In this ruling, the Court of Cassation clarified the liability of a logistics provider for import VAT where customs formalities are carried out by an intermediary. A company had instructed a logistics provider to handle its customs clearance under a so-called “express” mandate. Following irregularities in the import declarations, French Customs held the provider liable for the evaded duties and unpaid import VAT. The provider challenged this assessment, arguing that it had acted on behalf of its client and could not therefore be regarded as the person liable for the tax.
The Court rejected that argument. It reaffirmed that customs representation cannot be assumed and must be based on a formal, express mandate whose existence and scope are clearly established. The central question was whether an informal “express” mandate could be sufficient to establish customs representation and the Court’s answer leaves no room for doubt. Without a properly formalised mandate, the provider is deemed to have acted in its own name. Since liability for import VAT follows that of the declarant, the provider cannot claim the status of mere intermediary and remains personally liable for the tax, regardless of the economic reality of the arrangement. The ruling confirms a strict, formalistic approach to customs representation, where legal certainty and documentary evidence take precedence over the underlying commercial reality.
