Activities of Peter SIMON related to 2018/2121(INI)
Plenary speeches (1)
Report on financial crimes, tax evasion and tax avoidance (debate) DE
Amendments (106)
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Recalls that current international and national tax rules were mostly conceived in the early 20th century; asserts that there is an urgent need for reform of the rules, so that international, EU and national tax systems are fit for the new economic, social and technologic challenges of the 21st century; notes the broad understanding that current tax systems are not equipped to keep up with these developments and ensure that all market participants pay fairtheir fair share of taxes;
Amendment 50 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Highlights that Parliament has made a substantial contribution to the fight against financial crimes, tax evasion and tax avoidance as uncovered in the LuxLeaks, Panama Papers and, Paradise Papers, Football Leaks, Bahamas Leaks, and CumEx cases, notably with the work of the TAXE, TAX2 and TAX3 Special Committees, the PANA inquiry committee and the ECON committee;
Amendment 61 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Deplores the fact that some EU Member States confiscate the tax base of other Member States by attracting profits generated elsewhere, thereby allowing companies to artificially lower their tax base; upholds that this practice not only harms the principle of EU solidarity, but also produces a wealth redistribution towards multinationals and their shareholders, at the expense of EU citizens; supports the important work by academics and journalists who help to shed light on these practices;
Amendment 77 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Deplores again ‘the lack of reliable and unbiased statistics on the magnitude of tax avoidance and tax evasion [and] stresses the importance of developing appropriate and transparent methodologies to quantify the scale of these phenomena, as well as their impact on countries’ public finances, economic activities and public investments’; further deplores the lack of reliable quantitative assessment of the extent of financial crimes, tax evasion and tax avoidance;
Amendment 89 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Highlights that close to 40 % of MNEs’ profits are shifted to tax havens globally each year25 ; _________________with some European Union countries appearing to be the prime losers of profit shifting, because 35% of shifted profits come from EU countries, followed by developing countries (30%)1a; deplores that Ireland is the number one shifting destination, followed by Singapore, the Netherlands, Caribbean tax havens and Switzerland1b; deplores furthermore that about 80% of the profits shifted within the EU are shifted to the EU tax havens, primarily Ireland, Luxembourg and the Netherlands1c; [3] _________________ 1a Tørsløv, Wier and Zucman ‘The missing profits of nations’, National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper 24701, 2018. 1b Tørsløv, Wier and Zucman ‘The missing profits of nations’, National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper 24701, 2018. 1c Tørsløv, Wier and Zucman ‘Themissing profits of nations’, National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper 24701, 2018. 25 Tørsløv, Wier and Zucman ‘The missing profits of nations’, National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper 24701, 2018.
Amendment 133 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13 a. Recalls that the payment of taxes is both an essential corporate contribution to society and a tool for good governance and is therefore a requirement for responsible business practices; stresses the need to include harmful tax practices in the scope of mandatory reporting on corporate social responsibility (CSR);
Amendment 142 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Reiterates its call on companies, as taxpayers, to fully comply with their tax obligations and refrain from aggressive tax planning leading to BEPS, and to consider fair taxation strategy as an important part of their corporate social responsibility and of their implementation of the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights and the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises;
Amendment 148 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14 a. Urges furthermore the Member States taking part in the enhanced cooperation procedure to agree as quickly as possible on the adoption of a Financial Transaction Tax (FTT);
Amendment 155 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Recalls that taxes must be paid in the jurisdictions where the actual substantive and genuine economic activity and value creation takes place or, in case of indirect taxation, where consumption takes place; highlights that this can only be achieved by adopting the common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base (CCCTB); advocates for the inclusion of fair allocation of taxing rights on the agenda of current international tax negotiations, notably at OECD and UN levels;
Amendment 170 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16 a. Stresses that between 1985 and 2018, the global average statutory corporate tax rate has fallen from 49% to 24%1a ; notes that nominal corporate tax rates have decreased by 46% since 2000 at EU level –from an average of 32% in 2000 to 21,9% in 20181b; is concerned about a growing race to the bottom on nominal corporate tax rates at both international and EU levels; regrets that international tax reform such as G20/OECD led BEPS project did not touch upon this unfair tax competition; calls for a second set of international tax reforms aiming at tackling tax competition among countries and ensuring a fair allocation of taxing rights; underlines it is necessary to give a greater role to the UN Committee of Experts on International Cooperation in Tax Matters in the next reform of international tax rules; _________________ 1a Tørsløv, Wier and Zucman ‘Themissing profits of nations’, National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper 24701, 2018. 1b Taxation trend in the EU, Table 3:Top statutory corporate income tax rates (including surcharges), 1995- 2018,European Commission 2018
Amendment 174 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 b (new)
Paragraph 16 b (new)
16 b. Deplores the imbalance between taxes paid on corporate and capital income and on labour; points out that such distribution of tax burden is unsustainable in view of the expected massive changes in the labour market due to increased robotisation and digitalisation and poses a serious risk to social cohesion;
Amendment 177 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 c (new)
Paragraph 16 c (new)
16 c. Affirms that a fair and effective solution to tax dumping and aggressive tax competition would reside in the setting of a minimum corporate tax rate; calls for the adoption of a coordinated level of minimum effective taxation at European level through a combination of anti-abuse measures and limitation to tax deductions; asks the European Commission to consider proposing a legislative package aiming at ensuring a minimum effective level of taxation;
Amendment 179 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 d (new)
Paragraph 16 d (new)
16 d. Takes note that traditional sectors pay in average an effective corporate tax rate of 23% while the digital sector pays about 9,5%1a; asks the European Commission to carry out and release an in depth study on effective level of corporate taxation within the EU and develop a proposal fora coordinated level of minimum taxation within the EU; _________________ 1a COM(2018) 146 final COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEANPARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL Time to establish a modern, fair and efficient taxation standard for the digital economy
Amendment 198 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Notes that the G20/OECD 15-point BEPS action plan is being implemented and monitored and further discussions are taking place, in a broader context than just the initial participating countries, through the Inclusive Framework; calls on Member States to support a reform of both the mandate and the functioning of the Inclusive Framework to ensure that remaining tax loopholes and unsolved tax questions such as the allocation of taxing rights among countries are covered by the current international framework to combat BEPS practices; highlights the need to ensure that all countries participate on an equal footing;
Amendment 205 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Points out that some countries have recently adopted unilateral countermeasures against harmful tax practices (such as the UK’s Diverted Profits Tax and the Global Intangible Low- Taxed Income (GILTI) provisions of the US tax reform) to ensure that the foreign income of MNEs is duly taxed at a minimum effective tax rate in the parent’s country of residence; calls for an EU assessment of these measuresnotes that, in contrast to these unilateral measures, the EU generally promotes multilateral and consensual solutions to deal with a fair allocation of taxing rights, and, therefore, calls for an EU assessment of these measures; stresses that the EU prioritises a global solution when it comes to taxing the digital sector but is proposing a Digital Services Tax as global discussions seem currently locked;
Amendment 214 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Welcomes the provisions on Controlled Foreign Corporation (CFC) included in ATAD I to ensure that profits made by related companies parked in low or no-tax countries are effectively taxed; acknowledges that they prevent the absence or diversity of national CFC rules within the Union from distorting the functioning of the internal market beyond situations of wholly artificial arrangements as called for repeatedly by Parliament; deplores the coexistence of two approaches to implement CFC rules in ATAD I and calls on Member States to implement only the simpler and most efficient CFC rules as in ATAD I Article 7(2)(a); asks the European Commission to make a legislative proposal reinforcing CFC rules, including a criteria on an actual corporate tax paid on profits lower than 18%;
Amendment 218 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Welcomes the general anti-abuse rule for the purposes of calculating corporate tax liability included in ATAD I, allowing Member States to ignore arrangements that are not genuine and having regard to all relevant facts and circumstances aimed at obtaining a tax advantage; reiterates its repeated call for the adoption of a general and common anti- abuse rule, namely in existing legislation and in particular in the parent-subsidiary directive, the merger directive and the interest and royalties directive; calls on Member States to consider a general anti- abuse rule including a minimum effective tax rate of 18%;
Amendment 244 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Recognises that the new flow of information to tax authorities following the adoption of ATAD I and DAC4 creates the need for adequate resources to ensure the most efficient use of such information and to effectively reduce the current tax gap; calls on all Member States to evaluate if the tools of the authorities are sufficient and adequate to use this information; points out the importance of combining different sets of information in order to identify patterns which indicate suspicious activity and can thereby help to discover financial crimes, tax evasion or tax avoidance;
Amendment 252 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Welcomes the fact that Member States’ tax systems and overall tax environment have become part of the European Semester in line with Parliament’s call to that effect29 ; welcomes the studies and data drawn up by the Commission30 that allow situations that provide economic ATP indicators to be better addressed, and give a clear indication of the exposure to tax planning as well as furnishing a rich data base for all Member States on the phenomenon; calls for these new tax indicators for the European Semester to be given the same rank as the indicators relating to expenditure control; underlines the interest of providing the European Semester with this tax dimension, as it will make it possible to tackle certain harmful tax practices that had not been tackled until now through the ATAD Directive and other existing European regulations; _________________ 29 European Parliament resolution of 25 November 2015 on tax rulings and other measures similar in nature or effect, OJ C 366, 27.10.2017, p. 51, paragraph 96. 30 Referred to above. The studies provide an overview of Member States’ exposure to ATP structures affecting their tax base (erosion or increase), although there is no stand-alone indicator of the phenomenon, a set of indicators seen as a ‘body of evidence’ nevertheless exists.
Amendment 263 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
32. Calls on the Commission to issue a proposal aimed at repealing patent boxes, and calls on Member States to favour non- harmful and, if appropriate, direct support for R&D; stresses that tax reliefs for companies need to be carefully constructed and implemented only where their positive impact on jobs and growth is evident and any risk of creating new loopholes in the taxation system is excluded; reiterates, in the meantime, its call to ensure that current patent boxes establish a genuine link to economic activity, such as expenditure tests, and that they do not distort competition; welcomes the improved definition of R&D costs in the common corporate tax base (CCTB) proposal; however continues to express its concern about new deductions for R&D expenditure included in the CCTB proposal and which could create opportunities for artificially reducing the tax base;
Amendment 271 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 a (new)
Paragraph 32 a (new)
32 a. Calls on the Council, assisted by the European Commission, to define a comprehensive and exhaustive list of potential harmful tax practices within the EU, to be updated every year; demands that criteria aiming at identifying harmful tax practices include, notably, schemes allowing for a large deduction of corporate income tax without benefiting the real local economy;
Amendment 284 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
Paragraph 33
33. Welcomes the re-launch of the CCCTB project in a two-step approach, with the Commission’s adoption of interconnected proposals on CCTB and CCCTB; calls on the Council to swiftly adopt them,stresses that once implemented fully, the CCCTB will make it possible to attribute income to where the value is created and will eliminate loopholes between national tax systems, in particular transfer pricing; calls on the Council to swiftly adopt and implement the two proposals side by side taking into consideration Parliament’s opinion that already includes the concept of virtual permanent establishment that would close the remaining loopholes allowing tax avoidance to take place and level the playing field in light of digitalisation;
Amendment 290 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 a (new)
Paragraph 33 a (new)
33 a. Recalls that to end the practice of profit shifting and to introduce the principle that tax is paid where profit is generated, the CCTB and CCCTB should be introduced simultaneously in all Member States; calls on the Commission to issue a new proposal based on Article 116 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, whereby the European Parliament and the Council act in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure to issue the necessary legislation, should the Council fail to adopt a unanimous decision on the proposal to establish a CCCTB;
Amendment 300 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
34. Notes that the phenomenon of digitalisation has created a new situation in the market, whereby digital and digitalised companies are able to take advantage of local markets without having a physical, and therefore taxable, presence in that market, creating a non-level playing field and putting traditional companies at a disadvantage; notes that digital businesses models in the EU face a lower effective average tax burden than traditional business models31 ; deplores that digital businesses pay almost no taxes in some Member States despite their significant digital presence and large revenues in those Member States; reminds that, when it comes to the digitalisation of the whole economy, the location of the value creation should take into account the input from users as well as information collected on consumers' behaviour online; _________________ 31 As evidenced in the impact assessment of 21 March 2018 accompanying the digital tax package (SWD(2018)0081), according to which on average, digitalised businesses face an effective tax rate of only 9.5 %, compared to 23.2 % for traditional business models.
Amendment 334 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 a (new)
Paragraph 36 a (new)
36a. Notes that, across the political spectrum, and across Europe, there is an overwhelming support for a digital tax; recalls that surveys show that 80% of citizens from Germany, France, Austria, the Netherlands, Sweden and Denmark are supportive of a Digital Service Tax (DST) and that 80% of the citizens think that the EU should not wait for international efforts before it undertakes such a step; underlines furthermore that a majority of the surveyed citizens want a broad scope for a digital service tax, which includes services providing digital content and e-commerce1a; _________________ 1a KiesKompas, Public Perception towards taxing digital companies in six countries https://policies.kieskompas.nl/digital-tax- report.pdf,December 2018
Amendment 339 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 b (new)
Paragraph 36 b (new)
36b. Calls on Member States to ensure that the ‘Digital Services Tax’ remains a temporary measure by including a ‘sunset clause’ to the proposal for a Council Directive on the common system of a digital services tax on revenues resulting from the provision of certain digital services and by speeding up the discussion on a Significant Digital Presence1a ; _________________ 1a Proposal for a Council Directive laying down rules relating to the corporate taxation of a significant digital presence COM(2018) 147 final
Amendment 376 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44 a (new)
Paragraph 44 a (new)
44a. Notes the magnitude of the CumEx scandal, which according to some estimates, has taken EUR 55 billion from public coffers in the EU; observes that the "CumEx files" reveal a lack of cooperation between Member States' tax authorities and failures of the current system of exchange of information as some Member States were reportedly aware of these fraudulent tax practices but waited several years to inform other Member States; calls for a regulation of dividend arbitrage practices, preventing "CumEx" and "CumCum" schemes in the future, by putting the burden of proof of ownership of the dividends on the foreign beneficiary; calls on the European legislators to evaluate the possibility of implementing this measure at EU level;
Amendment 379 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44 b (new)
Paragraph 44 b (new)
44b. Further notes that the French Senate, in an effort to combat the practice of dividend arbitrage, has tabled an amendment to the draft budget bill that would make it possible to withhold 30 % of the value of the transaction to a foreign beneficiary, to be reimbursed a posteriori if they prove that they are the ultimate beneficial owner; calls on the EU legislators to evaluate the possibility of implementing this measure at EU level;
Amendment 395 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45
Paragraph 45
45. SRecalls that public CBCR is one of the key measures to find greater transparency on tax information of companies for all citizens; stresses that the proposal for public CBCR was submitted to the co-legislators just after the Panama papers scandal on 12 April 2016, and that Parliament adopted its position on it on 4 July 2017; recalls that this public nature is essential for civil society, investigative journalists, investors and other stakeholders, in particular, to whom the information is useful to assess potential risks and liabilities; recalls that the latter called for an enlargement of the scope of reporting and protection of commercially sensitive information; deplores the lack of progress and cooperation from the Council since 2016; urges for progress to be made in the Council so that it enters into negotiations with Parliament;
Amendment 407 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45 a (new)
Paragraph 45 a (new)
45a. Calls on the Commission and the Council to create a mandatory standardised public European Business Register in order to gain up-to-date and trustworthy information on companies and to achieve transparency via cross- border access to comparable and reliable information of companies in the EU;
Amendment 425 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 49 a (new)
Paragraph 49 a (new)
49a. Deplores the fact that companies can make agreements with governments to pay almost no tax in a given country despite conducting substantial activity; points in this light to a tax ruling between the Dutch tax revenue authority and Royal Dutch Shell plc that seems to be in violation of Dutch tax law on the sole ground that the head office would be located in the Netherlands after the unification of the two former parent companies, which results in an exemption from Dutch dividend withholding tax, while at the same time recent investigations seem to show that the company pays no profit tax in The Netherlands either; reiterates its call on the Commission to investigate this case of potential illegal state aid;
Amendment 444 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 52
Paragraph 52
52. Notes that there is no single definition of letterbox companieHighlights that companies create cross-border operations and corporate constructions including artificial arrangements in order to avoid or circumvent national tax law; stresses that company mobility should not lead to forum shopping; notes that there is no single definition of letterbox companies; reiterates its call for a clear definition; stresses that the requirement of genuine economic activity in the destination Member States can prevent the creation of a letterbox company through a cross- border operation, as proposed in the draft report for the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive (EU) 2017/1132 as regards cross-border conversions, mergers and divisions;
Amendment 519 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 65 a (new)
Paragraph 65 a (new)
65a. Welcomes that a VAT Mini One Stop Shop (MOSS) on telecommunications, broadcasting and electronic services was introduced in 2015 as a voluntary system for registration, declaration and payment of VAT; welcomes the extension of the MOSS to other supplies of goods and services to final consumers as of 1 January 2021;
Amendment 549 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 72
Paragraph 72
72. Calls on the Commission and Eurofisc to rapidly conclude their investigations on the Isle of Man’s VAT collection practices on privateWelcomes the infringement procedures opened by the Commission on 8 November 2018 against Italy and the Isle of Man to ensure that they put an end on illegal tax breaks for yachts and aircraft, as revealed by the Paradise pPapers; and, if necessary, to open infringement procedures;
Amendment 552 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 74
Paragraph 74
74. WNotes that the Commission has recently proposed additional control tools and an enhanced role for Eurofisc as well as mechanisms for closer cooperation between customs and tax administrations and greater involvement of the European Public Prosecutor's Office; welcomes the adoption of the Protection of Financial Interests (PIF) Directive53 which clarifies the issues of cross-border cooperation and mutual legal assistance between Member States, Eurojust, the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO), the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) and the Commission in tackling VAT fraud; _________________ 53 Directive (EU) 2017/1371 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2017 on the fight against fraud to the Union’s financial interests by means of criminal law, OJ L 198, 28.7.2017, p. 29, in particular Articles 3 and 15 thereof.
Amendment 555 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 75
Paragraph 75
75. Points, however, to the need for better cooperation between the administrative, judicial and law- enforcement authorities within the EU, as highlighted by experts during the hearing held on 28 June 2018 and in a study commissioned by the TAX3 Committee; calls on the EPPO, OLAF, Eurofisc, Europol and Eurojust to closely cooperate with a view to coordinating their efforts against VAT fraud and to identifying and adapting to new fraudulent practices;
Amendment 567 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 78 a (new)
Paragraph 78 a (new)
78a. Calls on Member States to mandate Eurofisc to develop new strategies to track goods under Customs procedure 42, the mechanism which allows the importer to obtain a VAT exemption when the imported goods are intended to be eventually transported to a business customer in another Member State than the Member State of importation;
Amendment 581 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 81
Paragraph 81
81. Emphasises that natural persons do not generally exercise their freedom of movement for the purposes of tax fraud, tax evasion and aggressive tax planning; underlines, however, that some natural persons have a tax base large enough to span several tax jurisdictions; stresses that tax evasion is highly concentrated among the rich, with the 0.01% richest households evading about 25% of their taxes1a; _________________ 1a Alstadsæter, Johannesen & Zucman: Tax Evasion and Inequality; October 2018
Amendment 635 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 87 a (new)
Paragraph 87 a (new)
87a. Alerts for the dangers of CBI and RBI schemes allowing associated family reunification, whereby family members of CBI/RBI beneficiaries can acquire residence or citizenship with minimum or no checks;
Amendment 683 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 93 a (new)
Paragraph 93 a (new)
93 a. Condemns Member States implementing CBI and RBI schemes in opaque circumstances and without proper enforcement of AML controls; urges Member States which operate these schemes to publish annually the names and nationalities of beneficiaries of CBI and RBI and their relatives in order to minimise risks of money laundering, tax crimes and related criminality;
Amendment 707 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 102
Paragraph 102
102. Calls on the Commission to table a legislative proposal to ensure the automatic exchange of information between the relevant authorities, including law enforcement tax and customs authorities, on beneficial ownership and transactions taking place in free ports, customs warehouses or SEZs;
Amendment 708 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 102
Paragraph 102
102. Calls on the Commission to table a legislative proposal to ensure the automatic exchange of information between the relevant authorities, including tax and customs authorities, on beneficial ownership and relevant transactions for taxation purposes taking place in free ports, customs warehouses or SEZs;
Amendment 711 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 4.3
Subheading 4.3
Tax Amnesties
Amendment 721 #
104. Calls on the Commission to assess past amnesty programmes enacted by Member States, and, in particular, the public revenues recovered and their impact in the medium and long term on tax base volatility; urges Member States to ensure that relevant data related to the beneficiaries of previous and future tax amnesties is duly shared with the judiciary, law enforcement, and tax authorities, to ensure compliance with AML/CFT rules and possible prosecution for other financial crimes;
Amendment 747 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 110 a (new)
Paragraph 110 a (new)
110 a. Welcomes the Action Plan adopted by the Council on the 4th of December 2018, including several non-legislative measures to better tackle money laundering and terrorist financing in the EU; requests the Commission to regularly update the Parliament on the progress of the implementation of the Action Plan;
Amendment 748 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 110 b (new)
Paragraph 110 b (new)
110 b. Is concerned by the absence of concrete procedures to assess and review the probity of members of the governing council of the European Central Bank, in particular when they are formally accused of criminal activity; calls for mechanisms to monitor and review the conduct and propriety of the members of the governing council of the European Central Bank and to protect them in case of abuse of power by the authority that has the appointment power;
Amendment 749 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 111
Paragraph 111
111. Condemns the fact that systemic failures in the enforcement of AML requirements, coupled with inefficient supervision, has led to a number of recent high-profile cases of ML in European banks linked to systematic breaches of the most basic KYC and CDD requirements; recalls the crucial importance of developing Public and Private Partnerships (PPPs) and highlights the existence and positive results of the only transnational PPP, the Europol Financial Intelligence Public Private Partnership, promoting the sharing of strategic and tactical information amongst banks, FIUs, LEAs and national regulators across States;
Amendment 751 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 111 a (new)
Paragraph 111 a (new)
111 a. Stresses the continued use of cash in cases of money laundering; highlights the new Regulation on controls on cash entering or leaving the Union, which harmonises and expands controls on large sums of cash and highly liquid stores of value; regrets that while rules on the EU external borders are harmonised, rules among Member States concerning cash movements within EU borders vary;
Amendment 754 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 111 b (new)
Paragraph 111 b (new)
111 b. Notes that high-denomination euro notes provide a way to move large amounts of cash and thus potentially evade AML controls; welcomes that the ECB announced in 2016 it would no longer issue new €500 notes (even though the outstanding stock remains legal tender); calls on the ECB to extend this action to the €200 notes and for determining the phasing out of the ability to use of both €500 and €200 notes;
Amendment 759 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 112 a (new)
Paragraph 112 a (new)
112 a. Notes the positive results of the UK law establishing the Unexplained Wealth Order (UWO) in tracking proceeds of criminal activities; highlights that a UWO is a court order that requires a person who is reasonably suspected of involvement in, or of being connected to a person involved in, serious crime to explain the nature and extent of their interest in particular property, and to explain how the property was obtained, where there are reasonable grounds to suspect that the respondent’s known lawfully obtained income would be insufficient to allow the respondent to obtain the property; calls on the Commission to assess the feasibility of proposing a similar measure through EU legislation and report back to Parliament;
Amendment 762 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 112 b (new)
Paragraph 112 b (new)
112 b. Welcomes the decision in some Member States to ban the issuing of bearer shares and to convert the current ones into nominal securities; reiterates its call on the Commission to propose EU- wide legislation to the same effect;
Amendment 763 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 112 c (new)
Paragraph 112 c (new)
112 c. Stresses the urgent need to create a more efficient system for communication and information exchange among judicial authorities within the EU, replacing the traditional instruments of mutual legal assistance in criminal matters, which provide lengthy and burdensome procedures harming investigations of money laundering and other serious crimes; reiterates its call on the Commission to assess the need for legislative action in this field;
Amendment 764 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 112 d (new)
Paragraph 112 d (new)
112 d. Calls on the Commission to assess and report to Parliament about the role and particular risks presented by legal arrangements such as Special Purpose Vehicles (SPVs), Special Purpose Entities (SPEs) and Non Charitable Purpose Trusts (NCPTs) in money laundering, particularly in the UK, and Crown Dependencies and Overseas territories;
Amendment 765 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 112 e (new)
Paragraph 112 e (new)
112 e. Urges Member States to fully comply with AML legislation when issuing sovereign bonds on the financial markets; recalls that money laundering and financing of terrorism takes many forms and that due diligence in such financial operations is strictly necessary;
Amendment 806 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 121 a (new)
Paragraph 121 a (new)
121 a. Notes that the recent scandals affecting banks in Malta, Latvia, Estonia, the Netherlands, Germany and Denmark reveal the failure of supervision by national anti-money laundering authorities; highlights, at the same time, that ESAs have limited abilities to take a more substantial role in the anti-money laundering field due to tight resources coupled with a lack of appropriate powers;
Amendment 808 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 122
Paragraph 122
122. Calls for an assessment of long- term objectives leading to an enhanced AML/CFT framework as mentioned in the ‘Reflection Paper on possible elements of a Roadmap for seamless cooperation between Anti Money Laundering and Prudential Supervisors in the European Union’, such as the establishment at EU level of a mechanism to better coordinate the activities of AML/CFT supervisors of financial sector entities, notably in situations where AML/CFT concerns are likely to have cross-border effects, and a possible centralisation of AML supervision via an existing or new Union body empowered to enforce harmonised rul; calls therefore for a European Anti-money Laundering Authority with adequate supervision, investigation and enforcement powers of both financial and non-financial obliged entities aund practiceser the AMLD;
Amendment 825 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 125 a (new)
Paragraph 125 a (new)
125 a. Notes the concerns expressed by the EBA with regards to the implementation of the Directive 2013/36/EU on access to the activity of credit institutions and the prudential supervision of credit institutions and investment firms1a; welcomes the suggestions made by the EBA to tackle the deficiencies caused by the current Union legal framework; _________________ 1a https://www.eba.europa.eu/documents/101 80/2101654/Letter+to+Tiina+Astola+on+t he+request+to+investigate+a+possible+B UL+under+Article+17+of+Regulation+% 28EU%29%20No+10932010+- +24092018.pdf
Amendment 827 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 5.2
Subheading 5.2
Cooperation between financial intelligence units (FIUs) and law enforcement
Amendment 832 #
126 a. Recalls that EU FIUs are strongly encouraged to use the FIU.net system and highlights that information sharing between FIUs and LEAs, including with Europol, should be improved;
Amendment 833 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 126 a (new)
Paragraph 126 a (new)
126 a. Highlights that the fight against money laundering and tax evasion also requires good cooperation between FIUs and customs authorities;
Amendment 848 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 128
Paragraph 128
128. Points out that the non- standardisation of suspicious transaction report formats and non-standardisation of suspicious transaction report thresholds among Member States and with respect to the different obliged entities leads to difficulties in the processing and exchange of information between FIUs; calls on the Commission to explore mechanisms to set up standardised reporting formats for obliged entities in order to facilitate the exchange of information between FIUs in cases with a cross-border dimension and to reflect on the standardisation of suspicious transaction thresholds;
Amendment 858 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 129 a (new)
Paragraph 129 a (new)
129 a. Notes the Commission’s assessment of the framework for FIUs’ cooperation with third countries and obstacles and opportunities to enhance cooperation between FIUs in the Union including the possibility of establishing an EU level coordination and support mechanism; recalls that according to the AMLD5 this assessment should be ready by 1 June 2019; asks the Commission to consider this opportunity to make a legislative proposal for a EU Financial Intelligence Unit, creating a hub for joint investigative work and coordination, with its own remit of autonomy and investigatory competences on cross border financial criminality, and an early warning mechanism;
Amendment 863 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 129 b (new)
Paragraph 129 b (new)
129 b. Calls on the Commission to draw up a report assessing the necessity of uniformisation or harmonisation of the organisational status conferred to FIUs in Member States, to ensure better cooperation and exchange of information, without interfering with their independence;
Amendment 864 #
129 c. Calls on the Commission to propose legislation for the creation of a European Financial Police within the framework of Europol, with its own autonomous investigatory competence, based on the European legal framework to tackle cross-border tax fraud, money laundering, financing of terrorism and predicate offences;
Amendment 870 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 131 a (new)
Paragraph 131 a (new)
131 a. Takes note of the repeated calls from obliged entities, namely financial institutions, for proper channels of enhanced dialogue, communication and exchange of information between private bodies and public authorities, on one hand, and among obliged entities themselves, on the other, to provide less fragmented information to FIUs; calls on the Commission to draw up guidelines in accordance with the AMLD5, for Member States to implement at national level in this regard, namely using the mechanisms provided in the General Data Protection Regulation for secure and lawful exchange of data;
Amendment 881 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 133 a (new)
Paragraph 133 a (new)
133 a. Calls on Member States to ensure that registers of beneficial owners contain verification mechanisms to ensure the accuracy of the data; calls on the Commission to make assessment of verification mechanisms and reliability of the data in its reviews;
Amendment 890 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 136
Paragraph 136
136. Underscores the problem of money laundering through investment in real estate in European cities through foreign shell companies; recalls that the Commission should assess the necessity and proportionality of harmonising the information in the land and real estate registers and assess the need for the interconnection of those registers; takes the view that Member States should have in place publicly accessible information on ultimate beneficial ownership of land and real estate; calls on the Commission, if appropriate, to accompany the report with a legislative proposal;
Amendment 916 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 140
Paragraph 140
140. Takes note of the expert-level work on electronic identification and remote KYC processes, which explores issues such as the possibility of financial institutions using electronic identification (e-ID) and of KYC portability to identify customers digitally; points out the advantages of having a European system of e-ID;
Amendment 920 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 140 a (new)
Paragraph 140 a (new)
140 a. Urges the Commission to lead on creating a global framework regulating virtual currencies which takes into consideration the risks of these new technologies; recalls the dangers posed to consumers by Initial Coin Offerings (ICO’s) and urges the Commission to enact a proposal for their regulation as financial operations; notes in particular that cryptocurrencies' opacity can be used to facilitate money laundering and tax evasion; calls on the Commission to draft legislative proposals to ban certain anonymity measures on specific cryptocurrencies, on a case-by-case basis;
Amendment 949 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 148
Paragraph 148
148. Recognises the effort made by some third countries to act decisively against BEPS; stresses, however, that such reforms should remain in line with existing WTO rules; considers the information gathered during the committee visit to Washington DC about the US tax reforms and their possible impact on international cooperation to be of particular importance; finds that some of the provisions of the US Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 would be incompatible with existing WTO rules according to some experts regrets certain provisions of the US tax reform seek, unilaterally and without any reciprocity, to revitalise transnational benefits attributable to US territory (presuming that these are generated, at least 50%, in US territory); welcomes the fact that the Commission is currently in the process of assessing the potential regulatory and commercial implications of, in particular, the BEAT, GILTI and FDII78 provisions of the new US tax reform; asks the Commission to inform Parliament of the results of the assessment; _________________ 78 Respectively ‘Base Erosion and Anti- Abuse Tax’ (BEAT), ‘Global Intangible Low Tax Income’ (GILTI) and ‘Foreign- Derived Intangible Income’ (FDII).
Amendment 977 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 152
Paragraph 152
152. Deeply regrets the lack of transparency during the initial listing process by failing to ensure an objective application of the listing criteria laid down by ECOFIN, free from any political interference; welcomes, however, the improvement in transparency made by the disclosure of letters sent to jurisdictions screened by the CoC Group, as well as the set of commitment letters received; calls for all remaining undisclosed letters to be made publicly available to ensure scrutiny and proper implementation of commitments;
Amendment 982 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 153
Paragraph 153
153. Welcomes the recent clarifications from the CoC Group on fair taxation criteria, especially regarding the lack of economic substance for jurisdictions having no corporate income tax rate or a rate close to 0 %; calls on the Member States to work towards the gradual improvement of the EU listing criteria to cover all harmful tax practices79 by determining a minimum level of effective taxation and by reviewing all potential harmful practices granting large tax exemptions or deductions which are disconnected from the domestic economy; regrets that the same criteria used to include the jurisdictions of third countries on the European list do not apply internally to Member States and that the EU consequently loses credibility to call on other countries to comply with standards of tax good governance; _________________ 79 Work on fair taxation criteria 2.1 and 2.2 of Council conclusions 14166/16 of 8 November 2016.
Amendment 984 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 153 a (new)
Paragraph 153 a (new)
153 a. Welcomes the new OECD global standard on substantial activities factor to no or only nominal tax jurisdictions1a, largely inspired by the EU work on the EU listing process (Fair criterion 2.2 of the EU list); calls on EU Member States to push for a more ambitious global standard including a minimum level of effective taxation; _________________ 1a OECD, “Resumption of Application of Substantial Activities Factor to No or only Nominal Tax Jurisdictions Inclusive Framework on BEPS: Action 5”, http://www.oecd.org/tax/beps/resumption- of-application-of-substantial-activities- factors.pdf, 2018
Amendment 990 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 154 a (new)
Paragraph 154 a (new)
154 a. Recalls a research study showing that tax avoidance via six EU Member States results in a loss of 42.8 billion in tax revenue in the other 22 Member States1a, which means that the net payment position of these countries can be offset against the losses they inflict on the tax base of other Member States; notes for instance, that the Netherlands impose a net cost on the Union as a whole of 11.2 billion euro, which means the country is in fact not a net contributor but a net recipient; _________________ 1a http://gabriel- zucman.eu/files/TWZ2018.pdf
Amendment 997 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 154 b (new)
Paragraph 154 b (new)
154 b. Welcomes the expected review of the EU list in the first quarter of 2019; asks the Council to release a detailed assessment of commitments from jurisdictions which committed to reform and were listed on Annex II when the first EU list was released on December 5th2017; demands that jurisdictions listed on Annex II thanks to commitments made in 2017 are listed on Annex I if the due reforms have not been implemented by the end of 2018 or the agreed timeline;
Amendment 1000 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 154 c (new)
Paragraph 154 c (new)
154 c. Notes that developing countries might not possess the resources to implement newly agreed international or European tax standards and /or might have more urgent tax gap issues to tackle to ensure they generate sufficient revenues to provide for essential public services; subsequently calls on the Council to exclude counter measures such as cuts in development aid;
Amendment 1001 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 154 d (new)
Paragraph 154 d (new)
154 d. Notes that, according to data of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) on foreign direct investment, Luxembourg and the Netherlands combined have more inward investment than the US, the vast majority of which is in special-purpose entities with no substantial economic activity, and Ireland has more inward investment than either Germany or France; points out that, according to its National Statistics Office, foreign investment in Malta amounts to 1 474 %of the size of its economy; notes that, according to research carried out by the University of Amsterdam, 23 % of all corporate investments that ended up in tax havens passed through the Netherlands; believes that these data are a clear indication that some Member States are facilitating excessive profit-shifting activities at the expense of other Member States;
Amendment 1002 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 154 e (new)
Paragraph 154 e (new)
154 e. Recalls that the European Commission has criticised seven member states - Belgium, Cyprus, Hungary, Ireland, Luxembourg, Malta and The Netherlands, for their "aggressive" tax policies, arguing that they have tax policies that undermine the integrity of the European single market;
Amendment 1004 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 154 f (new)
Paragraph 154 f (new)
154 f. Calls, therefore, on the Commission to regard explicitly at least Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Ireland and Malta as EU tax havens;
Amendment 1005 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 154 g (new)
Paragraph 154 g (new)
154 g. Notes the current negotiations between the EU and Switzerland towards a Framework Agreement; stresses its view that the EU should renegotiate its trade, economic and other relevant bilateral agreements with Switzerland to bring them into line with EU anti-tax fraud policy and anti-money laundering legislation, so as to eliminate serious flaws in the Swiss supervisory system which enable a policy of internal banking secrecy to continue, as well as the creation of offshore structures worldwide, tax fraud and tax evasion not constituting a criminal offence, weak supervision, the inadequate self-regulation of obliged entities, and aggressive prosecution and harassment of whistle-blowers;
Amendment 1010 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 156
Paragraph 156
156. Calls on the Member States to adopt a single set of strong countermeasures, including automatic CFC rulwithholding taxes, exclusion from public procurement calls and withdrawal of business licences, for blacklisted jurisdictionsthe intermediaries and companies present in blacklisted tax havens and automatic CFC rules applied to the latter, unless the taxpayers convey genuine economic activities there and are subject to increased audit requirements; invites both tax administrations and taxpayers to cooperate to gather the relevant facts in case the controlled foreign company carries out substantive real economic activity and has substantial economic presence supported by staff, equipment, assets and premises, as evidenced by relevant facts and circumstances;
Amendment 1021 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 158
Paragraph 158
158. Reiterates its call for the EU to have a leading role in the global fight against tax evasion, aggressive tax planning and money laundering, in particular through Commission initiatives in all related international forums; calls on the EU as a member of the G20 to aim for that forum to undertake a strong action against tax competition;
Amendment 1030 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 159
Paragraph 159
159. Recalls its position regarding the creation of a globn intergovernmental tax body within the UN framework, which should be well equipped and have sufficient resources to ensure that all countries can participate on an equal footing in the formulation and reform of global tax policies;
Amendment 1038 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 160
Paragraph 160
160. Calls for a globintergovernmental summit on remaining necessary global tax reforms in order to enhance international cooperation and put pressure on all countries, in particular their financial centres, to comply with transparency and fair taxation standards; calls for the Commission to take the initiative for such a summit and for the summit to allow for the establishment of the abovementioned globintergovernmental tax body;
Amendment 1041 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 160 a (new)
Paragraph 160 a (new)
160 a. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to push for a second set of international tax reform gathering all countries interested on an equal footing and aiming at tackling the growing corporate tax race to the bottom and the allocation of taxing rights;
Amendment 1045 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 161
Paragraph 161
161. Believes that supporting developing countries in combating tax evasion and aggressive tax planning, as well as corruption and secrecy that facilitate illicit financial flows, is of the utmost importance for strengthening policy coherence for development in the EU and improving developing countries’ tax capacities and domestic resource mobilisation; stresses the need to increase the share, in terms of aid and development, of financial and technical assistance to the national tax administrations of developing countries;
Amendment 1069 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 167
Paragraph 167
167. Recalls the need for fair treatment of developing countries when negotiating tax treaties, taking into account their particular situation and ensuring a fair allocation of tax rights according to genuine economic activity and value creation; calls, in this regard, for adherence to the UN model tax convention to be used as a minimum standard and for transparency around treaty negotiations to be ensured;
Amendment 1097 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 170 b (new)
Paragraph 170 b (new)
170 b. Notes that some tax treaties allow the development of potential harmful tax schemes, such as the ‘SingleMalt’ 1awhich directs profits to countries with which Ireland has a double taxation agreement but that do not have any corporation tax; asks the European Commission to investigate such schemes and assess if they constitute an abuse of tax treaties; _________________ 1a Christian Aid, ‘Impossible’ structures: tax outcomes overlooked by the 2015 tax Spillover analysis, Part Two, 2017 https://www.christianaid.ie/sites/default/fil es/2018-02/impossible-structures-tax- report.pdf
Amendment 1102 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 171 a (new)
Paragraph 171 a (new)
171 a. Asks Member States to renegotiate their bilateral tax treaties with third countries with the aim of introducing anti-abuse clauses, preventing ‘treaty shopping’ and a race to the bottom among developing countries;
Amendment 1103 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 171 b (new)
Paragraph 171 b (new)
171 b. Reiterates its call on the European Union and its Member States to ensure that, when negotiating tax and investment treaties with developing countries, income or profits resulting from cross-border activities be taxed in the source country, where value is extracted or created; stresses, in this regard, that the UN Model Tax Convention ensures a fairer distribution of taxing rights between source and residence countries; stresses than when negotiating tax treaties, the European Union and its Member States should comply with the principle of policy coherence for development established in Article 208 TFEU;
Amendment 1111 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 172
Paragraph 172
172. Calls on the Commission to review all tax treaties in force and signed by Member States with third countries through impact assessment in order to identify potential negative impacts of such treaties on low and lower-middle income countries and to ensure that they treaties are all compliant with new global standards such as the Multilateral Convention to Implement Tax Treaty Related Measures to Prevent Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (‘MLI’); asks the Commission to release recommendations to Member States regarding their existing bilateral tax treaties to ensure that theynotes that the MLI represents OECD-based standards which were not established with consideration to the needs or challenges of developing countries; asks the Commission to release recommendations to Member States regarding their existing bilateral tax treaties to ensure that Member States are open to country context specific responses and enter into bilateral conversations with treaty countries to discuss allocation of taxing rights, and that bilateral tax treaties include general anti-abuse rules, looking at genuine economic activity and value creation;
Amendment 1115 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 172 a (new)
Paragraph 172 a (new)
172 a. Calls on Member States to mandate the Commission to propose a European tax treaty template, containing a clause on significant digital presence, an anti-abuse rule and an anti-tax dumping clause including a minimum level of effective taxation set at 18% of profits;
Amendment 1132 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 177
Paragraph 177
177. Welcomes the broad definition of both ‘intermediary’ and ‘reportable cross- border arrangement’ in the recently adopted DAC683 ; _________________ 83stresses that the relevant information in relation to potentially aggressive tax planning arrangements should also be accessible to the general public; _________________ 83 OJ L 139, 5.6.2018, p. 1. OJ L 139, 5.6.2018, p. 1.
Amendment 1149 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 178 a (new)
Paragraph 178 a (new)
178 a. Calls for a rotation of auditors every 7 years to prevent conflicts of interests and the limitation of the provision of non-audit services to a minimum;
Amendment 1152 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 178 b (new)
Paragraph 178 b (new)
178 b. Reiterates that intermediaries play a crucial role in facilitating money laundering and the financing of terrorism and should beheld accountable for these actions;
Amendment 1153 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 178 c (new)
Paragraph 178 c (new)
178 c. Reiterates its call on the Commission to come forward with a legislative proposal on the separation of accounting firms and financial or tax service providers as well as on all advisory services, including a Union incompatibility regime for tax advisers, in order to prevent them from advising both public revenue authorities and taxpayers and to prevent other conflicts of interest;
Amendment 1158 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 179 a (new)
Paragraph 179 a (new)
179 a. Points out that professional secrecy cannot be used for the purposes of protection, the covering up of illegal practices or violating the spirit of the law; urges that the client/attorney privilege principle should not impede adequate STRs or the reporting of other potentially illegal activities without prejudice to the rights guaranteed by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and the general principles of criminal law; calls on the Commission to issue guidance on the interpretation and application of the legal privilege principle for professionals and to introduce a clear demarcation line between traditional judicial advice and lawyers acting as financial operators, in line with case-law of European courts;
Amendment 1159 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 179 b (new)
Paragraph 179 b (new)
179 b. Calls on the Commission to assess the possibilities of blacklisting financial and non-financial intermediaries based in the EU which operate branches in countries blacklisted as non-cooperative jurisdictions or which are listed as high risk third countries by the Commission; Suggests further that intermediaries should be restricted from operating in the single market if convicted of financial crimes or of facilitating tax evasion;
Amendment 1161 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 179 c (new)
Paragraph 179 c (new)
179 c. Pays tribute to the brave actions of whistle-blowers and recognizes their fundamental role in a democratic and accountable society;
Amendment 1167 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 180 a (new)
Paragraph 180 a (new)
180 a. Calls for a general EU fund to be set up to give appropriate financial support to whistle-blowers whose livelihood is put at risk as a result of disclosures of criminal activity or facts with clear public interest;
Amendment 1174 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 181 a (new)
Paragraph 181 a (new)
181 a. Is concerned by the impact of non- disclosure agreements in employment contracts and dismissal agreements, particularly in the financial sector; calls on the Commission to assess the possibility of proposing legislation banning abusive non-disclosure agreements and declared void agreements which limit the employee’s ability and right to report unlawful activity;
Amendment 1207 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 188 a (new)
Paragraph 188 a (new)
188 a. Highlights that trade unions should have a greater role in the negotiation of whistleblowing policies and channels in the workplace; calls on Member States to allow, in national law, for whistle-blowers to report wrongdoing to a union representative if they feel they cannot report it internally;
Amendment 1224 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 194 a (new)
Paragraph 194 a (new)
194 a. Notes that no EU Member States were included on the EU list of non- cooperative jurisdictions as EU Member States were not assessed; welcomes the declaration from the Chair of the Code of Conduct Group indicating that Member States could be assessed in the future1a; demands that such assessment is conducted without any further delay; _________________ 1a “The fact of screening the EU Member States with the same criteria is exactly what is under discussion in the context of the revision of the mandate of the Code Group that currently the Austrian Presidency of the Council is taking forward.” Exchange of views with Fabrizia Lapecorella, Chair of the Code of Conduct Group on Business Taxation, European Parliament, http://www.europarl.europa.eu/cmsdata/1 55396/TAX3%20Verbatim%2010%20Oct ober%202018_OR.pdfOct 2018
Amendment 1228 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 197
Paragraph 197
197. Believes that the mandate of the CoC Group needs to be updated, since it addresses matters beyond the assessment of harmful EU tax practices, which is more than simply providing technical input to the decisions made by the Council; calls, based on the nature of the work undertaken by the Group which is also of a political nature, for such tasks to be brought back under a framework which enables democratic control or supervision, starting by applying transparency; invites Member States to update the mandate of the CoC Group to include a minimum level of effective taxation set at 18% of profits as well as an increased and improved work on harmful tax practices and on the EU listing process;
Amendment 1233 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 199 a (new)
Paragraph 199 a (new)
199 a. Reiterates its call for the creation of an EU Tax Policy Coherence and Coordination Centre (EUTPCCC) within the structure of the Commission1a,which would ensure effective and expeditious cooperation between Member States’ and facilitate early warning in cases like the Cum Ex scandal; urges Member States to support this call and for the Commission to present a legislative proposal for such a mechanism; _________________ 1a European Parliament resolution of 6 July 2016 on tax rulings and other measures similar in nature or effect (2016/2038(INI))
Amendment 1280 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 207
Paragraph 207
207. Takes the view that the work of the TAXE, TAX2, PANA and TAX3 committees should be continued, in the forthcoming parliamentary term, in a permanent structure within Parliament such as a subcommittee to the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (ECON), including Members from a diverse range of committees; considers that the Commissioner for Taxation, the Chair of the CoC Group and the Finance minister holding the rotating EU presidency should appear at least twice a year before the heretofore mentioned permanent structure;