BETA


2008/2151(INI) European Court of Auditors' Special Report No 8/2007 concerning administrative cooperation in the field of VAT

Progress: Procedure completed

RoleCommitteeRapporteurShadows
Lead CONT STAES Bart (icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE)
Committee Opinion ECON RAEVA Bilyana Ilieva (icon: ALDE ALDE)
Lead committee dossier:
Legal Basis:
RoP 54, RoP 54-p4

Events

2009/03/10
   EC - Commission response to text adopted in plenary
Documents
2008/12/04
   EP - Results of vote in Parliament
2008/12/04
   EP - Decision by Parliament
Details

The European Parliament adopted, by 592 votes to 15 with 20 abstentions, a resolution on the European Court of Auditors' Special Report No 8/2007 concerning administrative cooperation in the field of value added tax (VAT).

The own-initiative report had been tabled for consideration in plenary by Bart STAES (Greens/ALE, BE) on behalf of the Comm ittee on Budgetary Control.

Value added tax (VAT) evasion and fraud not only affect the financing of Member States' budgets, but also the EU own resources system. According to estimates quoted by the Court of Auditors, VAT revenue losses amounted to EUR 17 billion in Germany for 2005 and EUR 18.2 billion in the UK for the tax year 2005-2006. The volume of VAT fraud could exceed the volume of the Community's total annual budget.

On the basis of the Court of Auditors' Special Report No 8/2007, Parliament concludes that Regulation (EC) No 1798/2003 is not an effective tool for administrative cooperation as several Member States obstruct its implementation and the Commission's role is limited.

The main points covered by the report are as follows:

Quantifying VAT fraud : the actual volume of VAT evasion and fraud is difficult to assess, therefore the Commission and the Council are urged to give a higher priority to the development of a common approach in order to quantify and analyse VAT fraud which should allow assessment as to whether measures taken by Member States against VAT evasion and fraud are successful, or whether they just trigger a displacement of VAT fraud to other economic sectors or Member States. Parliament also asks the Commission, the Council and the Member States to fully take into account the recommendations of the Contact Committee of the Supreme Audit Institutions of the European Union of December 2007, which include proposals as to how Member States could improve their estimates and how a single model for the estimation of VAT fraud could be established.

Shortcomings in the performance of Member States' authorities : concerned about the shortcomings identified by the Court of Auditors as regards administrative cooperation between Member States in the field of VAT, MEPs urge Member States to guarantee timely exchange of information on request and invites them to fully exploit the possibility of delegating competences as regards information exchange to local tax offices. They call on the Council to address the discrepancy between the number of requests for information which a Member State claims to have received and the number of requests other Member States claim to have sent to it, and to solve this problem as a matter of urgency.

The resolution recommends to the Commission that, within their national reform programmes under the Lisbon strategy, Member States report on the implementation of data requirements towards other Member States and considers it important, where data provision from one Member State to another is subject to systematic delay, that infringement procedures be initiated by the Commission against the Member State that delays the provision of data. The Commission is invited to facilitate further exchange of best practices and coordination between Member States as regards the organisational arrangements for administrative cooperation.

Moreover, MEPs fail to understand why Member States, despite the Commission's efforts to facilitate an agreement, still have not agreed on common criteria for the cancellation of VAT numbers, although the possibility for a quick withdrawal of a VAT number is an essential element in stopping and preventing VAT fraud. They regret that simultaneous, multilateral controls are not sufficiently used by Member States, although the Community provides for their funding and the Court of Auditors reports that good results can be achieved. Parliament notes the efficiency of the Eurocanet (European Carousel Network) founded by Belgium in order to improve the spontaneous exchange of information and call on Germany, Italy and the United Kingdom to join the Eurocanet Network. MEPs regret that Germany did not comply with the Court's audit request.

Follow-up and future perspectives : the resolution welcomes the Commission's proposals for amendment of the VAT Directive and the VAT Administrative Cooperation Regulation. The Commission is invited to:

submit further proposals aimed at reinforcing Member States' ability to collect non-paid VAT by making traders jointly and severally liable for tax losses in cases where their non-compliance with reporting obligations facilitated the fraud; submit further proposals on automated access by all other Member States to certain non-sensitive data held by Member States on their own taxable persons and on the harmonisation of procedures for the registration and de-registration of persons liable for VAT to ensure the swift detection and de-registration of counterfeit taxable persons.

MEPs ask the Council to continue negotiations on the proposal for a regulation on mutual administrative assistance in the fight against fraud affecting the financial interests of the European Community, including VAT fraud, which would provide a detailed framework for multidisciplinary administrative anti-fraud cooperation. They also invite the Commission's responsible services, DG Taxation and Customs Union and the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF), to create a task force.

Stepping-up cooperation between judicial authorities : Member States are invited to remove legal obstacles in national law which hamper cross-border prosecution, in particular in cases where the VAT losses occur in another Member State.

Documents
2008/12/04
   EP - End of procedure in Parliament
2008/12/03
   EP - Debate in Parliament
2008/11/07
   EP - Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
Documents
2008/11/07
   EP - Committee report tabled for plenary
Documents
2008/11/04
   EP - Vote in committee
Details

The Committee on Budgetary Control adopted an own-initiative report drafted by Bart STAES (Greens/ALE, BE) on the report of the European Court of Auditors' Special Report No 8/2007 concerning administrative cooperation in the field of value added tax (VAT).

The committee w elcomes the Court of Auditors' Special Report No 8/2007 and concludes, on the basis of the Court of Auditors' findings, that Regulation (EC) No 1798/2003 is not an effective tool for administrative cooperation as several Member States obstruct its implementation and the Commission's role is limited.

The main points covered by the report are as follows:

Quantifying VAT fraud : MEPs are aware of the fact that the actual volume of VAT evasion and fraud is difficult to assess, as many Member States either do not collect or do not publish data. The Commission and the Council are urged to give a higher priority to the development of a common approach in order to quantify and analyse VAT fraud. They also ask the Commission, the Council and the Member States to fully take into account the recommendations of the Contact Committee of the Supreme Audit Institutions of the European Union of December 2007, which include proposals as to how Member States could improve their estimates and how a single model for the estimation of VAT fraud could be established.

Member States' authorities : concerned about the shortcomings identified by the Court of Auditors as regards administrative cooperation between Member States in the field of VAT, MEPs urge Member States to guarantee timely exchange of information on request and invites them to fully exploit the possibility of delegating competences as regards information exchange to local tax offices. They call on the Council to address the discrepancy between the number of requests for information which a Member State claims to have received and the number of requests other Member States claim to have sent to it, and to solve this problem as a matter of urgency.

The report recommends to the Commission that, within their national reform programmes under the Lisbon strategy, Member States report on the implementation of data requirements towards other Member States and considers it important, where data provision from one Member State to another is subject to systematic delay, that infringement procedures be initiated by the Commission against the Member State that delays the provision of data. The Commission is invited to facilitate further exchange of best practices and coordination between Member States as regards the organisational arrangements for administrative cooperation.

Moreover, MEPs fail to understand why Member States, despite the Commission's efforts to facilitate an agreement, still have not agreed on common criteria for the cancellation of VAT numbers, although the possibility for a quick withdrawal of a VAT number is an essential element in stopping and preventing VAT fraud. They regret that simultaneous, multilateral controls are not sufficiently used by Member States, although the Community provides for their funding and the Court of Auditors reports that good results can be achieved. MEPs regret that Germany did not comply with the Court's audit request.

Follow-up and future perspectives : the report welcomes the Commission's proposals for amendment of the VAT Directive and the VAT Administrative Cooperation Regulation. The Commission is invited to:

submit further proposals aimed at reinforcing Member States' ability to collect non-paid VAT by making traders jointly and severally liable for tax losses in cases where their non-compliance with reporting obligations facilitated the fraud; submit further proposals on automated access by all other Member States to certain non-sensitive data held by Member States on their own taxable persons and on the harmonisation of procedures for the registration and de-registration of persons liable for VAT to ensure the swift detection and de-registration of counterfeit taxable persons.

MEPs ask the Council to continue negotiations on the proposal for a regulation on mutual administrative assistance in the fight against fraud affecting the financial interests of the European Community, including VAT fraud, which would provide a detailed framework for multidisciplinary administrative anti-fraud cooperation. They also invite the Commission's responsible services, DG Taxation and Customs Union and the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF), to create a task force.

Stepping-up cooperation between judicial authorities : Member States are invited to remove legal obstacles in national law which hamper cross-border prosecution, in particular in cases where the VAT losses occur in another Member State.

2008/10/15
   EP - Committee opinion
Documents
2008/09/16
   EP - Amendments tabled in committee
Documents
2008/07/08
   EP - Committee draft report
Documents
2008/06/19
   EP - Committee referral announced in Parliament
2008/06/19
   EP - Referral to associated committees announced in Parliament
2008/05/20
   EP - RAEVA Bilyana Ilieva (ALDE) appointed as rapporteur in ECON
2008/02/26
   EP - STAES Bart (Verts/ALE) appointed as rapporteur in CONT
2008/01/25
   CofA - Non-legislative basic document
Details

SPECIAL REPORT No 8/2007 of the Court of Auditors concerning administrative cooperation in the field of value added tax, together with the Commission ’ s replies.

The report recalls that in 2004 , new Community legislation came into force to speed up and strengthen cross-border cooperation between Member State authorities, mainly through clearer procedures, more comprehensive exchange of information and increased direct contacts between local tax offices.

The audit of the Court aimed to assess whether information exchanges between Member States take place in a timely and effective manner and are supported by sound procedures and adequate administrative structures. It showed that information exchanges between Member States can help Member States to assess taxation correctly and to prevent and detect fraud.

However, the Court found that, despite new arrangements introduced in 2004, administrative cooperation between Member States in the field of VAT is still not intensive enough to cope with intra-Community VAT evasion and fraud .

The Court found in particular that:

· insufficient use is made of the new possibilities to enhance and speed up cooperation and not all Member States have set up adequate administrative structures and/or operational procedures for ensuring efficient cooperation;

· half of the information exchange upon request does not take place within the timescales required by the legislation and notifications of late replies or interim replies are rarely given;

· late replies occur in all Member States but their frequency varies considerably between Member States. There are sometimes significant differences between the number of requests which a Member State claims to have received and the number of requests other Member States claim to have sent it;

· the framework for exchanges of information without prior request is not well defined and the information which is provided spontaneously is not always systematically exploited;

· the late availability and lack of reliability of data in the current Value Added Information Exchange System (VIES) increase the risk of evasion and fraud not being detected.

According to the Court, there is a need for more intensive and rapid cooperation, more direct contacts between local tax offices and better monitoring to ensure that Member States provide efficient assistance to each other. The weaknesses of VIES should be urgently addressed, for example by radically shortening the timescale for collecting and capturing data and by granting broader direct access to data to enable multilateral consultations.

To combat intra-Community VAT fraud successfully, the Court sets out the following recommendations:

Member States should encourage more direct communication between local inspection staff as an effective way to speed up the exchange of information. It would at the same time help to increase the intensity of cooperation and the quality of the information exchanged; more efficient monitoring of exchanges of information between Member States is necessary to ensure that problems are swiftly identified and tackled; the procedures for exchanges of information without prior request need to be clarified. Information which is provided spontaneously should be systematically exploited by Member States; t he introduction of harmonised rules for withdrawing VAT numbers from traders involved in fraudulent activities should be considered; a common approach needs to be developed by the Commission together with the Member States to quantifying and analysing VAT evasion; to improve cross-border prosecution of intra-Community VAT fraud in the Member States.

T he Court recalls that it recommended that the Commission should make an effort to propose a simplification and consolidation of Community anti-fraud legislation with a view to avoiding duplications and overlapping or contradictory provisions. Existing weaknesses in cooperation between the Commission and the Member States could be addressed in the framework of such an overhaul.

2008/01/24
   EC - Non-legislative basic document published
Details

SPECIAL REPORT No 8/2007 of the Court of Auditors concerning administrative cooperation in the field of value added tax, together with the Commission ’ s replies.

The report recalls that in 2004 , new Community legislation came into force to speed up and strengthen cross-border cooperation between Member State authorities, mainly through clearer procedures, more comprehensive exchange of information and increased direct contacts between local tax offices.

The audit of the Court aimed to assess whether information exchanges between Member States take place in a timely and effective manner and are supported by sound procedures and adequate administrative structures. It showed that information exchanges between Member States can help Member States to assess taxation correctly and to prevent and detect fraud.

However, the Court found that, despite new arrangements introduced in 2004, administrative cooperation between Member States in the field of VAT is still not intensive enough to cope with intra-Community VAT evasion and fraud .

The Court found in particular that:

· insufficient use is made of the new possibilities to enhance and speed up cooperation and not all Member States have set up adequate administrative structures and/or operational procedures for ensuring efficient cooperation;

· half of the information exchange upon request does not take place within the timescales required by the legislation and notifications of late replies or interim replies are rarely given;

· late replies occur in all Member States but their frequency varies considerably between Member States. There are sometimes significant differences between the number of requests which a Member State claims to have received and the number of requests other Member States claim to have sent it;

· the framework for exchanges of information without prior request is not well defined and the information which is provided spontaneously is not always systematically exploited;

· the late availability and lack of reliability of data in the current Value Added Information Exchange System (VIES) increase the risk of evasion and fraud not being detected.

According to the Court, there is a need for more intensive and rapid cooperation, more direct contacts between local tax offices and better monitoring to ensure that Member States provide efficient assistance to each other. The weaknesses of VIES should be urgently addressed, for example by radically shortening the timescale for collecting and capturing data and by granting broader direct access to data to enable multilateral consultations.

To combat intra-Community VAT fraud successfully, the Court sets out the following recommendations:

Member States should encourage more direct communication between local inspection staff as an effective way to speed up the exchange of information. It would at the same time help to increase the intensity of cooperation and the quality of the information exchanged; more efficient monitoring of exchanges of information between Member States is necessary to ensure that problems are swiftly identified and tackled; the procedures for exchanges of information without prior request need to be clarified. Information which is provided spontaneously should be systematically exploited by Member States; t he introduction of harmonised rules for withdrawing VAT numbers from traders involved in fraudulent activities should be considered; a common approach needs to be developed by the Commission together with the Member States to quantifying and analysing VAT evasion; to improve cross-border prosecution of intra-Community VAT fraud in the Member States.

T he Court recalls that it recommended that the Commission should make an effort to propose a simplification and consolidation of Community anti-fraud legislation with a view to avoiding duplications and overlapping or contradictory provisions. Existing weaknesses in cooperation between the Commission and the Member States could be addressed in the framework of such an overhaul.

Documents

Documents

Activities

Votes

Rapport Staes A6-0427/2008 - résolution #

2008/12/04 Outcome: +: 592, 0: 20, -: 15
DE IT FR PL ES GB RO NL PT BE HU BG EL CZ SE AT LT FI DK IE SK LV SI EE LU CY MT
Total
80
57
57
49
43
60
25
25
24
21
18
16
19
16
17
13
12
11
13
11
10
7
6
6
6
3
2
icon: PPE-DE PPE-DE
228

Lithuania PPE-DE

1

Denmark PPE-DE

1

Slovenia PPE-DE

3

Estonia PPE-DE

For (1)

1

Luxembourg PPE-DE

3

Malta PPE-DE

For (1)

1
icon: PSE PSE
171

Czechia PSE

2

Lithuania PSE

2

Finland PSE

2

Ireland PSE

1

Slovakia PSE

2

Slovenia PSE

For (1)

1

Estonia PSE

3

Luxembourg PSE

For (1)

1

Malta PSE

For (1)

1
icon: ALDE ALDE
82

Hungary ALDE

1

Sweden ALDE

2

Austria ALDE

1

Ireland ALDE

For (1)

1

Latvia ALDE

1

Slovenia ALDE

2

Estonia ALDE

2

Luxembourg ALDE

For (1)

1

Cyprus ALDE

For (1)

1
icon: UEN UEN
39

Lithuania UEN

2

Denmark UEN

For (1)

1

Latvia UEN

2
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
37

Italy Verts/ALE

2

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

3

Romania Verts/ALE

1

Belgium Verts/ALE

2

Sweden Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Austria Verts/ALE

1

Finland Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Denmark Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Latvia Verts/ALE

1

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

For (1)

1
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
33

France GUE/NGL

2

United Kingdom GUE/NGL

1

Netherlands GUE/NGL

2

Portugal GUE/NGL

For (1)

3
3

Sweden GUE/NGL

2

Finland GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

Denmark GUE/NGL

1

Cyprus GUE/NGL

2
icon: NI NI
22

Italy NI

Abstain (1)

3

Poland NI

1

United Kingdom NI

Abstain (1)

4

Belgium NI

2

Czechia NI

Against (1)

1

Austria NI

1

Slovakia NI

2
icon: IND/DEM IND/DEM
15

Poland IND/DEM

3

Netherlands IND/DEM

2

Sweden IND/DEM

2

Denmark IND/DEM

Against (1)

1

Ireland IND/DEM

Abstain (1)

1
AmendmentsDossier
13 2008/2151(INI)
2008/09/16 CONT 12 amendments...
source: PE-412.175
2008/09/23 ECON 1 amendments...
source: PE-412.326

History

(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)

committees/0/associated
Old
True
New
 
docs/3/docs/0/url
Old
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE411.931&secondRef=02
New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/ECON-AD-411931_EN.html
docs/5/docs/0/url
/oeil/spdoc.do?i=16316&j=0&l=en
events/0/date
Old
2008-01-25T00:00:00
New
2008-01-24T00:00:00
docs/0
date
2008-01-25T00:00:00
docs
summary
type
Non-legislative basic document
body
CofA
docs/0
date
2008-01-25T00:00:00
docs
summary
type
Non-legislative basic document
body
CofA
docs/1/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE409.375
New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/EN&reference=PE409.375
docs/2/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE412.175
New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/EN&reference=PE412.175
docs/3/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE411.931&secondRef=02
New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE411.931&secondRef=02
docs/4/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-6-2008-0427_EN.html
New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-6-2008-0427_EN.html
events/0/docs/0/url
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:[%SECTOR]2008[%DESCRIPTOR]0032:EN:NOT
events/1/type
Old
Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
New
Committee referral announced in Parliament
events/3/type
Old
Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
New
Vote in committee
events/4
date
2008-11-07T00:00:00
type
Committee report tabled for plenary
body
EP
docs
url: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-6-2008-0427_EN.html title: A6-0427/2008
events/4
date
2008-11-07T00:00:00
type
Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
body
EP
docs
url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-6-2008-0427_EN.html title: A6-0427/2008
events/5/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20081203&type=CRE
New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/EN&reference=20081203&type=CRE
events/7
date
2008-12-04T00:00:00
type
Decision by Parliament
body
EP
docs
url: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-6-2008-0581_EN.html title: T6-0581/2008
summary
events/7
date
2008-12-04T00:00:00
type
Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
body
EP
docs
url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-6-2008-0581_EN.html title: T6-0581/2008
summary
procedure/legal_basis/0
Rules of Procedure EP 54
procedure/legal_basis/0
Rules of Procedure EP 052
procedure/legal_basis/1
Rules of Procedure EP 54-p4
procedure/legal_basis/1
Rules of Procedure EP 052-p4
committees/0
type
Responsible Committee
body
EP
associated
True
committee_full
Budgetary Control
committee
CONT
rapporteur
name: STAES Bart date: 2008-02-26T00:00:00 group: Greens/European Free Alliance abbr: Verts/ALE
committees/0
type
Responsible Committee
body
EP
associated
True
committee_full
Budgetary Control
committee
CONT
date
2008-02-26T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: STAES Bart group: Greens/European Free Alliance abbr: Verts/ALE
committees/1
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
True
committee_full
Economic and Monetary Affairs
committee
ECON
rapporteur
name: RAEVA Bilyana Ilieva date: 2008-05-20T00:00:00 group: Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe abbr: ALDE
committees/1
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
True
committee_full
Economic and Monetary Affairs
committee
ECON
date
2008-05-20T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: RAEVA Bilyana Ilieva group: Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe abbr: ALDE
docs/4/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A6-2008-427&language=EN
New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-6-2008-0427_EN.html
docs/5/body
EC
events/4/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A6-2008-427&language=EN
New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-6-2008-0427_EN.html
events/7/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P6-TA-2008-581
New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-6-2008-0581_EN.html
activities
  • date: 2008-01-25T00:00:00 docs: type: Non-legislative basic document published title: N6-0032/2008 body: EC commission: DG: url: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/budget/ title: Budget Commissioner: KALLAS Siim type: Non-legislative basic document published
  • date: 2008-06-19T00:00:00 body: EP type: Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading committees: body: EP responsible: True committee: CONT date: 2008-02-26T00:00:00 committee_full: Budgetary Control (Associated committee) rapporteur: group: Verts/ALE name: STAES Bart body: EP responsible: False committee: ECON date: 2008-05-20T00:00:00 committee_full: Economic and Monetary Affairs (Associated committee) rapporteur: group: ALDE name: RAEVA Bilyana Ilieva
  • date: 2008-11-04T00:00:00 body: EP committees: body: EP responsible: True committee: CONT date: 2008-02-26T00:00:00 committee_full: Budgetary Control (Associated committee) rapporteur: group: Verts/ALE name: STAES Bart body: EP responsible: False committee: ECON date: 2008-05-20T00:00:00 committee_full: Economic and Monetary Affairs (Associated committee) rapporteur: group: ALDE name: RAEVA Bilyana Ilieva type: Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
  • date: 2008-11-07T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A6-2008-427&language=EN type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading title: A6-0427/2008 body: EP type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
  • date: 2008-12-03T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20081203&type=CRE type: Debate in Parliament title: Debate in Parliament body: EP type: Debate in Parliament
  • date: 2008-12-04T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/sda.do?id=16316&l=en type: Results of vote in Parliament title: Results of vote in Parliament url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P6-TA-2008-581 type: Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading title: T6-0581/2008 body: EP type: Results of vote in Parliament
commission
  • body: EC dg: Budget commissioner: KALLAS Siim
committees/0
type
Responsible Committee
body
EP
associated
True
committee_full
Budgetary Control
committee
CONT
date
2008-02-26T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: STAES Bart group: Greens/European Free Alliance abbr: Verts/ALE
committees/0
body
EP
responsible
True
committee
CONT
date
2008-02-26T00:00:00
committee_full
Budgetary Control (Associated committee)
rapporteur
group: Verts/ALE name: STAES Bart
committees/1
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
True
committee_full
Economic and Monetary Affairs
committee
ECON
date
2008-05-20T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: RAEVA Bilyana Ilieva group: Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe abbr: ALDE
committees/1
body
EP
responsible
False
committee
ECON
date
2008-05-20T00:00:00
committee_full
Economic and Monetary Affairs (Associated committee)
rapporteur
group: ALDE name: RAEVA Bilyana Ilieva
docs
  • date: 2008-01-25T00:00:00 docs: url: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/FR/TXT/?uri=OJ:C:2008:020:TOC title: OJ C 020 25.01.2008, p. 0001 title: N6-0032/2008 summary: SPECIAL REPORT No 8/2007 of the Court of Auditors concerning administrative cooperation in the field of value added tax, together with the Commission ’ s replies. The report recalls that in 2004 , new Community legislation came into force to speed up and strengthen cross-border cooperation between Member State authorities, mainly through clearer procedures, more comprehensive exchange of information and increased direct contacts between local tax offices. The audit of the Court aimed to assess whether information exchanges between Member States take place in a timely and effective manner and are supported by sound procedures and adequate administrative structures. It showed that information exchanges between Member States can help Member States to assess taxation correctly and to prevent and detect fraud. However, the Court found that, despite new arrangements introduced in 2004, administrative cooperation between Member States in the field of VAT is still not intensive enough to cope with intra-Community VAT evasion and fraud . The Court found in particular that: · insufficient use is made of the new possibilities to enhance and speed up cooperation and not all Member States have set up adequate administrative structures and/or operational procedures for ensuring efficient cooperation; · half of the information exchange upon request does not take place within the timescales required by the legislation and notifications of late replies or interim replies are rarely given; · late replies occur in all Member States but their frequency varies considerably between Member States. There are sometimes significant differences between the number of requests which a Member State claims to have received and the number of requests other Member States claim to have sent it; · the framework for exchanges of information without prior request is not well defined and the information which is provided spontaneously is not always systematically exploited; · the late availability and lack of reliability of data in the current Value Added Information Exchange System (VIES) increase the risk of evasion and fraud not being detected. According to the Court, there is a need for more intensive and rapid cooperation, more direct contacts between local tax offices and better monitoring to ensure that Member States provide efficient assistance to each other. The weaknesses of VIES should be urgently addressed, for example by radically shortening the timescale for collecting and capturing data and by granting broader direct access to data to enable multilateral consultations. To combat intra-Community VAT fraud successfully, the Court sets out the following recommendations: Member States should encourage more direct communication between local inspection staff as an effective way to speed up the exchange of information. It would at the same time help to increase the intensity of cooperation and the quality of the information exchanged; more efficient monitoring of exchanges of information between Member States is necessary to ensure that problems are swiftly identified and tackled; the procedures for exchanges of information without prior request need to be clarified. Information which is provided spontaneously should be systematically exploited by Member States; t he introduction of harmonised rules for withdrawing VAT numbers from traders involved in fraudulent activities should be considered; a common approach needs to be developed by the Commission together with the Member States to quantifying and analysing VAT evasion; to improve cross-border prosecution of intra-Community VAT fraud in the Member States. T he Court recalls that it recommended that the Commission should make an effort to propose a simplification and consolidation of Community anti-fraud legislation with a view to avoiding duplications and overlapping or contradictory provisions. Existing weaknesses in cooperation between the Commission and the Member States could be addressed in the framework of such an overhaul. type: Non-legislative basic document body: CofA
  • date: 2008-07-08T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE409.375 title: PE409.375 type: Committee draft report body: EP
  • date: 2008-09-16T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE412.175 title: PE412.175 type: Amendments tabled in committee body: EP
  • date: 2008-10-15T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE411.931&secondRef=02 title: PE411.931 committee: ECON type: Committee opinion body: EP
  • date: 2008-11-07T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A6-2008-427&language=EN title: A6-0427/2008 type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading body: EP
  • date: 2009-03-10T00:00:00 docs: url: /oeil/spdoc.do?i=16316&j=0&l=en title: SP(2009)401/2 type: Commission response to text adopted in plenary
events
  • date: 2008-01-25T00:00:00 type: Non-legislative basic document published body: EC docs: title: N6-0032/2008 summary: SPECIAL REPORT No 8/2007 of the Court of Auditors concerning administrative cooperation in the field of value added tax, together with the Commission ’ s replies. The report recalls that in 2004 , new Community legislation came into force to speed up and strengthen cross-border cooperation between Member State authorities, mainly through clearer procedures, more comprehensive exchange of information and increased direct contacts between local tax offices. The audit of the Court aimed to assess whether information exchanges between Member States take place in a timely and effective manner and are supported by sound procedures and adequate administrative structures. It showed that information exchanges between Member States can help Member States to assess taxation correctly and to prevent and detect fraud. However, the Court found that, despite new arrangements introduced in 2004, administrative cooperation between Member States in the field of VAT is still not intensive enough to cope with intra-Community VAT evasion and fraud . The Court found in particular that: · insufficient use is made of the new possibilities to enhance and speed up cooperation and not all Member States have set up adequate administrative structures and/or operational procedures for ensuring efficient cooperation; · half of the information exchange upon request does not take place within the timescales required by the legislation and notifications of late replies or interim replies are rarely given; · late replies occur in all Member States but their frequency varies considerably between Member States. There are sometimes significant differences between the number of requests which a Member State claims to have received and the number of requests other Member States claim to have sent it; · the framework for exchanges of information without prior request is not well defined and the information which is provided spontaneously is not always systematically exploited; · the late availability and lack of reliability of data in the current Value Added Information Exchange System (VIES) increase the risk of evasion and fraud not being detected. According to the Court, there is a need for more intensive and rapid cooperation, more direct contacts between local tax offices and better monitoring to ensure that Member States provide efficient assistance to each other. The weaknesses of VIES should be urgently addressed, for example by radically shortening the timescale for collecting and capturing data and by granting broader direct access to data to enable multilateral consultations. To combat intra-Community VAT fraud successfully, the Court sets out the following recommendations: Member States should encourage more direct communication between local inspection staff as an effective way to speed up the exchange of information. It would at the same time help to increase the intensity of cooperation and the quality of the information exchanged; more efficient monitoring of exchanges of information between Member States is necessary to ensure that problems are swiftly identified and tackled; the procedures for exchanges of information without prior request need to be clarified. Information which is provided spontaneously should be systematically exploited by Member States; t he introduction of harmonised rules for withdrawing VAT numbers from traders involved in fraudulent activities should be considered; a common approach needs to be developed by the Commission together with the Member States to quantifying and analysing VAT evasion; to improve cross-border prosecution of intra-Community VAT fraud in the Member States. T he Court recalls that it recommended that the Commission should make an effort to propose a simplification and consolidation of Community anti-fraud legislation with a view to avoiding duplications and overlapping or contradictory provisions. Existing weaknesses in cooperation between the Commission and the Member States could be addressed in the framework of such an overhaul.
  • date: 2008-06-19T00:00:00 type: Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading body: EP
  • date: 2008-06-19T00:00:00 type: Referral to associated committees announced in Parliament body: EP
  • date: 2008-11-04T00:00:00 type: Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading body: EP summary: The Committee on Budgetary Control adopted an own-initiative report drafted by Bart STAES (Greens/ALE, BE) on the report of the European Court of Auditors' Special Report No 8/2007 concerning administrative cooperation in the field of value added tax (VAT). The committee w elcomes the Court of Auditors' Special Report No 8/2007 and concludes, on the basis of the Court of Auditors' findings, that Regulation (EC) No 1798/2003 is not an effective tool for administrative cooperation as several Member States obstruct its implementation and the Commission's role is limited. The main points covered by the report are as follows: Quantifying VAT fraud : MEPs are aware of the fact that the actual volume of VAT evasion and fraud is difficult to assess, as many Member States either do not collect or do not publish data. The Commission and the Council are urged to give a higher priority to the development of a common approach in order to quantify and analyse VAT fraud. They also ask the Commission, the Council and the Member States to fully take into account the recommendations of the Contact Committee of the Supreme Audit Institutions of the European Union of December 2007, which include proposals as to how Member States could improve their estimates and how a single model for the estimation of VAT fraud could be established. Member States' authorities : concerned about the shortcomings identified by the Court of Auditors as regards administrative cooperation between Member States in the field of VAT, MEPs urge Member States to guarantee timely exchange of information on request and invites them to fully exploit the possibility of delegating competences as regards information exchange to local tax offices. They call on the Council to address the discrepancy between the number of requests for information which a Member State claims to have received and the number of requests other Member States claim to have sent to it, and to solve this problem as a matter of urgency. The report recommends to the Commission that, within their national reform programmes under the Lisbon strategy, Member States report on the implementation of data requirements towards other Member States and considers it important, where data provision from one Member State to another is subject to systematic delay, that infringement procedures be initiated by the Commission against the Member State that delays the provision of data. The Commission is invited to facilitate further exchange of best practices and coordination between Member States as regards the organisational arrangements for administrative cooperation. Moreover, MEPs fail to understand why Member States, despite the Commission's efforts to facilitate an agreement, still have not agreed on common criteria for the cancellation of VAT numbers, although the possibility for a quick withdrawal of a VAT number is an essential element in stopping and preventing VAT fraud. They regret that simultaneous, multilateral controls are not sufficiently used by Member States, although the Community provides for their funding and the Court of Auditors reports that good results can be achieved. MEPs regret that Germany did not comply with the Court's audit request. Follow-up and future perspectives : the report welcomes the Commission's proposals for amendment of the VAT Directive and the VAT Administrative Cooperation Regulation. The Commission is invited to: submit further proposals aimed at reinforcing Member States' ability to collect non-paid VAT by making traders jointly and severally liable for tax losses in cases where their non-compliance with reporting obligations facilitated the fraud; submit further proposals on automated access by all other Member States to certain non-sensitive data held by Member States on their own taxable persons and on the harmonisation of procedures for the registration and de-registration of persons liable for VAT to ensure the swift detection and de-registration of counterfeit taxable persons. MEPs ask the Council to continue negotiations on the proposal for a regulation on mutual administrative assistance in the fight against fraud affecting the financial interests of the European Community, including VAT fraud, which would provide a detailed framework for multidisciplinary administrative anti-fraud cooperation. They also invite the Commission's responsible services, DG Taxation and Customs Union and the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF), to create a task force. Stepping-up cooperation between judicial authorities : Member States are invited to remove legal obstacles in national law which hamper cross-border prosecution, in particular in cases where the VAT losses occur in another Member State.
  • date: 2008-11-07T00:00:00 type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading body: EP docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A6-2008-427&language=EN title: A6-0427/2008
  • date: 2008-12-03T00:00:00 type: Debate in Parliament body: EP docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20081203&type=CRE title: Debate in Parliament
  • date: 2008-12-04T00:00:00 type: Results of vote in Parliament body: EP docs: url: https://oeil.secure.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/sda.do?id=16316&l=en title: Results of vote in Parliament
  • date: 2008-12-04T00:00:00 type: Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading body: EP docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P6-TA-2008-581 title: T6-0581/2008 summary: The European Parliament adopted, by 592 votes to 15 with 20 abstentions, a resolution on the European Court of Auditors' Special Report No 8/2007 concerning administrative cooperation in the field of value added tax (VAT). The own-initiative report had been tabled for consideration in plenary by Bart STAES (Greens/ALE, BE) on behalf of the Comm ittee on Budgetary Control. Value added tax (VAT) evasion and fraud not only affect the financing of Member States' budgets, but also the EU own resources system. According to estimates quoted by the Court of Auditors, VAT revenue losses amounted to EUR 17 billion in Germany for 2005 and EUR 18.2 billion in the UK for the tax year 2005-2006. The volume of VAT fraud could exceed the volume of the Community's total annual budget. On the basis of the Court of Auditors' Special Report No 8/2007, Parliament concludes that Regulation (EC) No 1798/2003 is not an effective tool for administrative cooperation as several Member States obstruct its implementation and the Commission's role is limited. The main points covered by the report are as follows: Quantifying VAT fraud : the actual volume of VAT evasion and fraud is difficult to assess, therefore the Commission and the Council are urged to give a higher priority to the development of a common approach in order to quantify and analyse VAT fraud which should allow assessment as to whether measures taken by Member States against VAT evasion and fraud are successful, or whether they just trigger a displacement of VAT fraud to other economic sectors or Member States. Parliament also asks the Commission, the Council and the Member States to fully take into account the recommendations of the Contact Committee of the Supreme Audit Institutions of the European Union of December 2007, which include proposals as to how Member States could improve their estimates and how a single model for the estimation of VAT fraud could be established. Shortcomings in the performance of Member States' authorities : concerned about the shortcomings identified by the Court of Auditors as regards administrative cooperation between Member States in the field of VAT, MEPs urge Member States to guarantee timely exchange of information on request and invites them to fully exploit the possibility of delegating competences as regards information exchange to local tax offices. They call on the Council to address the discrepancy between the number of requests for information which a Member State claims to have received and the number of requests other Member States claim to have sent to it, and to solve this problem as a matter of urgency. The resolution recommends to the Commission that, within their national reform programmes under the Lisbon strategy, Member States report on the implementation of data requirements towards other Member States and considers it important, where data provision from one Member State to another is subject to systematic delay, that infringement procedures be initiated by the Commission against the Member State that delays the provision of data. The Commission is invited to facilitate further exchange of best practices and coordination between Member States as regards the organisational arrangements for administrative cooperation. Moreover, MEPs fail to understand why Member States, despite the Commission's efforts to facilitate an agreement, still have not agreed on common criteria for the cancellation of VAT numbers, although the possibility for a quick withdrawal of a VAT number is an essential element in stopping and preventing VAT fraud. They regret that simultaneous, multilateral controls are not sufficiently used by Member States, although the Community provides for their funding and the Court of Auditors reports that good results can be achieved. Parliament notes the efficiency of the Eurocanet (European Carousel Network) founded by Belgium in order to improve the spontaneous exchange of information and call on Germany, Italy and the United Kingdom to join the Eurocanet Network. MEPs regret that Germany did not comply with the Court's audit request. Follow-up and future perspectives : the resolution welcomes the Commission's proposals for amendment of the VAT Directive and the VAT Administrative Cooperation Regulation. The Commission is invited to: submit further proposals aimed at reinforcing Member States' ability to collect non-paid VAT by making traders jointly and severally liable for tax losses in cases where their non-compliance with reporting obligations facilitated the fraud; submit further proposals on automated access by all other Member States to certain non-sensitive data held by Member States on their own taxable persons and on the harmonisation of procedures for the registration and de-registration of persons liable for VAT to ensure the swift detection and de-registration of counterfeit taxable persons. MEPs ask the Council to continue negotiations on the proposal for a regulation on mutual administrative assistance in the fight against fraud affecting the financial interests of the European Community, including VAT fraud, which would provide a detailed framework for multidisciplinary administrative anti-fraud cooperation. They also invite the Commission's responsible services, DG Taxation and Customs Union and the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF), to create a task force. Stepping-up cooperation between judicial authorities : Member States are invited to remove legal obstacles in national law which hamper cross-border prosecution, in particular in cases where the VAT losses occur in another Member State.
  • date: 2008-12-04T00:00:00 type: End of procedure in Parliament body: EP
links
other
  • body: EC dg: url: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/budget/ title: Budget commissioner: KALLAS Siim
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee
Old
CONT/6/64121
New
  • CONT/6/64121
procedure/legal_basis/0
Rules of Procedure EP 052
procedure/legal_basis/0
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 052
procedure/legal_basis/1
Rules of Procedure EP 052-p4
procedure/legal_basis/1
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 052-p2
procedure/subject
Old
  • 2.70.02 Indirect taxation, VAT, excise duties
  • 2.80 Cooperation between administrations
New
2.70.02
Indirect taxation, VAT, excise duties
2.80
Cooperation between administrations
activities
  • date: 2008-01-25T00:00:00 docs: type: Non-legislative basic document published title: N6-0032/2008 body: EC commission: DG: url: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/budget/ title: Budget Commissioner: KALLAS Siim type: Non-legislative basic document published
  • date: 2008-06-19T00:00:00 body: EP type: Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading committees: body: EP responsible: True committee: CONT date: 2008-02-26T00:00:00 committee_full: Budgetary Control (Associated committee) rapporteur: group: Verts/ALE name: STAES Bart body: EP responsible: False committee: ECON date: 2008-05-20T00:00:00 committee_full: Economic and Monetary Affairs (Associated committee) rapporteur: group: ALDE name: RAEVA Bilyana Ilieva
  • date: 2008-11-04T00:00:00 body: EP committees: body: EP responsible: True committee: CONT date: 2008-02-26T00:00:00 committee_full: Budgetary Control (Associated committee) rapporteur: group: Verts/ALE name: STAES Bart body: EP responsible: False committee: ECON date: 2008-05-20T00:00:00 committee_full: Economic and Monetary Affairs (Associated committee) rapporteur: group: ALDE name: RAEVA Bilyana Ilieva type: Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
  • date: 2008-11-07T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A6-2008-427&language=EN type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading title: A6-0427/2008 body: EP type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
  • date: 2008-12-03T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20081203&type=CRE type: Debate in Parliament title: Debate in Parliament body: EP type: Debate in Parliament
  • date: 2008-12-04T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/sda.do?id=16316&l=en type: Results of vote in Parliament title: Results of vote in Parliament url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P6-TA-2008-581 type: Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading title: T6-0581/2008 body: EP type: Results of vote in Parliament
committees
  • body: EP responsible: True committee: CONT date: 2008-02-26T00:00:00 committee_full: Budgetary Control (Associated committee) rapporteur: group: Verts/ALE name: STAES Bart
  • body: EP responsible: False committee: ECON date: 2008-05-20T00:00:00 committee_full: Economic and Monetary Affairs (Associated committee) rapporteur: group: ALDE name: RAEVA Bilyana Ilieva
links
other
  • body: EC dg: url: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/budget/ title: Budget commissioner: KALLAS Siim
procedure
dossier_of_the_committee
CONT/6/64121
reference
2008/2151(INI)
title
European Court of Auditors' Special Report No 8/2007 concerning administrative cooperation in the field of VAT
legal_basis
stage_reached
Procedure completed
subtype
Initiative
type
INI - Own-initiative procedure
subject