Europe Matters for Britain: The Case for Remaining In” MLR 1, 124.] In accordance with the Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA) provisions between the European Union and the United Kingdom, Austria's conduct could still be regarded as incompatible with the non-discrimination principle after Brexit. The TCA still maintains the regulatory framework to preserve good business practices and prevent build-ups of trade barriers. Austria's claim to have the tax exclusively on Daisy's products and not to do something about domestic items could be regarded as discriminatory and incompatible with the contract.[UK by The Stationery Office Limited, “EXPLANATORY NOTES European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 Chapter 16” (2018) MLR 1, 4.] Daisy could have many options to fight for her rights through diverse methods. She could lodge a formal complaint with the European Commission, the responsible body for monitoring EU rules and agreements. Through legal action, Daisy could argue that Austrian actions violate the EU law or the TCA. If she takes such action, Daisy may claim her rights and win the legal battle against the discriminatory tax. Based on the new UK relationship rules with the EU regarding exports and imports. Businesses are supposed to comply with the latest regulations, and one of them is good tariff and quota-free as long as the goods are aligned with the “Rules of Origin” requirements. Therefore, as long as Scottish Whisky Thrills are aligned with this requirement, Daisy does not have to pay the 30 % tax upon entry. [HM Government, “Agreement on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community” (2019) MLR 1, 541.] Caspian Sea Mysteries If the Netherlands had been a member state of the EU before Brexit, it would be subject to the EU legislation that promotes the free movement of products within the single market. Sales tax explicitly imposed based on the distinctiveness of Daisy's product, without any similar regulations for homegrown items, undoubtedly might be considered discriminatory. For instance, if the Dutch manufacturers of luxury chocolates with exotic ingredients were to be free from paying the same tax, this would be an example of prejudice against Daisy's imported products.[European Commission, “Questions and Answers on the United Kingdom's withdrawal from the European Union on 31 January 2020” (2020) MLR 1, 14.] The Dutch decision to implement a tax explicitly targeting Daisy's Caspian Sea Mysteries series is a breach of the TCA's non-discrimination rules regardless of whether Brexit has occurred. For as in the case when only the imported untraditional luxury confectionary with ingredients like caviar is subjected to the tax, and, on the other hand, Dutch products comparable to these but based on unique country ingredients are exempted from this tax, this may be seen as discrimination. Failure to address the concerns thus raised will amount to an infringement of the rules of trade outlined under the TCA that aims to ensure fair trading and no unjustified barriers to trade.[European Commission, “Importer’s and exporter’s checklist “10 THINGS TO DO” (2021) MLR 1, 4.] Daisy may consider filing a formal protest with the European Commission to draw attention to what she perceives as an unfair tax regime in the Netherlands. Furthermore, she might take up internal court proceedings in the Netherlands, invoking EU law and those contained in the EU-UK trade agreement (TCA). Daisy has the opportunity to take her rights and stand up for the settling of the discrimination that her Caspian Sea Mysteries have received in the Dutch market if she seeks the path of these routes. Among the benefits of the EU-UK trade and cooperation agreement is the specific facilitation arrangement for goods such as organics. This means Daisy should enjoy such benefits and not be discriminated against in delivering her goods as they are not found in the Netherlands. Additionally, she is supposed to enjoy zero tariffs since her foods are meeting the rules of origin as the nation is part of the trade agreement. [European Commission, “Brexit: End of Transition Period FAQS On Tax and C...