BETA

Activities of Olle SCHMIDT related to 2013/0188(CNS)

Plenary speeches (1)

2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2013/0188(CNS)

Shadow reports (1)

2016/11/22
Committee: ECON
Dossiers: 2013/0188(CNS)
Documents: PDF(259 KB) DOC(379 KB)

Amendments (17)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 1

(1) In recent years, the challenge posed by tax fraud and tax evasion has increased considerably and has become a major focus of concern within the Union and at global level. Unreported and untaxed income is considerably reducing national tax revenues. Tax fraud and tax evasion threaten government revenues and cost billions of euros each year. An increase in the efficiency and effectiveness of tax collection is therefore urgently needed. There should be effective systems in place to improve the efficiency of tax collection. The automatic exchange of information constitutes an important tool in this regard and the Commission in its Communication of 6 December 2012 containing an Action plan to strengthen the fight against tax fraud and tax evasion8 highlighted the need to promote vigorously the automatic exchange of information as the future European and international standard for transparency and exchange of information in tax matters. The European Council on 22 May 2013 requested the extension of automatic information exchange at Union and global levels with a view to combatting tax fraud, tax evasion and aggressive tax planning. __________________ 8 COM(2012)722 final. COM(2012)722 final.

2013/10/01
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Recital 1 a (new)

(1a) For decades, tax policy was seen as an exclusively national matter, in which the EU does not matter. That time is past, however. Tax must be as a result of globalization also discussed at the EU level. It would be more efficient and effective for the European Commission to coordinate the exchange of information on tax on behalf of Member States than have a series of bilateral agreements between Member States. Different standards for automatic exchange of information vary from country to country. This is unnecessarily complex and imposes unnecessarily high costs for both Member States and financial institutions within the Union. It is important that the automatic exchange of information is extended to reflect as close as possible the information that follows the model of bilateral FATCA agreement with the US.

2013/10/01
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Recital 1 b (new)

(1b) In order to reduce ambiguities and inconsistencies, and to achieve cost savings, it is essential that the implementation of the provisions is coordinated with the implementation of Member States' agreement on FATCA.

2013/10/01
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Recital 1 c (new)

(1c) The proposed amendments to the Directive lack a number of necessary explanations and definitions, which considerably complicates the understanding of the regulatory framework and overview of the impacts of the proposal. Therefore, the development of drafting definitions should be coordinated with the OECD's work in this aspect.

2013/10/01
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Recital 3

(3) As highlighted by the request of the European Council, it is appropriate to bring forward the extension of automatic information exchange already envisaged in Article 8(5) of Directive 2011/16/EU. A Union initiative ensures a coherent, consistent and comprehensive Union-wide approach to the automatic exchange of information in the internal market ~~which would lead to cost savings both for tax administrations and economic operator~~and is important in order to improve the efficiency of the tax systems.

2013/10/01
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Recital 3 a (new)

(3a) Member States should implement administrative cooperation and exchange of information that does not violate the taxpayers' procedural rights and right to privacy.

2013/10/01
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Recital 3 b (new)

(3b) When data is submitted to tax authorities for the purpose of information exchange with other countries, it is important to clarify how those authorities may use that data.

2013/10/01
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Recital 4

(4) The fact that Member States have concluded or have expressed an intention to conclude agreements with the United States of America relating to its legislation on Foreign Account Tax Compliance (commonly referred to as ‘FATCA’) means that they are providing or will provide for a wider cooperation within the meaning of Article 19 of Directive 2011/16/EU, and are or will be under an obligation to provide such wider cooperation to other Member States as well. It is important that the automatic exchange of information is extended to reflect as close as possible the information that follows the model of bilateral FATCA agreement with the U.S.

2013/10/01
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Recital 5 a (new)

(5a) Work is in progress under the auspices of the OECD to develop bilateral and multilateral model agreements on exchanging information. Negotiations are also being held between the USA and many other countries on the implementation of FATCA by means of bilateral agreements (intergovernmental agreements). Many of the proposed amendments to Directive 2011/16/EU on administrative cooperation in the field of taxation regulate the same information exchange with which FATCA and the work at the OECD are concerned. The Commission should clarify the relationship between these regulatory provisions in order to make it in any way practicable for national tax authorities and the financial institutions concerned to apply the amendments to the Directive.

2013/10/01
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Recital 6 a (new)

(6a) The Commission’s proposal concerning Article 8(3a) lacks the requisite explanations and definitions. It is not clear what the five proposed items listed in Article 1(3a) refer to. The proposal does not contain any precise definition of the terms, and it will result in considerable uncertainty as to what information should be provided and to what extent the existing reporting on supervisory tasks relating to income from capital has to be increased. Unlike the current Article 8(1), the proposed items in Article 1(3a) are not supposed to be interpreted in the light of national legislation in the Member State which supplies the information. As there will probably be differences between EU Member States as regards how income from capital is classified, it is important to have clear definitions of the five proposed items. This could also entail national tax authorities having to take on supervisory tasks which are not in line with national taxation of capital. The Commission proposal should be clarified with regard to the following points: 1. There is no definition of ‘financial institution’ or ‘financial account’. Without a clear and unambiguous definition, it is difficult to assess the impact of the proposal or which parties the exchange of information will apply to. 2. Points (c) and (d) of paragraph 3a are vaguely formulated and not clearly defined. It is therefore difficult to discern what information should be covered by exchanges relating to these items. There is a risk of duplication of regulation of reporting on certain income within the EU. For example, it might be possible for the new point 3a(c) to apply to the same income as is covered by the Savings Directive. The Commission should supplement the proposal with a clarification of the way in which duplication of regulation is to be avoided. 3. The proposal requires the competent authority in a Member State to provide information to the competent authority of any other Member State regarding a number of items which are paid, secured or held by a financial institution for the direct or indirect benefit of a beneficial owner who is a natural person resident in another Member State. However, it is not apparent what is meant by ‘direct or indirect benefit’. Does it apply to every natural person’s ownership of a company or financial instrument, irrespective of the size of the holding or stock exchange listing?

2013/10/01
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Recital 7 a (new)

(7a) The purpose of the existing provision of information to national tax authorities on income from capital and services is firstly to provide a basis for taxation and secondly, inter alia, to provide a basis for exchanges of information with other countries. If the requirement to provide information is now altered and information is obtained purely for the purpose of exchanging it, it is important to make it clear how the national tax authorities are permitted to use this information.

2013/10/01
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Recital 9

(9) The review of the condition of availability to be undertaken in 2017 should be extended to all the f~~ive~~ our categories referred to in Article 8(1) of Directive 2011/16/UE, so that the case for exchange of information by all Member States on all those categories be examined.

2013/10/01
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Recital 9 a (new)

(9a) "Sanctions" and how a Member State proceed in order to meet its obligations should be up to each Member State to decide for themselves.

2013/10/01
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b

Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 8 – paragraph 3a – point c

~~(c) any other income generated with respect to the assets held in a financial account;~~deleted

2013/10/01
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 18 – paragraph 2 a (new)

In Article 18 of Directive 2011/16/EU, the following paragraph is inserted: "2a. Sanctions and how a Member State proceeds in order to meet its obligations should be up to each Member State to decide for themselves."

2013/10/01
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 b (new)

Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 19 a (new)

In Directive 2011/16/EU, the following Article is inserted: "Article 19a Member States should not be prohibited from entering into bilateral agreements with third countries on automatic information exchange. If a Member State wants to go forward in an area where it is not possible to unite the EU behind a common position, the Member State should not be prevented from doing so."

2013/10/01
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

1. Member States shall adopt and publish, by 31 December 20145 at the latest, the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive. They shall forthwith communicate to the Commission the text of those provisions.

2013/10/01
Committee: ECON