Activities of Patryk JAKI related to 2021/2010(INI)
Plenary speeches (1)
Digital taxation: OECD negotiations, tax residency of digital companies and a possible European Digital Tax (debate)
Shadow reports (1)
REPORT on digital taxation: OECD negotiations, tax residency of digital companies and a possible European Digital Tax
Amendments (9)
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 5
Citation 5
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 10
Citation 10
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas the Commission put forward two proposals on the taxation of the digital economy in 2018, including a short-term solution introducing a digital services tax (DST), and a long-term solution defining a significant digital presence (SDP) as a nexus for corporate taxation which should replace the DST; whereas Parliament supported these proposals, but they were not adopted in the Council because Member States could not reach the unanimous agreement needed in the realm of taxation at EU level, which forced some Member States to introduce the DST unilaterally;
Amendment 53 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes that the current rules date back to the early 20th century, and are mainly based on physical presence; points out that digitalised companies can engage in significant business activities in a jurisdiction without physical presence there, and therefore taxes paid in one jurisdiction no longer reflect the value and profits created there; regreasserts that the traditional concept of permanent establishment fails to cover the new aspects of digital businesses, and underlines the need to define virtual permanent establishment; stresses that on the basis of the value and profits generated by users of online platforms and consumers of digital services residing in a given jurisdiction; unlike capital and labour, they cannot be shifted outside a jurisdiction in the same way as capital and labour, and should therefore be the basis for the definition of a new tax nexus in order to provide, which would be, among other things, an effective remedy against aggressive planning;
Amendment 84 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Notes that on average digital business models face significantly lower effective tax rates than traditional business models which rely on physical presence; regrets that tax avoidance linked to aggressive tax planning is not only detrimental to the collection of public revenues but also puts businesses, especially SMEs, at a disadvantage, while creating barriers for new local entrants; recalls that the issue of under-taxation of the digital economy is particularly relevant today, in the light of the COVID- 19 crisis, which has put digital companies providing services remotely in a more favourable position than traditional businesses, especially SMEs;
Amendment 158 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Insists therefore that, regardless of the progress of the negotiations at the G20/OECD IF, the EU should stand ready to roll out its own solutions for taxing the digital economy by the end of 2021, especially since the OECD proposals concern only a narrow group of companies and may prove to be insufficient; calls on the Commission to present proposals by June 2021, while anticipating their compatibilityat they will be in compliance with the reform by the G20/OECD IF to be agreed on; stresses the need to create a level playing field for providers of traditional services and digital services in the EU by ensuring that the latter are taxed at an adequate rate; invites the Commission to consider in particular introducing a European Digital Services Tax as a necessary first step;
Amendment 173 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Understands that some Member States consider the taxation of digital economy an urgent issue and have therefore introduced digital services taxes at national level; recalls that these national measures shouldmay be phased out once a multilateral solution is found; recalls on Member States to refrain from introducing national solutions unilateralthat taxation is primarily, as they create a risk of fragmentation of the single market; recalls that although taxation is primarily a Member State competence, they must competence of the Member States, which should exercise it in coherence with the common principles of EU law in order to ensure coherence between national frameworks, thereby allowing for fair competition and avoiding a negative impact on the overall coherence of EU taxation principles;
Amendment 198 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. RegretsPoints out that the Council did not agree on any of the Commission’s related proposals, i.e. the digital services tax, the significant digital presence or the CCTB and CCCTB; calls on the Member States to reconsider their position on these proposals, and to consider all options provided for by the Treatiefind a common position that takes into account the interests iof no unanimous agreement can be reachedthe EU as a whole;
Amendment 211 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15