AG: design costs and buying commissions join value via supplies

An Advocate General proposes that buyer-paid template design costs and buying commissions on upstream inputs both enter customs value through the value of the incorporated supplies.EuropaEuropaEuropa The German Bundesfinanzhof asked the General Court how to value porcelain mugs imported in gift boxes with cork coasters, all bearing the buyer-designed imageEuropaEuropa.EuropaEuropa A fourth question asks what classification of the goods as a retail set means for valuationEuropa; the proposal says it does not make the set a unitEuropa, while shaping how the supplies test is applied.

B had the image designed in Germany at its costEuropa and supplied it free electronically as print templatesEuropaEuropa to decal, coaster and box makers in Hong Kong and TaiwanEuropa, who passed the resulting decals, boxes and coasters to the mug makers in ChinaEuropa; the decals were applied to the mugsEuropa. A Hong Kong agent invoiced buying commissions on the decals and coasters.Europa B declared neither the licence payments nor the commissions.Europa Customs post-recovered duties and anti-dumping duties for January 2016 to July 2018 imports.Europa The finance court partly sided with B, annulling recovery for the coasters' design costs and related commissionsEuropaEuropa. The first of four questions, on the gift-box templates, fell awayEuropaEuropa after the Court's 26 March 2026 G GmbH judgmentEuropa on label templates for food cansEuropaEuropa.

On the second question, the Advocate General proposes that design costs for print templates used to make materials incorporated in the imports, here the decals applied to the mugsEuropa, are included in the value of those incorporated supplies under Article 71(1)(b)(i) of the Union Customs CodeEuropa, and Article 32(1)(b)(i) of the Community Customs Code for the older importsEuropa. The decals' status as incorporated supplies is undisputedEuropa; the point is whether their value also carries the design costs. Each category in Article 71(1)(b) has its own scope, so the container analysis in G GmbH does not decide this.

On the third question, he proposes that buying commissions paid for upstream incorporated supplies, rather than for the goods as such, are included in the value of those supplies under the same provisionEuropa. The referring court's reasoning is that valuation of supplies is governed by Article 71(1)(b)(i), and commissions paid to the agent in connection with buying the supplies form part of the supplies' purchase price. That contrasts with the exclusion of buying commissions in Article 72(e), which the Advocate General confines to commissions on the goods to be imported.

On the fourth question, he proposes that classifying imports as a set under General Rule 3(b) for interpreting the Combined Nomenclature does not make the set a unit for customs valuation under Article 32 of the Community Customs Code and Article 71 of the Union CodeEuropa; valuation follows a logic similar to tariff classification, starting from the essential-character item, and the set classification should lead the court to examine whether the coasters are suppliesEuropa. Whether the coasters are incorporated supplies must be tested on its ownEuropa: incorporated means intimately united with the goods, inseparable without altering their characteristicsEuropa. With the mug as the set's essential articleEuropa, the referring court must determine whether the coasters were used for the production and sale for export of the mugs and fall under Article 71(1)(b)(i)Europa.

The proposal is not a judgment.Europa The General Court must still ruleEuropa, and the referring court must apply that test to the coasters.

Legal basis is Articles 32 to 33 of Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 and Articles 70 to 72 of Regulation (EU) No 952/2013 with General Rule 3(b) of the Combined Nomenclature, on a reference under Article 267 TFEU; see Court judgment of 26 March 2026, G GmbH, C-307/23.