BETA

16 Amendments of Daniel BUDA related to 2016/0337(CNS)

Amendment 27 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 1
(1) Companies which seek to do business across frontiers within the Union encounter serious obstacles and market distortions owing to the existence and interaction of 28 disparate corporate tax systems. Furthermore, tax planning structures have become ever-more sophisticated over time, as they develop across various jurisdictions and effectively take advantage of the technicalities of a tax system or of mismatches between two or more tax systems for the purpose of reducing the tax liability of companies. Although those situations highlight shortcomings that are completely different in nature, they both create obstacles which impede the proper functioning of the internal market. AWithin a more globalised, mobile and digital economic framework, action to rectify those problems should therefore address both types of market deficiencies through the alignment of company tax systems in the Union and the creation of a fairer and more coherent tax environment in which companies can operate.
2017/05/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 31 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4
(4) Considering the need to act swiftly in order to ensure a proper functioning of the internal market by making it, on the one hand, friendlier to trade and investment and, on the other hand, more resilient to tax avoidance schemes, it is necessary to divideadopt a stage-by-stage approach to the ambitious CCCTB initiative before dividing it into two separate proposals. At a first stage, rules on a common corporate tax base should be enact, that is to say rules on the calculation of the tax base for companies, should be enacted, including provisions on measures to combat tax avoidance and on the international dimension of the tax system proposed, before addressing, at a second stage, the issue of consolidation.
2017/05/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 32 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4 a (new)
(4a) In this way, the CCCTB is in line with Commission efforts to achieve fairer and more effective taxation, being largely complementary to EU company law; it is also is broadly in line with projects such as the Capital Markets Union and efforts to ensure tax transparency, promote the exchange of information and combat money laundering.
2017/05/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 34 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
(5) Many aggressive tax planning structures tend to feature in a cross-border context, which implies that the participating groups of companies possess a minimum of resources. On this premise, for reasons of proportionality, the rules on a common base should be mandatory only for companies which belong to a group of a substantial size, while exempting micro- enterprises and SMEs. For that purpose, a size- related threshold should be fixed on the basis of the total consolidated revenue of a group which files consolidated financial statements. In addition, to ensure coherence between the two steps of the CCCTB initiative, the rules on a common base should be mandatory for companies which would be considered as a group should the full initiative materialise. In order to better serve the aim of facilitating trade and investment in the internal market, the rules on a common corporate tax base should also be available, as an option, to companies which do not meet those criteria.
2017/05/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 35 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 6
(6) It is necessary to define the concept of a permanent establishment situated in the Union and belonging to a taxpayer who is resident for tax purposes within the Union. The aim would be to ensure that all concerned taxpayers share a common understanding and to exclude the possibility of a mismatch due to divergent definitions. On the contrary, it should not be seen as essential to have a common definition of permanent establishments situated in a third country, or in the Union but belonging to a taxpayer who is resident for tax purposes in a third country. This dimension should better be left to bilateral tax treaties and national law due to its complicated interaction with international agreements.
2017/05/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 37 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 6 a (new)
(6a) Given the digital change in the business environment, it is necessary to define and implement the concept of a ‘digital business establishment’. Companies that generate profits in a Member State without having a physical establishment there should be treated in the same way as companies that do have a physical establishment in that Member State. Therefore, the CCCTB should also apply to digital corporations.
2017/05/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 40 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 14
(14) To avoid the base erosion of higher tax jurisdictions through shifting profits via inflated transfer prices towards lower tax countries, transactions between a taxpayer and its associated enterprise(s) should be subject to pricing adjustments in line with the 'arm's length' principle, which is a generally applied criterion. In this way, loopholes between national tax systems, in particular transfer pricing, which accounts for around 70% of all profit shifting in the EU, could be eliminated and a major step taken towards a fair, efficient and transparent tax system.
2017/05/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 41 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 21
(21) Since the objectives of this Directive, namely to improve the functioning of the internal market through countering practices of international tax avoidance and to facilitate businesses in expanding across borders within the Union, cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States acting individually and in a disparate fashion because coordinated action is necessary to obtain these objectives, but can rather, by reason of the fact that the Directive targets inefficiencies of the internal market that originate in the interaction between disparate national tax rules which impact on the internal market and discourage cross-border activity, be better achieved at Union level, the Union may adopt measures, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union. In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Directive does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve those objectives, especially considering that its mandatory scope is limited to groups beyond a certain size. The envisaged measures do not go further than harmonising the corporate tax base, which is a prerequisite for curbing identified obstacles that distort the internal market. Furthermore, this stage- by-stage approach entitles Member States to determine their desired amount of tax revenues in order to meet their budgetary policy targets. At the same time, it does not affect Member States' right to set their own profits tax rate.
2017/05/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 42 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1
1. This Directive establishes a system of a common base for the taxation of certain companies and lays down rules for the calculation of that base, including certain provisions regarding measures to prevent tax avoidance and on the international dimension of the proposed tax system.
2017/05/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 44 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The rules of this Directive shall apply to a company that is established under the laws of a Member State, including its permanent establishments in other Member States and digital business establishments, where the company meets all of the following conditions:
2017/05/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 49 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
This Directive shall also apply to a company that is established under the laws of a third country in respect of its permanent establishments situated in one or more Member State, and with regard to income earned in a Member State, where the company meets the conditions laid down in points (b) to (d) of paragraph 1.
2017/05/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 52 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point 33 a (new)
(33a) ‘digital business establishment’ means an establishment specifically directed towards consumers and businesses in a Member State and, to that end, account shall be taken of whether the activity is being carried out in the top level domain of the Member State or of the Union and whether mobile applications are being distributed through part of a distribution centre specifically intended for that purpose in the Member State concerned.
2017/05/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 54 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point f a (new)
(fa) a digital business establishment.
2017/05/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 57 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point j a (new)
(ja) expenses to beneficiaries situated in countries listed on the European list of non-cooperative tax jurisdictions (tax havens)1a; __________________ 1a See the European list of non- cooperative tax jurisdictions currently being developed by the Council: http://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/docu ment/ST-14166-2016-INIT/en/pdf
2017/05/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 58 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 59 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Financial undertakings shall not be treated as controlled foreign companies under paragraph 1 where not more than one third of the income accruing to the entity or permanent or digital business establishment from categories (a) to (f) of paragraph 2 comes from transactions with the taxpayer or its associated enterprises.
2017/05/15
Committee: JURI
Amendment 59 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 69 – paragraph 1
The Commission shall, five years after the entry into force of this Directive, review its application and report to the Council and the European Parliament on the operation of this Directive.
2017/05/15
Committee: JURI