3 Amendments of Alfred SANT related to 2018/0073(CNS)
Amendment 51 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) Given the problem of taxing the digital economy is of a global nature, the ideal approach would be to find a multilateral, international solution to it. The Commission is actively engaged in the international debate for that reason. Work at the OECD is currently ongoing. However, progress at international level is challenging. Hence, action is being taken to adapt the corporate tax rules at Union level27 and to encourage agreements to be reached with non-Union jurisdictions28 , so that the corporate tax framework can be made to fit the new digital business models. There is a common interest in maintaining a coherent yet relevant set of international rules. Therefore, coherence with the BEPS Inclusive Framework should be ensured, given the absence of consensus on the merits for interim measures. _________________ 27 Proposal for a Council Directive laying down rules relating to the corporate taxation of a significant digital presence (COM(2018) 147 final). 28 Commission Recommendation relating to the corporate taxation of a significant digital presence (C(2018) 1650 final).
Amendment 78 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) Services consisting in the placing on a digital interface of a client's advertising targeted at users of that interface should not be defined by reference to who owns the digital interface through which the advertising appears on a user's device, but rather by reference to the entity responsible for enabling the advertising to appear on that interface. This is because the value for a business placing a client's advertising on a digital interface lies with user traffic and the user data which is typically taken into account for the purposes of the placement, regardless of whether the interface belongs to the business itself or to a third party who is renting out the digital space where the advertisement will appear. However, it should be clarified that in cases where the supplier of the advertising service and the owner of the digital interface are different entities, the latter should not be considered to have provided a taxable service for DST purposes. This is in order to avoid possible cascading effects and double taxation. Moreover, the DST as proposed will require companies to keep significant volume of user data to be able to commute tax in each Member State, an approach that could not be in compliance with data protection safeguards.
Amendment 127 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 41
Recital 41
(41) The objectives of this Directive aim at protecting the integrity of the Single Market, ensuring its proper functioning and avoiding distortion of competition. Should Member States consider the interim measure, the scope shall be kept targeted in order to mitigate the impact on investment, innovations and growth in the European Digital Single Market. Since those objectives, by their very nature, cannot be sufficiently achieved by Member States but can rather 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 of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Directive does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve those objectives,