. In cases where the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) recognizes a violation of the right to property enshrined in article 1 of Protocol 1 to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the most impressive amounts of just satisfaction are awarded. In this context, violations of this right in the fiscal domain entail significant expenditures from the State budget for the purpose of providing just satisfaction to the applicant’s victims and, besides, create even more serious financial risks for the State in the future.

The article examines the historical and theoretical foundations of the emergence and development of the ECHR case law regarding interference with the right to property based on fiscal legislation and through its implementation measures, and also cases when violation of this right is recognized in relation to Ukraine, as well as the possibility of establishing new violations referred to this category. The author concludes that the violations established by the ECHR mainly pertain to the eclectic application of legislation provisions by fiscal authorities. Moreover, the ECHR established the presence of violations also in cases where the courts sided with fiscal authorities, and where they supported taxpayers but the authorities proceeded with their practice in respect of the applicants. Therefore, the most efficient general measures aimed at preventing violations of this type in the future should involve improvement of tax legislation quality, enhancement of the knowledge of law and legal awareness of fiscal authority employees and interaction between them and the courts. Furthermore, a group of cases concerning unjustified confiscation of undeclared currency during border crossings may potentially lead to significant expenditures from the State budget for the purpose of just satisfaction payments and requires urgent changes to article 472 of the Customs Code of Ukraine.

Bibliography

Edited books

1. Perrou K, ‘Fundamental rights in EU tax law’ in Peeters M and Eliantonio M (ed), Research Handbook on EU Environmental Law (Edward Elgar Publishing 2020) (in English).

Journal articles

2. Baker P, ‘Some Recent Decisions of the European Court of Human Rights on Tax Matters (and Related Decisions of the European Court of Justice)’ European Taxation (August 2016) 346–7 (in English).

3. Baker P, ‘Some recent decisions of the European Court of Human Rights’ [2009] 49 (12) European Taxation 597 (in English).

4. Baker P, ‘Taxation and Human rights’ [2001] I (1) GITC Review 5 (in English). 5. Baker P, ‘Taxation and the European Convention on Human Rights’ (2000) 4 Brittish Tax Review 30 (in English).

6. Burgstaller Markus and Zarowna Agnieszka, ‘The growing importance of investment arbitration in relation to tax measures in the energy and natural resources sector’ [2018] 4 (1) Turkish Commercial Law Review 93–4 (in English).

7. Pauwels M, ‘Retroactive Tax Legislation in View of Article 1 First Protocol ECHR’ (2013) 6 EC Tax Review 280 (in English).

Websites

8. Krzemińska Iwona, ‘Human rights’ expansion into the tax field – European perspective’ 4thyear, WPIA WU <http://en.zpc.wpia.uw.edu.pl/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/KrzeminskaHuman-rights-expansion-into-the-tax-field-European-perspective.doc> (accessed: 20.04.2020) (in English).