7 Amendments of Marta ANDREASEN related to 2012/0000(INI)
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that the definition of tax havens is no longer up-to-date and that (semi- )legal ways of avoiding or reducing tax 1 resolution Van Vliet nr. 35 (25087) liabilities are becoming more and more common in the Member Stateslegal ways of avoiding or reducing tax liabilities are becoming more and more common in the Member States as a direct and intended consequence of the functioning of the Single Market: for instance, transfers by ‘postbox companies’ in and through the Netherlands are estimaasserted to amount to EUR 8000 billion a year alone;
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. StressNotes that massive tax evasiontax avoidance by larger companies, can hasve a devastatingleterious effect on the taxpaying discipline of smaller companieSMEs and even individuals, since it makes tax evasion appear to be the accepted norm who are less able to take advantage of the facilities available and may help to make tax evasion an acceptable option to SMEs and individuals;
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. RegretNotes that the vast amountsums paid to the Union on the basis of the agreements by the major tobacco companies were not used for anti-fraud measures and programmes but were ‘90 % confiscated’ by the Member States, which added them as income to their respective budgetsquite properly returned in large measure to the Member States, where they would be able to make some contribution to deficit reduction;
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Stresses thatNotes however that as VAT is an 'Own Resource', tax evasion in theat area of VATdoes hasve a direct influence on both the economies of the Member States and the EU budget; recalls that, in the words of the Court of Auditors, ‘VAT evasion affects the financial interests of Member States. It has an impact on the EU budget as it leads to lower VAT-based Own Resources. This loss is compensated by the GNI-based own resource, distorting individual Member States’ contributions to the EU budget. Moreover, tax fraud undermines the functioning of the internal market and prevents fair competition*; 1 Special Report of the Court of Auditors No 13/2011, p. 11, paragraph 5. 1; Or. en
Amendment 17 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Points out that ever since VAT was introduced its collection model has remained largely unchanged; stressnotes that this model ismay be outdated, given the many changes in the technological and economic environment that have taken place, and; believes that it otherefore leads to substantial losses in terms of possibilities with lower compliance cuostoms duties, VAT and excise dutiess and greater fairness should be investigated;
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Deplores the fact that two importantNotes that two initiatives aimed at combating VAT fraud, namely the proposal for a Council Directive amending Directive 2006/112/EC on the common system of value added tax as regards a quick reaction mechanism against VAT fraud (COM(2012)0428) and the proposal for a Council Directive amending Directive 2006/112/EC as regards an optional and temporary application of the reverse charge mechanism in relation to supplies of certain goods and services susceptible to fraud (COM(2009)0511), are still blocked in Council;
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. StressNotes that the correct operation of the customs system has direct consequences in terms of the calculation of VAT; is deeply worriconcerned that customs checks in the EU aremay not be functioning properly, resulting in significant VAT losses*1; finds it unacceptable that in most Member States the tax authorities have no direct access to customs data and that automated cross-checking with tax data is therefore not possible; points out that organised crime is well aware of the weaknesses of the actual system;