On 4 March, the General Court of the European Union (GCEU) published the judgment of the Case T-691/24, ruling on preliminary rulings concerning the interpretation of the Combined Nomenclature and in the field of excise duties (wine and fermented beverages).

The GCEU examines the tariff classification of certain alcoholic beverages produced partly from fermented apple juice and whether these can be classified as cider, despite the fact that a significant proportion of their alcohol content derives from the fermentation of other plants.

The dispute pitted Heineken România SA against the National Agency for Fiscal Administration (ANAF) and the General Directorate for the Administration of Large Taxpayers in Romania. Heineken had purchased and imported into Romania ‘Strongbow’-style alcoholic beverages, packaged in cans and bottles, which it subsequently marketed on the Romanian market. The dispute arose when the Romanian authorities questioned the tariff classification used by the company.

The General Court of the European Union (TGUE) had to determine whether these beverages, consisting of fermented concentrated apple juice, water, glucose-fructose syrup, malic acid, carbon dioxide, potassium metabisulphite and flavourings, could be classified as ‘cider and perry’ under subheadings 2206 00 31, 2206 00 51 or 2206 00 81, despite the fact that between 48% and 53% of the alcohol present in the product derived from plants other than apples, or whether, on the contrary, they should be reclassified under subheadings 2206 00 39 or 2206 00 59, relating to ‘other fermented beverages’. In other words, the main issue was to clarify whether the quantity of alcohol not derived from the fermentation of apples prevented the drink from being classified as cider, even though it possessed identical characteristics.

This issue was particularly relevant as Heineken România had classified the beverages under subheading 2206 00 51, for which the excise duty rate in Romania was zero. However, the Romanian authorities considered that the products should be reclassified under subheadings 2206 00 39 or 2206 00 59, due to the high percentage of alcohol derived from the fermentation of other plants. These subheadings were subject to excise duties of €41.88/hl and €9.31/hl respectively in 2015, the year in which the inspection began.

The TGUE concludes that the fact that the drink contains a considerable proportion of alcohol derived from other plants is not sufficient to exclude its classification as cider, as the regulations do not stipulate any minimum percentage of alcohol derived from the fermentation of apples for it to be classified as cider.

For the correct classification, the TGUE applies general interpretative rule 3(b) of the Harmonised System, focusing on the essential character of the product.  Thus, it is understood that the high percentage of alcohol derived from other plants did not alter the nature of the cider, as it continued to retain its organoleptic characteristics and was intended to be consumed as cider. Consequently, the classification made by Heineken România S.A. under the subheading ‘cider and perry’ was correct.

How can we assist you?

Salinas & Partners, with over 30 years’ experience in customs and international trade matters, are at your disposal to assist you with the correct tariff classification of your products and the assessment of associated tax risks, as well as with the review and challenge of tax assessments that may arise from incorrect classification criteria.