Maintenance and Renewal of Equipments

Reserves authorized related to long term agreements providing for the maintenance and renewal of equipments
(Supreme Court dated June 21, 1995, no 144450)

Comments:

Three remarks could be made after this significant decision taken by the Supreme Court:

1. Understanding of the case law of the State Council:

The first question which could be raised is linked to the ability of the Administrative Courts of Appeal to deal with the subtle case law of the Supreme Court. Indeed, the Administrative Court of Appeal of Nantes did not seem to understand what had been understood by most of the well-informed tax men.

In 1983, the Supreme Court to which a question similar to that raised in the present case has been submitted, made a mistake. It made a confusion (decision dated June 22, 1983, no 21.662) between the reserve for charges and the reserve for loss, and thus authorized a company, which was concluding with its clients long term agreements (20 years) for the supply of heat