BETA

29 Amendments of Eva JOLY related to 2016/0414(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 1

(1) Money laundering and the associated financing of terrorism and organised crime remain significant problems at the Union level, thus damaging the integrity, stability and reputation of the financial sector and threatening the internal security and the internal market of the Union. In order to tackle those urgent problems and also reinforce the application of Directive 2015/849/EU34, this Directive aims to tackle money laundering by means of criminal law, allowing for better cross- border cooperation between competent authorities. _________________ 34 Directive (EU) 2015/849 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2015 on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purposes of money laundering or terrorist financing, amending Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 of the European Parliament and the Council, and repealing Directive 2005/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Commission Directive 2006/70/EC (OJ L 141, 5.6.2015, p.73).

2017/09/26
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Recital 6

(6) Tax crimes relating to direct and indirect taxes should be included in the definition of criminal activity, in line with the revised FATF Recommendations. Given that different tax offences may in each Member State constitute a criminal activity punishable by means of the sanctions referred to in this Directive, definitions of tax crimes may diverge in national law. However ~~no harmonisation of the definitions of tax crimes in Member States' national law is sought~~tax crimes should be understood as including at least tax fraud, aggravated tax fraud and tax evasion offences and any fraudulent behaviour involving concealment of income or profits or the organisation of one’s insolvency which aims at reducing or suppressing tax liability. The definitions of tax crimes should not include thresholds requiring the existence of a significant amount of unpaid taxes or the systematic use of fraudulent manoeuvres in national law.

2017/09/26
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Recital 9

(9) In order for money laundering to be an effective tool against organised crime, it should not be necessary to identify the specifics of the crime that generated the property, let alone require a prior or simultaneous conviction for that crime. Prosecutions for money laundering should also not be impeded by the mere fact that the predicate offence was committed in another Member State or third country, provided it is a criminal offence in that Member State or third country. Member States ~~may~~should also be able to establish as a prerequisite the fact that the pre~~dicate offence~~levant conduct would have been a ~~crim~~predicate offence in its national law, had it been committed there. However, insofar as the relevant conduct constitutes terrorism, organised crime, corruption, trafficking in human beings, environmental crimes, sexual exploitation or tax crimes, Member States should not require that the relevant conduct be a criminal offence in the Member State or country where that conduct took place.

2017/09/26
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Recital 11

(11) In order to deter money laundering throughout the Union, Member States should lay down minimum types and levels of penalties when the criminal offences defined in this Directive are committed. WMinimum types and levels of penalties should also be laid down with respect to inciting, aiding and abetting the commission of such criminal offences. Member States should provide for aggravating circumstances in accordance with the applicable rules established by their legal systems, in the following circumstances: where the offence is committed within a criminal organisation within the meaning of Council Framework Decision 2008/841/JHA37 ~~8 or~~; where the perpetrator abused their professional position to enable money laundering~~, Member States should provide for aggravating circumstances in accordance with the applicable rules established by their legal systems~~; where the money or property being laundered is derived from terrorist activities as defined in Directive 2017/541 or illicit arms trafficking; or where the offender is a Politically Exposed Person as defined by Directive 2015/849 or involved in corruption of elected officials. Member States should calculate the amount of fines in accordance with the gross principle, i.e. based on the profit stemming from the criminal action without deducting any costs incurred, so as to ensure that the sanction is higher than the economic value of the crime. _________________ 37 Council Framework Decision 2008/841/JHA of 24 October 2008 on the fight against organised crime, (OJ L 300, 11.11.2008, p. 42)

2017/09/26
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point p a (new)

(pa) tax crimes relating to direct taxes and indirect taxes, including evading taxes by concealing income, earned either legally or illegally, from detection and collection by the tax authorities;

2017/09/26
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point v

(v) all offences~~, including tax crimes relating to direct taxes and indirect taxes as defined in the national law of the Member States,~~ which are punishable by deprivation of liberty or a detention order for a maximum of more than one year or, as regards Member States that have a minimum threshold for offences in their legal system, all offences punishable by deprivation of liberty or a detention order for a minimum of more than six months;

2017/09/26
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point c

(c) the acquisition, possession or use of property, ~~knowing at the time of receipt,~~ that such property was derived from criminal activity or from an act of participation in such an activity.

2017/09/26
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point c

(c) whether the criminal activity that generated the property was carried out in the territory of another Member State or in that of a third country, when the relevant conduct iswould constitute a criminal ~~offence~~activity under the national law of the Member ~~State or the thir~~implementing or applying this Article had it been carried cou~~ntry where the conduct was committed and would be~~t there. Member States may, however, require that the relevant conduct, insofar as it does not fall within the categories referred to in Article 2, paragraph 1, points (a), (b), (c), (d), (h) (l) and (pa), constitutes a criminal offence under the national law of the other Member State ~~implementing or applying this Article had it been committed there;~~ or of that of the third country;

2017/09/26
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)

(ca) whether the criminal activity that generated the property was carried out in the territory of a third country mentioned in the list of countries at high risk of money laundering as referred to in Directive 2015/849, when the relevant conduct would constitute a criminal activity under the national law of the Member State implementing or applying this Article had it been carried out there;

2017/09/26
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1

1. Each Member State shall ensure that the conduct referred to in Articles 3 and 4 shall be punishable by effective, proportionate and dissuasive criminal penalties, including criminal or non- criminal fines, based on the gross value of the total amount stemming from criminal activity.

2017/09/26
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2

2. Each Member State shall ensure that the offences referred to in Article 3 shall be punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of at least f~~our~~ive years~~, at least in serious cases~~.

2017/09/26
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Each Member State shall ensure that the offences referred to in Article 4 shall be punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of at least three years.

2017/09/26
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2 b (new)

2b. Each Member State shall ensure that the offences referred to in Article 3 and 4 may also be punishable, at the judge’s discretion, by complementary, temporary or permanent sanctions including: (a) a ban on entering into contracts with public authorities; (b) a disqualification from the practice of certain commercial activities; and (c) a ban to run for elected offices.

2017/09/26
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)

(ba) the money or property being laundered is derived from terrorist activities as defined in Directive 2017/541 or illicit arms trafficking;

2017/09/26
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b b (new)

(bb) the offender is a Politically Exposed Person as defined by Directive 2015/849 or involving corruption of elected officials;

2017/09/26
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Each Member State shall ensure that a legal person held liable for offences pursuant to Article 67 shall be punishable by effective, proportionate and dissuasive sanctions, which shall include criminal or non-criminal fines ~~and may include other~~, based on the gross value of the total amount stemming from criminal activity, and may, at the judge’s discretion, include other temporary or permanent sanctions, ~~such as~~including:

2017/09/26
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point 1 a (new)

(1a) the exclusion of that person from entitlement to Union funds;

2017/09/26
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point 1 b (new)

(1b) a ban on entering into contracts with public authorities;

2017/09/26
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point a

(a) the offence is committed in whole or in part in its territory or;

2017/09/26
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point b

(b) the offender is one of its nationals. or;

2017/09/26
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)

(ba) the offences referred to in Articles 3 and 4 are committed outside its territory but the offender is a habitual resident in its territory or;

2017/09/26
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point b b (new)

(bb) the offences referred to in Articles 3 and 4 are committed outside its territory but the offence is committed for the benefit of a legal person established in its territory.

2017/09/26
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. When an offence falls within the jurisdiction of more than one Member State and when any of the Member States concerned can validly prosecute on the basis of the same facts, Member States shall take into account the following factors, listed in order of priority, to decide which of them will prosecute the offenders: (a) the territory of the Member State where the offence was committed; (b) the nationality or residency of the offender; (c) the country of origin of the victims; (d) the territory of the Member State where the offender was found.

2017/09/26
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1 b (new)

1b. Member States may have recourse to Eurojust in order to facilitate cooperation between their judicial authorities and the coordination of their action.

2017/09/26
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 2

2. A Member State shall inform the Commission where it decides to establish further jurisdiction over the offences referred to in Articles 3 and 4 committed outside its territory where: (a) the offender is a habitual resident in its territory; (b) the offence is committed for the benefit of a legal person established in its territory.deleted

2017/09/26
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – title

Investigative tools and cooperation

2017/09/26
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 1

1. Each Member State shall ensure that effective investigative tools, such as those used in countering organised crime or other serious crimes are available to persons, units or services responsible for investigating or prosecuting the offences referred to in Articles 3 and 4.

2017/09/26
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Each Member State shall ensure that adequate and sufficient human and financial resources, as well as trainings are allocated to investigate and prosecute the offences referred to in Articles 3 and 4.

2017/09/26
Committee: ECON

1b. Each Member State shall ensure that their national authorities investigating or prosecuting offences referred to in Articles 3 and 4 are empowered to cooperate with other national authorities and their counterparts in other Member States.

2017/09/26
Committee: ECON