BETA

35 Amendments of Matt CARTHY related to 2015/2010(INL)

Amendment 2 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
A. whereas a consortium of journalists, the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ), on tax rulings and other harmful practices in Luxembourg (LuxLeaks) revealed in November 2014 that nearly 340 multinational companies secured secret deals from Luxembourg that allowed many of them to slash their global tax bills, while creating little or no economic activity within Luxembourg; whereas further revelations such as the second batch of documents released by the ICIJ on 9 December 2014 on tax deals brokered by Ernst & Young, Deloitte, KPMG along with Luxembourg-based tax and law firms, have highlighted that measures which reduce multinational companies' overall tax liabilities and reduce overall tax revenue by artificially shifting profits across borders are systemic and are endemic to the European Union and beyond;
2015/10/13
Committee: ECON
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
B. whereas the revelations showed that tax advisors have helped multinational companies to obtain at least 548 tax rulings in Luxembourg between 2002 and 2010; whereas those secret deals feature complex financial structures designed to create substantial tax reductions; whereas the tax rulings provide written assurance that multinational companies’ tax-saving plans would be viewed favourably by Luxembourg authorities; whereas such revelations highlight the need for measures to be implemented in order to ensure a functional split between tax advisory and auditing services for large auditing firms in order to firmly exclude conflicts of interest;
2015/10/13
Committee: ECON
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Ca. Stresses that tax avoidance by some MNCs can result in close-to-zero effective tax rates for the profits generated in European jurisdictions, highlighting the fact that such MNCs, while benefiting from various public goods and services where they operate, do not pay their fair share, thereby contributing to national tax base erosion; highlighting with concern that close-to-zero effective tax rates for the profits generated by some MNCs, do not positively impact upon domestic or real economies in the manner other sectors can;
2015/10/13
Committee: ECON
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
D. whereas in many cases Luxembourg subsidiaries handling hundreds of millions of euros in business maintain little presence and conduct little economic activity in Luxembourg, with some addresses being home to more than 1,600 companies; whereas much of this economic activity does not positively impact upon domestic or real economies in the manner other sectors can;
2015/10/13
Committee: ECON
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Ea. whereas the practice of rulings developed, in the framework of a closer and more cooperative relationship between tax administrations and taxpayers, as a tool to tackle the increasing complexity of the tax treatment of certain transactions in an increasingly complex, global and digitalised economy; whereas, as undisclosed and potentially discretionary/negotiated arrangements, rulings could at the same time be used as a means of obtaining derogations and more favourable tax treatments; whereas this seems to particularly be an issue – although not exclusively – with rulings related to pricing of intra-company transfers (so-called Advance Pricing Agreements);
2015/10/13
Committee: ECON
Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
F. whereas corporate income tax revenue for the 28 Member States of the Union amounted to an average of 2,6% of GDP in 20121 ; notes further with concern, that growth rates in some Member States are masked by the impact of foreign multinationals; notes with concern that a substantial proportion of growth in specific Member States, is due to low-tax financial services sectors, which do not positively impact upon domestic or real economies in the manner other sectors can; __________________ 1 http://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/resou rces/documents/taxation/gen_info/economi c_analysis/tax_structures/2014/report.pdf
2015/10/13
Committee: ECON
Amendment 49 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital K
K. whereas multinational companies’ use of aggressive tax planning practices conflicts with the principle of fair competition and corporate responsibility; stresses further, that tax competition in the Union and vis-à-vis third countries is harmful and leads to a race to the bottom in terms of tax rates and regulatory standards and should therefore be replaced by a consistent cooperative framework; this should take place within a clear framework of rules in order to guarantee fair competition between firms in the Union;
2015/10/13
Committee: ECON
Amendment 54 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital N
N. whereas the Union has been a pioneerplayed an important role in the global fight against aggressive tax planning, notably in promoting progress at OECD level on the BEPS project ; whereas the Union should continue to play a pioneering role as the BEPS project developsositive and proactive role as the BEPS project develops; notes with concern the late and still unequal inclusion of developing countries in the OECD BEPS process as well as the rejection of Member States of an intergovernmental body on taxation under the auspice of the UN at the third Financing for Development Conference;
2015/10/13
Committee: ECON
Amendment 60 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital O
O. whereas the power to legislate on corporate taxation is currently vested in themust always remain vested in the Member States; whereas Union law contains no specific requirement with regard to the way in which a Member State must deal with corporate tax, provided that the conditions governing it do not constitute a discrimination, either direct or indirect; stresses that corporate tax as a component of direct taxation is a competence of Member States;
2015/10/13
Committee: ECON
Amendment 66 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital P
P. whereas the lack of coordinated taxabuse of tax legislation and policies in the European Union leads to significant cost and administrative burden for citizens and businesses operating cross- border within the Union, and results in unintended non-taxation or faciliEuropean Union, which facilitates aggressive tax planning; notes that Union action on direct tax beyond administrative cooperation can have consequences for individual Member States' aggressive tax planningbility to shape their domestic tax systems to raise revenue and to support domestic growth;
2015/10/13
Committee: ECON
Amendment 73 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital Q
Q. whereas the revelations of the LuxLeaks scandal and the work carried out by the TAXE Committee clearly show the need for Union legislative measures to improve transparency, coordination and convergence within corporate tax policies in the UnionMember States to improve and strengthen administrative cooperation between themselves as well as between tax administrations; stresses that all policy formulation should respect the tax sovereignty of national governments; stresses that issues of subsidiarity and proportionality must be thoroughly agreed upon and should always ensure the competency and autonomy of each Member States' is upheld;
2015/10/13
Committee: ECON
Amendment 76 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital R
R. whereas the European Commission and the Member States should continue to play a very active role in the international arena in order to work for the establishment of international standards based at least on principles of transparency, exchange of information and abolition of harmful tax measures;
2015/10/13
Committee: ECON
Amendment 82 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital T – introductory part
T. whereas increased transparency in the area of corporate taxation can improve tax collection, make work of tax authorities m and is crucial fore efficient or cnsuring an increase in public trust and confidence in tax systems and governments;
2015/10/13
Committee: ECON
Amendment 95 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital T – point ii
(ii) whereas some companies within the Union have already begun to demonstrate that they are fully tax compliant by applying for and promoting their ownership of a 'Fair Tax Payer' label6 ; whereas firms and citizens alike across the Union would benefit from wider take-up of such labels by companies who are fully tax compliant in order to set a high standard for others to emulate; Underlines that such measures can have a strong deterrent effect and change behaviours, through both the reputational risk for non- compliant firms and the provision of information to the competent authorities, which can then adopt appropriate corrective measures and sanctions; __________________ 6 Such as the Fair Tax Mark: http://www.fairtaxmark.net/.
2015/10/13
Committee: ECON
Amendment 115 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital T – point vi
(vi) whereas progress in the fight against tax avoidance and aggressive tax planning can only be monitored with a harmonised methodology that can be used to estimate the size of the direct and indirect tax gaps in all Member States, and across the European Union as a whole; expresses its support for the intention in the action plan proposed by the Commission on 17 June 2015 to address tax avoidance and promote fair and efficient corporate taxation in the EU; highlights that the European market is not homogeneous and that national markets evolve at different rates and have different needs;
2015/10/13
Committee: ECON
Amendment 121 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital T – point vii
(vii) whereas the current European Union- wide legal framework to protect whistleblowers is insufficient, and there exists significant variation between the ways in which different Member States provide protection for whistleblowers; whereas in the absence of such protection, those employees who hold vital information will understandably be reluctant to come forward and therefore that information will not be made available; whereas since whistleblowers helped to mobilise public attention on the issue of unfair taxation, Member States should consider measures that will protect such activity; whereas it would therefore be appropriate to offer Union-wide protection for whistleblowers who report suspected misconduct, wrongdoing, fraud or illegal activity to national regulators or, in cases of persistently unaddressed illegal activity that could affect the public interest, to the public as a whole; whereas such protection should be coherent with the overall legal system;
2015/10/13
Committee: ECON
Amendment 125 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital T – point vii a (new)
(viia) Calls on National Governments, including Luxembourg, to consider amending their national legislation to provide further protection for whistle- blowers and journalists that act in the public interest;
2015/10/13
Committee: ECON
Amendment 128 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital U – introductory part
U. whereas the power to legislate on corporate taxation ismust remain vested in thewithin Member States, yet; whereas the vast majority of problems linked to aggressive tax planning are of a multinational nature; whereas more coordination of national tax policies therefore represents the only feasible way to address the problems of BEPS and aggressive tax planninginsists that Member States must improve and strengthen administrative cooperation between themselves as well as between tax administrations; in order to ensure fair competition between firms;
2015/10/13
Committee: ECON
Amendment 130 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital U – point i
(i) whereas a mandatory Union-wide Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base (CCCTB) would be a major step towards solving those problems associated with aggressive tax planning within the Union; whereas the ultimate goal should remain a full, mandatory CCCTB with possible exemptions for small- and medium-sized enterprises and companies with no cross-border activity; whereas until a full CCCTB is in place, the Commission is considering temporary measures to counteract profit shifting opportunities; whereas it is necessary to ensure that those measures, including the offsetting of cross-border losses, do not increase the risk of BEPS;deleted
2015/10/13
Committee: ECON
Amendment 145 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital U – point ii
(ii) whereas despite the work of the Code of Conduct Group on harmful corporate taxation, aggressive tax planning measures continue to exist throughout the Union; whereas therefore the functioning of the Group needs to be improved and made more transparent;deleted
2015/10/13
Committee: ECON
Amendment 150 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital U – point ii a (new)
(iia) Calls also on the Commission, in the absence of any generally accepted definition, to conduct further analyses and studies in order to define harmful tax practices, calls on the Commission, in the absence of any generally accepted definition, to conduct further analyses and studies in order to define aggressive tax planning;
2015/10/13
Committee: ECON
Amendment 158 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital U – point vi
(vi) whereas for automatic exchange of information in general and on tax rulings in particular to be effective, a common European Tax Identification Number regime is required;deleted
2015/10/13
Committee: ECON
Amendment 172 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital V – introductory part
V. whereas improved coordination alone will not solve fundamental problems arising from the fact that different rules regarding corporate taxation exist in different Member States; whereas part of the overall response to aggressive tax planning must involve the convergence of a limited number of national tax practices; whereas this can be achieved while still preserving the sovereignty ofbetween Member States is crucial in order to combat aggressive tax planning; notes that Member States must improve and strengthen administrative cooperation between each country and tax administrations; stresses that all policy formulation should respect the principle of subsidiarity; stresses that issues of subsidiarity and proportionality must be thoroughly agreed upon and should always ensure the competency and autonomy of each Member States is upheld in relation to other elements of theireach Member State's corporate tax systems;
2015/10/13
Committee: ECON
Amendment 181 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital V – point ii
(ii) whereas the European Union should have its own up to date list of 'tax havens'; calls on the Commission, in particular, to develop a clear definition, a common set of criteria to identify tax havens and appropriate sanctions for countries cooperating with them, on the basis of its December 2012 Recommendation regarding measures intended to encourage third countries to apply minimum standards of good governance in tax matters and on defining appropriate common measures applying to those jurisdictions; refers to its resolution of 21 May 2013 on 'the fight against tax fraud, tax evasion and tax havens' for a non-exhaustive list of such possible measures including among others to suspend or terminate existing Double Tax Conventions with jurisdictions that are on the blacklist, to prohibit access to Union public procurement of goods and services and refuse to grant state aid to companies based in blacklisted jurisdictions, to prohibit Union financial institutions and financial advisors from establishing or maintaining subsidiaries and branches in blacklisted jurisdictions and to consider revoking licences for European financial institutions and financial advisors which maintain, to introduce a special levy on all transactions to or from blacklisted jurisdictions, to examine a range of options for the non-recognition, within the Union, of the legal status of companies set up in blacklisted jurisdictions, to apply tariff barriers in cases of trade with blacklisted third countries; reiterates that genuinely European lists, regularly updated, would be more effective as a means of promoting good tax governance and changing tax behaviours towards and within those jurisdictions;
2015/10/13
Committee: ECON
Amendment 191 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital V – point vii
(vii) whereas the Commission's ongoing investigations into alleged breaches of the Union state aid rules have revealed a degree of uncertainty regarding the way in which those rules should be applied; whereas to rectify this, the Commission should publish binding guidelines to clarify how it will determine instances of tax-related state aid, thereby providing more legal certainty for companies and Member States alike;deleted
2015/10/13
Committee: ECON
Amendment 202 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital W
W. whereas the overall efficiency of tax collection, the notion of tax fairness and the credibility of national tax administrations are not undermined only by aggressive tax planning and BEPS activities; whereas the Union should take similarly decisive action to address the problems of tax evasion and tax fraud within both corporate and individual taxation as well as problems relating to the collection of taxes other than corporate taxes; whereas those other elements of tax collection and administration represent a substantial part of the existing tax gap; stresses, the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality under Article 5(3) of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) and Protocol (No 2) ; believes in this regard that an erosion or breaches of the principle of subsidiarity can lead to unintended consequences such as undermined faith in the European Union for citizens and that erosion or breaches of the principle of subsidiarity should therefore be avoided;
2015/10/13
Committee: ECON
Amendment 222 #
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 1 – introductory part
The European Parliament calls once again on the European Commission to bring forward a legislative proposal by June 2016 to introduce comprehensive and public country-by-country reporting (CBC- R) for all multinational companies in all sectors.
2015/10/13
Committee: ECON
Amendment 228 #
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 1 – indent 1
This proposal should be developed on the basis of the requirements put forward by the OECD in its CBC-R data template published in September 2014 (Action 13 of the OECD/G20 BEPS project), utilising the information requirements set out in the template but with a particular focus and strengthening of the provisions on targeted transparency and exchange of information.
2015/10/13
Committee: ECON
Amendment 243 #
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 3 – introductory part
The European Parliament calls on the European Commission to bring forward a proposal as soon as possible on a new mechanism whereby Member States are compelled to inform other Member States (initially via the Code of Conduct Group)and the public if they intend to introduce a new allowance, relief, exception, incentive or similar measure that could have a material impact on the effective tax rate in the Member State or on the tax base of another Member State.
2015/10/13
Committee: ECON
Amendment 248 #
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 3 – indent 1
These notifications by Member States shall contain spillover analyses, which will be published along with the notification, of the material impact of the new tax measures on other Member States and developing countries, to support the action of the Code of Conduct Group in identifying harmful tax practices.
2015/10/13
Committee: ECON
Amendment 252 #
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 3 – indent 2
These new tax measures should also be assessed by the European Commission, included in the European Semester process, and recommendations should be made for follow-up.deleted
2015/10/13
Committee: ECON
Amendment 273 #
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 4 – indent 2
Significantly increasing the transparency of tax rulings at the EU level, with due consideration given to business confidentiality and trade secrets and taking into account the current best practices applicable in some Member States via one of the following methods: ° requiring Member Statesby making publicly available the exchanged tax rulings via the central directory orf the Commission to produce an annual list, published in a fully public directory accessible to all, of companies with which they have concluded tax rulings, one year at the , with the exception of specific parts for which corporations can demonst after the tax ruling is signed by tax authorities ; ° requiring Member Statesrate a financial loss as a consequence orf the Commission to publish a summary of the main important (anonymised) tax rulings that have been agreed in the previous yearir public disclosure.
2015/10/13
Committee: ECON
Amendment 288 #
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 5 – indent 2
Oblige customs-free ports authorities to immediately inform the relevant Member States’ and third countries’ tax authorities of any transaction carried on by their tax residents in customs-free ports premises. These communications should be embedded in the automatic exchange of information framework according to the CRS.
2015/10/13
Committee: ECON
Amendment 300 #
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 7 – indent 1
Protect whistleblowers who act in the public interest only (and not also for money or any other personal agenda) in order to exposeby exposing misconduct, wrongdoing, fraud or illegal activity in relation to corporate taxpublic or private organisations in any Member State in the European Union. Such whistleblowers should be protected if they report suspected misconduct, wrongdoing, fraud or illegal activity to their relevant competent authority, and should also be protected if, in cases of persistently unaddressed illegal activity in relation to corporate taxation that could affect the public interestinsufficient action by the competent authority, they report their concerns to the public as a whole;
2015/10/13
Committee: ECON
Amendment 309 #
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 7 – indent 4
Such a legislative proposal should take as its basis the existing Market Abuse Regulation, as well as the text of the Directive on the Protection of Trade Secrets once it has been agreed by the European Parliament and European Council;deleted
2015/10/13
Committee: ECON