Customs value and final price – CJEU position: transaction value is determinative

In case C-782/23 (Tauritus), the Court of Justice of the European Union ruled that the customs value of imported goods should be determined primarily using the transaction value method, even if only a provisional price is known at the time of customs declaration. It is crucial that the mechanism for determining the final price is clearly defined in the contract and based on objective criteria, such as market quotations or exchange rates.

This ruling has significant practical implications – it confirms the primacy of transaction value over substitute methods and indicates that importers should, as a rule, use the simplified procedure and supplementary declarations. As a result, businesses gained greater predictability in customs and VAT settlements, but at the same time, there was a need to carefully document and update declarations in order to reduce the risk of additional assessments and possible interest charges.

---

Factual Background

The case concerned the Lithuanian company Tauritus, which imported fuels under contracts providing for the use of provisional prices. These prices were then adjusted on the basis of objective factors such as average market prices and exchange rates during the period in question. The final price could be either higher or lower than the initial price.

In its customs declarations, the company declared a value corresponding to the provisional prices, using the fallback method. After receiving the final invoices, Tauritus usually requested an adjustment of the customs value. However, in some cases, no adjustment was made, even though the invoices indicated higher final prices.

The Lithuanian customs administration, conducting an inspection after the release of the goods, decided that the transaction value method was the appropriate method and took the value from the final invoices as a basis. As a result, it demanded additional import VAT payments with interest calculated from the date of the original customs declaration.

The case went to court, and during the national proceedings, doubts arose as to the correct interpretation of the provisions of the EU Customs Code. The Supreme Administrative Court of Lithuania therefore referred questions for a preliminary ruling to the CJEU.

Preliminary questions

The Supreme Administrative Court of Lithuania, in examining the case, referred two questions to the Court concerning the interpretation of the EU Customs Code:

1. Can the transaction value method (Article 70 of the UCC) be applied in a situation where, at the time of acceptance of the customs declaration, only the provisional price is known and the final price is determined only later, on the basis of objective and independent factors specified in the contract?

2. Is the importer required to submit a request for correction of the customs declaration (Article 173(3) of the UCC) if the final price of the goods was determined only after they were released for free circulation?

The purpose of the questions was to determine the method to be used to determine the customs value in the case of provisional prices and the procedural obligations incumbent on the importer when the final price is determined after the declaration has been lodged.

Provisions of the Customs Code – legal basis

Article 70
Method of customs valuation based on the transaction value

1. The primary basis for the customs value of goods shall be the transaction value, that is the price actually paid or payable for the goods when sold for export to the customs territory of the Union, adjusted, where necessary.
2. The price actually paid or payable shall be the total payment made or to be made by the buyer to the seller or by the buyer to a third party for the benefit of the seller for the imported goods and include all payments made or to be made as a condition of sale of the imported goods.
3. The transaction value shall apply provided that all of the following conditions are fulfilled:
1. there are no restrictions as to the disposal or use of the goods by the buyer, other than any of the following:
   • restrictions imposed or required by a law or by the public authorities in the Union;
   • limitations of the geographical area in which the goods may be resold;
   • restrictions which do not substantially affect the customs value of the goods;
2. the sale or price is not subject to some condition or consideration for which a value cannot be determined with respect to the goods being valued;
3. no part of the proceeds of any subsequent resale, disposal or use of the goods by the buyer will accrue directly or indirectly to the seller, unless an appropriate adjustment can be made;
4. the buyer and seller are not related or the relationship did not influence the price.

Article 74
Secondary methods of customs valuation

1. Where the customs value of goods cannot be determined under Article 70, it shall be determined by proceeding sequentially from points (a) to (d) of paragraph 2, until the first point under which the customs value of goods can be determined.
2. The customs value, pursuant to paragraph 1, shall be:
1. the transaction value of identical goods sold for export to the customs territory of the Union and exported at or about the same time as the goods being valued;
2. the transaction value of similar goods sold for export to the customs territory of the Union and exported at or about the same time as the goods being valued;
3. the value based on the unit price at which the imported goods, or identical or similar imported goods, are sold within the customs territory of the Union in the greatest aggregate quantity to persons not related to the sellers; or
4. the computed value, consisting of the sum of:
   • the cost or value of materials and fabrication or other processing employed in producing the imported goods;
   • an amount for profit and general expenses equal to that usually reflected in sales of goods of the same class or kind as the goods being valued which are made by producers in the country of export for export to the Union;
   • the cost or value of the elements referred to in point (e) of Article 71(1).
3. Where the customs value cannot be determined under paragraph 1, it shall be determined on the basis of data available in the customs territory of the Union, using reasonable means consistent with the principles and general provisions of all of the following:
1. the agreement on implementation of Article VII of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade;
2. Article VII of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade;
3. this Chapter.

Article 166
Simplified declaration

1. The customs authorities may accept that a person has goods placed under a customs procedure on the basis of a simplified declaration which may omit certain of the particulars referred to in Article 162 or the supporting documents referred to in Article 163.
2. The regular use of a simplified declaration referred to in paragraph 1 shall be subject to an authorisation from the customs authorities.

Article 167
Supplementary declaration

1. In the case of a simplified declaration pursuant to Article 166 or of an entry in the declarant’s records pursuant to Article 182, the declarant shall lodge a supplementary declaration containing the particulars necessary for the customs procedure concerned at the competent customs office within a specific time-limit.
2. The obligation to lodge a supplementary declaration shall be waived in the following cases:
1. where the goods are placed under a customs warehousing procedure;
2. in other specific cases.
3. The customs authorities may waive the requirement to lodge a supplementary declaration where the following conditions apply:
1. the simplified declaration concerns goods the value and quantity of which is below the statistical threshold;
2. the simplified declaration already contains all the information needed for the customs procedure concerned; and
3. the simplified declaration is not made by entry in the declarant’s records.
4. The simplified declaration referred to in Article 166 or the entry in the declarant’s records referred to in Article 182, and the supplementary declaration shall be deemed to constitute a single, indivisible instrument taking effect, respectively, on the date on which the simplified declaration is accepted in accordance with Article 172 and on the date on which the goods are entered in the declarant’s records.
5. The place where the supplementary declaration is to be lodged shall be deemed, for the purposes of Article 87, to be the place where the customs declaration has been lodged.

---

Key points of the CJEU judgment

The Court of Justice recalled that the basic method for determining customs value is the transaction value method under Article 70 of the UCC, and other methods provided for in the Code are only auxiliary in nature. The absence of a final price on the date of acceptance of the declaration is not sufficient to exclude the application of this method, provided that the final price can be determined on the basis of objective criteria independent of the parties to the transaction.

Key elements of the judgment:

• Objective criteria as a basis – if the mechanism for determining the final price is based on predetermined indicators independent of the parties (e.g. fuel prices, exchange rates), the customs value should be determined on the basis of the price payable, even if it has not yet been paid at the time of customs declaration.
• The importer does not have the freedom to choose the method – Articles 70–74 of the UCC establish a clear hierarchy of methods for determining customs value. Substitute methods may only be used when it is not possible to determine the customs value on the basis of the transaction method.
• Simplified procedure as the appropriate tool – in the case of provisional prices, the importer should use a simplified declaration and then submit a supplementary declaration after receiving the final invoice to ensure compliance with the requirement of accuracy and completeness of declarations.

---

The CJEU judgment in Case C-782/23 (Tauritus) confirms that the transaction value method remains the basic principle for determining customs value, even in the case of provisional prices. The Court pointed out that the decisive factor is the existence of a contractual mechanism allowing for an objective determination of the final price, independent of the will of the parties.

At the same time, it was emphasised that in such situations, importers should use the simplified declaration procedure and then complete their declarations after receiving the final invoice. Failure to make such an adjustment may lead to an additional customs value assessment and, in accordance with national law, the calculation of interest.

The ruling is of practical importance for businesses operating in sectors where prices are determined on the basis of variable market indicators and sets a standard of conduct that will also be referred to by customs authorities in EU Member States.

---

Legal basis:

• Regulation (EU) No 952/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 October 2013 laying down the Union Customs Code (recast)
• Judgment of the Court of Justice of 15 May 2025 in Case C-782/23 [Tauritus]

---

If you have any further questions or require additional information, please contact your business relationship person or use the enquiry form on the HLB Poland website.

Contact us »

***