Abstract: - In order to ensure the effective functioning of the EU internal market, in particular the exercise of its

freedoms, it is necessary to harmonize indirect taxes at the level of European Union law. This harmonization

also covers excise duty. At the same time, when analyzing the harmonization of excise duty in the EU Member

States, certain gradually emerging differences can be noticed at the level of national legislation. As a

consequence, it should be considered whether they are the beginning of deharmonization processes and

strengthening the tax sovereignty of EU Member States, which may become a major challenge for the tax law

of the European Union overtime. The article discusses the idea of indirect tax harmonization at the European

Union level, indicates the specificity of the harmonization of excise duty, presents contemporary

deharmonization tendencies of excise duty in European Union law, as well as presents contemporary challenges

related to the issue of excise duty in European Union law. The analysis of this issue was based on the following

economic and legal turnover in the European Union.

The aim of the article is to analyze the harmonization and deharmonization trends in excise duty from the

perspective of the European Union law, as well as to identify challenges for the EU legislation in this area.

Key-Words: - challenges of EU tax law, deharmonization, European Union tax law, excise duty, harmonization

1 Introduction This is due to the differences of a socio-economic

legislative activity of particular member states,

resulting from political, social, economic and

environmental conditions, leads nowadays to

deharmonization tendencies, which has not been

analyzed in the literature on this subject so far. The

differences in excise duty regulations in individual

EU member states may become so significant that it

becomes impossible to claim its harmonization.

Thus, the main contribution of the article is, first, to

draw attention to and analyze the deharmoinization

and the European Union member states, especially

in the context of works on new regulations and

amendments to the current legislation in the area of

indirect taxes, keeping in mind the basic goal of

harmonization and avoidance of deharmonization

tendencies. Moreover, the de-harmonization

tendencies negatively affect the economic turnover

in the European Union and, consequently, the

activity of public and legal economic entities.

2 Research Methodology

In conducting the analysis in the field of

harmonization and deharmonization of excise duty

in the European Union, research methods

characteristic of legal sciences were used, aimed at

theoretical, axiological As a result, the following

methods were applied: theoretical-legal, formal-

dogmatic, critical writing and comparative-legal.

applied to analyze legal institutions in the field of

logic through the identification of designations of

Member States. It takes the form of the

harmonization of indirect taxes and results from the

establishment of the common internal market of the

European Union, as provided for in Art. 3 sec. 3 of

the Treaty on the European Union [5, hereinafter:

TEU]. In order to ensure the efficient functioning of

the common market, it is necessary to establish a

common taxation [1, p. 91] to a certain extent. By

the same token, harmonization, and thus

approximation of the legislation with regard to

the EU internal market.

including excise duty, in the European Union law,

apart from Art. 3 sec. 3 TEU is also Art. 113 of the

Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

which provides that: „The Council shall, acting

unanimously in accordance with a special legislative

procedure and after consulting the European

Parliament and the Economic and Social

Committee, adopt provisions for the harmonization

harmonization of indirect taxes also results from the

necessity to implement the freedoms of the EU

internal market, i.e. the free movement of goods

(Articles 28-37 TFEU), services (Articles 56-62

tax levied by the state on certain food products,

consumer goods and services, included in their

price” [18]. For centuries, various products were

taxed with excise duties, including beer, honey,

mineral oils, matches, yeast, sugar or paper tissue.

There is no doubt, however, that it was membership

in the European Union that contributed to the

harmonization of procedures and, in part, the subject

of taxation of individual products with excise duty.

It should be said that, unlike tax on goods and

consumption chain, and, consequently, the burden

of the above tax is borne by the consumer.

economic freedoms, the European Union

contributed to the development of the concept of

harmonization, i.e. approximation of the legal orders

of different countries. However, bearing in mind the

sovereignty and independence of each Member

State, the European Union was obliged to create

such legal and tax solutions that, on the one hand,

origin. However, it was necessary to introduce

specific legal institutions that would contribute to

the harmonization of the tax. This was mainly

related to the abolition of border controls between

system makes it possible to exchange information

between European Union member states, which in

turn results in easier detection of tax fraud. In

particular, transactions involving goods that are

exempt from indirect taxation should be borne in

mind, as fraud in this area can be widespread. The

harmonization of indirect taxes is thus intended to

provide a certain stability and sustainability while

eliminating differences in trade by introducing

common rules for the taxation of selected taxes.

throughout the Community, because the European

Union is not an international organization that takes

away the sovereignty of its countries. These

countries continue to be independent. The desire to

replace harmonization with the unification of the

law in the European Union would have to entail a

change in its legal character, which the Member

States have not agreed to so far. It can therefore be

concluded that the sovereignty of the states,

especially in such an important aspect as financial

of products defined by the Combined Nomenclature

and the determination of tax rates at the minimum

level, confirms the fact that it is not possible to

create a Community law that would be unified at the

Republic of Poland, the subject of taxation with

excise duty are passenger cars, in Poland and Italy,

lubricating oils [22], in Germany, coffee, also

contained in other products, while in France or

Hungary, products with a high sugar content became

subject to excise duty. Considering Polish

regulations on excise taxation of lubricating oils

(CN 2710 and 3403), it should be noted that

currently, entities carry out many transactions

related to these products. Intra-Community

transactions with such products, may be guided by

the conviction that excise duty has been harmonized

and, consequently, each European Union state has

similar legal regulations in this respect. This may in

fact result in the failure to comply with excise duty

obligations and the non-payment of tax. It is worth

noting that lubricating oils constitute a significant

part of energy products and are not merely a

marginal excise product. Despite the fact that

Poland enjoys the freedom to tax other products,

a tax on goods and services that is not subject to

excise duty. Also, the sugar tax applicable in Poland

in 2021 is nothing else than a tax that, from the

perspective of the features and tasks to be fulfilled,

within the scope of the result to be achieved. The

procedures and measures to achieve this are left to

the discretion of individual Member States. The

reason why the European Union acts in the field of

harmonization and not unification, i.e. creating

uniform regulations for all countries, is precisely the

sovereignty of individual states. Art. 113 of the

TFEU states that the activity of the EU authorities in

the field of the harmonization of regulations relating

to indirect taxation is their indispensability for the

circumvented, and efforts to create a common

market should be achieved by methods that

primarily take into account the sovereignty of the

Member States.

duty also on other items is used nowadays on a

larger scale. The dynamically developing economy

of the EU Member States creates new challenges for

the legislators that must be met. This situation

creates a state of deharmonization, which is a

2008/118/EC.

In perspective, the challenge for the EU legislator

sovereignty and not to be bound by the EU law in

this respect. It can be gradually seen in the trend of

differentiating individual regulations in the EU

countries within the freedom granted to the Member

States to tax other products with excise duty. A

possible departure from harmonization in the future

may lead to significant difficulties in the effective

internal market and the existence of its freedoms.

The economy may be affected by economic,

political and social crises, which in turn may lead to

changes in the area of the economic integration.

This is because during any recessions caused by

various factors, there may be a situation where the

legislators of individual EU states will introduce

regulations with deharamonizing tendencies. During

crises, member states seek to introduce solutions

that will be best for that particular state at that

harmonizing certain areas, in this context a certain

part of the tax law. In fact, crises always cause a

tendency to return to state economies and reduce the

amount of the EU regulations. As a consequence,

the economic situation of the EU and its individual

Member States may bring about the emergence of

not only harmonization tendencies, but also

deharmonization trends, also in the field of excise

duty.

a significant impact on the ecosystem, especially

when misused. The European Union thus aims to

reduce harmful emissions so that the use of energy

products is kept to a minimum. In literature, excise

[10] Groeben-Andel H., Kommentarzum EWG-

[11] Behrens P., Das Wirtschaftsrecht des

[12] Laule G., Die Harmonisierung des

[15] Selling H-J., Steuerharmonisierung im

[20] Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 of 23