2015/2010(INL) | [ParlTrack]

Lefteris CHRISTOFOROU, Neoklis SYLIKIOTIS, Eleni THEOCHAROUS, Costas MAVRIDES, Demetris PAPADAKIS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Welcomes the recent initiatives of the Commission and encourages Member States to tackle further tax fraud, tax evasion and tax avoidance, ~~promoting clear and fair tax rulings, combatting aggressive tax planning and~~and to stop their fiscal competition in the form of fiscal privileges to multinational corporations as means to attract or retain them, as in addition to being unfair and harmful, such practices constitute a heavy market distortion and penalize the rest of companies, mainly the SME's; welcomes the re-launching of the Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base scheme and urges its full implementation, stressing the importance to avoid ~~any~~the increase in administrative burdens and cost of compliance that would be implied by a new delay and a lengthy open-ended two-step procedure; believes CCCTB is a critical step towards a Europeanised corporate taxation system;

Amendment 10 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

Amendment 11 #

Evžen TOŠENOVSKÝ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. ~~Welcom~~Notes the recent initiatives of the Commission and encourages Member States to tackle further tax fraud, tax evasion and tax avoidance, promoting clear and fair tax rulings, combatting aggressive tax planning and ~~re-launching the Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base scheme, stressing~~stresses the importance tof avoiding any increase in administrative burdens and cost of compliance;

Amendment 12 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Welcomes the recent initiatives of the Commission and encourages Member States to tackle further tax fraud, tax evasion and tax avoidance, promoting ~~clear and fair~~automatic and mandatory exchange of information on tax rulings, combatting aggressive tax planning and re-launching the Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base scheme, stressing the importance to avoid any increase in administrative burdens and cost of compliance;

Amendment 13 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Welcomes the recent initiatives of the Commission and encourages Member States to ~~tackle further~~intensify tackling tax fraud, tax evasion and tax avoidance, promoting ~~clear~~transparent and fair tax rulings, combatting aggressive tax planning and re- launching gradual and two-step establishment of the Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base scheme,; stress~~ing~~es the importance to of avoid aning unnecessary increase inof administrative burdens and cost of compliance;

Amendment 14 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Welcomes the recent initiatives of the Commission and encourages Member States to tac~~kle further~~tively combat tax fraud, tax evasion and tax avoidance, promoting clear and fair tax rulings, combatting aggressive tax planning and re-launching the Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base scheme, stressing the importance to avoid any increase in administrative burdens and cost of compliance;

Amendment 15 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Regrets the lack of collaboration of some Member States regarding the exchange of tax-related information with the rest of the Member States, concerning taxes due and/or paid in their territory by nationals or business registered in the rest of the Member States; considers that the Commission should certainly devote priority efforts to improve the reciprocal collaboration in the matter;

Amendment 16 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Acknowledges the Commission's approach of putting forward a simple CCTB (without consolidation) as a first step and that, until consolidation is re- introduced at a later stage, the Commission will include an element of cross border relief; points out that this element is not a perfect substitute for consolidation and time would be necessary to make this new regime fully operational;

Amendment 17 #

Jean-Luc SCHAFFHAUSER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Considers that a proposal for harmonisation of corporate tax rates is also required in order to prevent any increase in the pace of corporate relocation as a result of the Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base and to stop EU countries trying to undercut each other’s tax rates;

Amendment 18 #

Paloma LÓPEZ BERMEJO, Marisa MATIAS, Sofia SAKORAFA, Miloslav RANSDORF

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1b. Recalls that no significant decisions are being taken at Council level on corporate taxation despite recent developments and the need to go further in EU integration in many related fields such as internal market, economic and fiscal governance, banking union;

Amendment 19 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Believes that fiscal policies and corporate taxation should be used as a tool to boost growth, jobs and development; believes that the Union must, by a more efficient, more transparent and fairer tax treatment for all companies, promote an attractive, competitive and balanced business environment that would allow businesses, including, by ensuring a more equal distribution of income and supporting public budgets; believes that the Union must develop a more transparent and fairer tax system, also for micro, small and medium- sized enterprises~~, family businesses and self-employed people to operate simpler across the borders within the Union~~ and cooperatives vis-à-vis larger businesses;

Amendment 2 #

Roger HELMER, David COBURN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Welcomes the recent initiatives of the Commission and encourages Member States to tackle further tax fraud, tax evasion and tax avoidance, promoting clear and fair tax rulings~~, combatting~~ that aim to reduce aggressive tax planning ~~and re-launching the Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base scheme, stressing~~to a minimum, in order to avoid instances of double taxation or double non-taxation; stresses the need to make implementation of the Commission’s proposal for a directive on the Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base scheme (CCCTB) binding and to include therein a general anti-abuse rule common to all Member States; stresses finally the importance to avoid any increase in administrative and bureaucratic burdens and cost of compliance;

Amendment 20 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

Amendment 21 #

Kaja KALLAS, Juan Carlos GIRAUTA VIDAL, Philippe DE BACKER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Believes that fiscal policies and corporate taxation ~~should be used as a tool to boost growth, jobs and development~~can play an important role in boosting sustainable growth, permanent jobs and durable development; considers, therefore, that any positive fiscal discrimination must be applied to support training, innovation, circular economy, energy efficiency and R&D, while avoiding present patent boxes’ negative practices; believes that the Union must, by a more efficient, more transparent and fairer tax treatment for all companies, promote an attractive, competitive and balanced business environment that would allow businesses, including small and medium- sized enterprises, family businesses and self-employed people to operate simpler across the borders within the Union;

Amendment 22 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Believes that fiscal policies and corporate taxation should be used as a tool to boost growth, jobs and ~~development~~increase Europe's international competitiveness ; believes that the Union must, by a more efficient, more transparent and fairer tax treatment for all companies, promote an attractive, competitive and ~~balanced~~stable business environment that would allow businesses, including small and medium- sized enterprises, family businesses and self- employed people to operate simpler across the borders within the Union, innovative businesses to scale up, and the Union to better attract foreign investment; considers that the Commission should promote competitive, simplified and neutral tax systems, with a reduced number of exemptions;

Amendment 23 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Believes that fiscal policies and corporate taxation should be used as a tool to boost growth, jobs and development; believes that the Union must, by a more efficient, more transparent and fairer tax treatment for all companies, promote an attractive, competitive and balanced business environment that would allow businesses, including small and medium- sized enterprises (SME), family businesses and self-employed people to operate simpler across the borders within the Union; emphasises in this respect that multinational corporations can use instruments for aggressive tax planning that are not available to SMEs, which are therefore severely affected;

Amendment 24 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Believes that fiscal policies and corporate taxation should be used as a tool to boost growth, jobs and development; believes that t~~he Union must, by a~~ax fraud, tax evasion and tax avoidance in the Union need to be combated so that there is more efficient, more transparent and fairer tax treatment for all companies, and that the Union must promote an attractive, competitive, fair, transparent and balanced business environment that would allow businesses, including small and medium- sized enterprises, family businesses and self- employed people to operate simpler across the borders within the Union;

Amendment 25 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Believes that fiscal policies and corporate taxation should be used as a tool to boost growth, jobs and development; believes that the Union must, by a more efficient, more transparent and fairer tax treatment for all companies, promote an attractive, competitive and balanced business environment that would allow businesses, including small and medium- sized enterprises, family businesses ~~and~~, self- employed people and liberal professions to operate simpler across the borders within the Union;

Amendment 26 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Believes that fiscal policies and corporate taxation should be used as a tool to boost growth, jobs and development; believes that the ~~Union~~Member States must, by a more efficient, more transparent and fairer tax treatment for all companies, promote an attractive, competitive and balanced business environment that would allow businesses, including small and medium- sized enterprises, family businesses and self-employed people to operate simpler across the borders within the Union;

Amendment 27 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Believes that fiscal policies and corporate taxation should be used as a tool to boost growth, jobs and development; believes that the Union must, by a more efficient, significantly less evasive, more transparent and fairer tax treatment for all companies, promote an attractive, competitive and ~~balanced~~stable business environment that would allow businesses, including small and medium- sized enterprises, family businesses and self- employed people to operate simpler across the borders within the Union;

Amendment 28 #

Flavio ZANONATO, Patrizia TOIA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Believes that fiscal policies and corporate taxation should be used as a tool to boost growth, jobs and ~~develop~~investment; believes that the Union must, by a more efficient, more transparent and fairer tax treatment for all companies, promote an attractive, competitive and balanced business environment that would allow businesses, including small and medium- sized enterprises, family businesses and self-employed people to operate simpler across the borders within the Union;

Amendment 29 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Reiterates its position that multinational companies in all sectors should disclose in their financial statements, by Member State and by third country in which they have an establishment, a comprehensive range of aggregated information, including their profit or loss before tax, taxes on profit or loss, number of employees, assets held, tax rulings issued by tax authorities etc. (country-by-country reporting); underlines the importance of making this information easily available to the public, possibly in the form of a central EU register; calls on the Commission to take any necessary step to reach this objective;

Amendment 3 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. ~~Welcomes~~Takes note of the recent initiatives of the Commission and encourages Member States to tackle further tax fraud, tax evasion and tax avoidance, promoting clear and fair tax rulings, combatting aggressive tax planning and re-launching the Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base scheme,; insists in the importance of ensuring a fully public and transparent country-by- country reporting for multinational companies, while stressing the importance to avoid ~~any~~unjustified increases in administrative burdens and cost of compliance;

Amendment 30 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Insist that the Commission should coordinate the design of common rules in order to eliminate current fiscal privileges of multinational and transnational companies (e.g. tax rulings, tax agreements, etc.), favouring them in an unfair way over SMEs, which have scarce or none possibilities of developing for themselves tailored tax optimisations;

Amendment 31 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)

2b. Requests the Commission to develop initiatives for improving the identification of tax havens and for applying severe sanctions to European companies which use them for avoiding their tax responsibilities vis-à-vis the Member States;

Amendment 32 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Stresses that taxes must be paid where profits are made or value is created and where public services and infrastructures are used; believes that situation of double non-taxation or very low taxation should be avoided and that tax profits should be taxed at least once in the market; believes that to overcome complexity in the present globalized economy and within an EU single market this means this principle should apply to the whole EU through a single EU corporate tax system;

Amendment 33 #

Paloma LÓPEZ BERMEJO, Marisa MATIAS, Sofia SAKORAFA, Miloslav RANSDORF, Neoklis SYLIKIOTIS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Stresses that taxes must be paid where profits are made or value is created and where public services and infrastructures are used; expects a declaration by the Council to respect these principles in national tax laws; points out that in particular multinational corporations (MNCs) use the over-complexity and differences in national tax systems for aggressive tax planning purposes; urges therefore to increase transparency by introducing extensive country-by-country reporting and making it available to the public;

Amendment 34 #

Adam GIEREK

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Stresses that all taxes ~~must be paid where profits are made or~~, including those on dividends, must be paid in the countries where the real added value is created and where public services and infrastructures are used, in proportion to that value, and not solely in the place where the company is registered, unless it is registered in the country where the sole activity is conducted;

Amendment 35 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Stresses that taxes must be paid where profits are made or value is created and where public services and infrastructures are used; stresses, in this respect, the need for clear, transparent and coherent rules on the accounting of profits and value creation, thus avoiding their "ad hoc" transfer for taxation purposes, particularly by means of intangibles;

Amendment 36 #

Jean-Luc SCHAFFHAUSER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Stresses that taxes must be paid where profits are made or value is created and where public services and infrastructures are used; regards the automatic transmission of bank and tax data between Member States as essential in this regard;

Amendment 37 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Stresses that taxes must be paid ~~where profits are made or value is created and where public services and infrastructures are used~~in the country in which profits are made;

Amendment 38 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Stresses that taxes must be paid where ~~profits are mad~~economic activity takes place or value is created and where public services and infrastructures are used;

Amendment 39 #

Kaja KALLAS, Juan Carlos GIRAUTA VIDAL, Philippe DE BACKER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Stresses that taxes must be paid where ~~profits are made or value is created and where public services and infrastructures are us~~value is added;

Amendment 4 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Welcomes the recent initiatives of the Commission and encourages Member States to tackle further tax fraud, tax evasion and tax avoidance, promoting ~~clear~~transparent and fair tax rulings, combatting aggressive tax planning ~~and~~; welcomes the initiative of the Commission to re-launch~~ing~~ the Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base scheme~~, stressing the importance to avoid any increase~~ that should serve at reducing administrative burdens and cost of compliance for businesses and closing loopholes between national systems ;

Amendment 40 #

Kaja KALLAS, Pavel TELIČKA, Philippe DE BACKER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Stresses that taxes must be paid where profits are made or value is created ~~and where public services and infrastructures are used~~;

Amendment 41 #

Anne SANDER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Deplores the fact that national and international tax legislation has not kept pace with the digital revolution; supports, therefore, the work being done under the auspices of the OECD on the Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS) project, and calls on the Commission to promote a harmonised definition of the ‘permanent establishment’ of digital enterprises, with a view to improving the evaluation of profits generated in a given area so that tax contributions can be set accordingly;

Amendment 42 #

Massimiliano SALINI, Antonio TAJANI, Fulvio MARTUSCIELLO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Believes that fundamental corporate governance principles of transparency and accountability will contribute to a strong and stable economy by reducing market volatility and increasing trust in businesses; calls for public, country-by- country reporting on large enterprises in all sectors to increase transparency regarding their activities, in particular regarding profits made, taxes on profit paid and subsidies received; believes that mandatory reporting in this area is an important element of the corporate responsibility of companies to shareholders and society;

Amendment 43 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Acknowledges that the loopholes and mismatches between 28 national tax systems are being exploited by some companies to use aggressive tax planning and abusive tax practices, that erode Member States' revenues and undermine fair burden sharing between taxpayers and fair competition for business, in particular for SMEs, family businesses, self-employed people and liberal professions;

Amendment 44 #

Flavio ZANONATO, Patrizia TOIA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Believes that the European single market needs a more transparent, cooperative and progressively harmonised taxation framework in order to function effectively; stresses the fact that, in the current situation, the European SMEs can face unfair competition compared to MNCs, which could artificially design their structure in order to lower their tax rates;

Amendment 45 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Points out that digitalisation also challenges national tax systems and cross- border activities; emphasises in this respect the need for a consistent application of general principles of corporate taxation instead of a special tax regime for digital companies;

Amendment 46 #

Lefteris CHRISTOFOROU, Neoklis SYLIKIOTIS, Eleni THEOCHAROUS, Costas MAVRIDES, Demetris PAPADAKIS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Requires that the prospective proposed measures against corporate tax avoidance reward those businesses which are not engaged in tax avoidance practices and which publish their country-by-country reports on a voluntary basis;

Amendment 47 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Calls on the Commission to produce a common European definition of tax havens, based on the OECD's criteria, and to draw up a blacklist of firms which evade tax and of firms which advise them;

Amendment 48 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Believes that the sovereign rights of Member States should be taken into consideration, as well as the diversities on economic, commercial and corporate sectors in terms of affecting the growth and development as well as the social cohesion within the Member State and the EU as such;

Amendment 49 #

Roger HELMER, David COBURN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Supports the principle of transparency and of automatic exchange of information in tax rulings among tax authorities; notes that this can increase confidence between Member States, specifically by setting up automatic exchange of information under the same rules, obligations and rights for all Member States; (This amendment applies before point 4.)

Amendment 5 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. ~~Welcomes the recent initiatives of the Commission and e~~Encourages Member States to tackle further tax fraud, tax evasion and tax avoidance, promoting clear and fair tax rulings, combatting aggressive tax planning ~~and re-launching the Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base scheme~~, stressing the importance to avoid any increase in administrative burdens and cost of compliance;

Amendment 50 #

Massimiliano SALINI, Antonio TAJANI, Fulvio MARTUSCIELLO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3b. Believes that tax rulings are crucial to ensure legal certainty and business friendly environment for tax payers, for their daily work and for their investments strategy;

Amendment 51 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. ~~Underlines the importance of guaranteeing person~~Supports the wide implementation of country-by-country reporting for multinational corporations including with regards to main fiscal data, pro~~tection, confidentiality of information exchanged and freedom to conduct a business; encourages the identification of solutions that strike a balance between transparency and confidentiality~~fits made and subsidies received; underlines the importance of ensuring the objective of tax transparency to be fulfilled while guaranteeing personal data protection and freedom to conduct a business; underscores the need to ensure that in no case SMEs must see an increase in their administrative burden;

Amendment 52 #

Paloma LÓPEZ BERMEJO, Marisa MATIAS, Miloslav RANSDORF, Neoklis SYLIKIOTIS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Underlines the importance of guaranteeing personal data protection, confidentiality of information exchanged and freedom to conduct a business~~; encourages~~, in the strict respect of the principle of public interest; encourages, accordingly, the identification of solutions that strike a balance between transparency and confidentiality, especially concerning the automatic, immediate and exhaustive exchange among Member States of all relevant tax information;

Amendment 53 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Underlines the importance of guaranteeing personal data protection~~, confidentiality of information exchanged and freedom to conduct a business; encourages the identification of solutions that strike a balance between transparency and confidentiality~~ while ensuring transparency in corporate taxation;

Amendment 54 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Underlines the importance of guaranteeing personal data protection, confidentiality of information exchanged and freedom to conduct a business; encourages the identification of solutions that strike a balance between transparency and confidentiality, such as the establishment of a certified data collection, management and protection system;

Amendment 55 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Underlines the ~~importance of~~need to guarantee~~ing~~ personal data protection, and confidentiality of information exchanged ~~and freedom to conduct a business~~; encourages the identification of solutions that strike a balance between transparency and confidentiality;

Amendment 56 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Underlines the importance of guaranteeing personal data protection, confidentiality of information exchanged, trade secrets and freedom to conduct a business; encourages the identification of solutions that strike a balance between transparency and confidentiality;

Amendment 57 #

4a. Stresses that EU initiatives should not result in any increase of administrative burdens and cost of compliance; believes that all proposals should lead to a greater legal certainty, transparency, simplicity and rapidity of the administrative process;

Amendment 58 #

Paloma LÓPEZ BERMEJO, Marisa MATIAS, Sofia SAKORAFA, Miloslav RANSDORF

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. ~~Suggests the simplification of utilisation of th~~Recalls that, notwithstanding efforts made, there are still cases of double taxation that have to be cre~~dit coming from taxes paid in a foreign country, along with consequent automatic exchange of information between tax authorities~~solved; urges simpler, swifter and more transparent solutions, in particular for SMEs, self- employed workers and the professions; calls in this regard for automatic exchange of information between tax authorities to be used to simplify use of credit for taxes paid abroad;

Amendment 59 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Suggests ~~the simpl~~a clarification ofn the utilisation of the credit coming from taxes paid in a foreign country, ~~along with consequent~~stressing the need for automatic exchange of information between tax authorities; highlights the complexity of bilateral and multilateral tax treaties, which are often designed to include loopholes that favour tax avoidance in conjunction with domestic taxation schemes;

Amendment 6 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Welcomes the recent initiatives of the Commission and encourages Member States to tackle further tax fraud, tax evasion and tax avoidance, promoting clear and fair tax rulings, and combatting aggressive tax planning ~~and re-launch~~; stresses that before reconsidering ~~the~~a Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base scheme, ~~stressing~~comprehensive research should be conducted on the different criteria on which such a scheme could be based, followed by an appropriate impact assessment; underlines the importance tof avoiding any increase in administrative burdens and cost of compliance;

Amendment 60 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Suggests the simplification of utilisation of the credit coming from taxes paid in a foreign country, along with consequent automatic exchange of information between tax authorities, where information is being exchanged between Member States and competent authorities in a form of EU central register, which can be accessed by competent authorities;

Amendment 61 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

Amendment 62 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Calls for efficient harmonised taxation of interest deduction in Europe and for an urgent revision of the Council Directive 2003/49/EC of 3 June 2003 on a common system of taxation applicable to interest and royalty payments made between associated companies of different Member States1 a regarding withholding taxes; ___________ 1a OJ L 157, 26.6.2003, p. 49

Amendment 63 #

Kaja KALLAS, Juan Carlos GIRAUTA VIDAL, Philippe DE BACKER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Stresses the importance of strong tax sovereignty and calls to retain the taxation as a national competence in each Member State, as the Treaty foresees it; nevertheless encourages stronger information exchange between competent authorities on taxation matters;

Amendment 64 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Considers that the Commission and Member States should further deploy electronic solutions in taxation-related procedures to reduce administrative burdens and simplify cross-border procedures ;

Amendment 65 #

Paloma LÓPEZ BERMEJO, Marisa MATIAS, Sofia SAKORAFA, Miloslav RANSDORF

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Proposes to consider the introduction of a temporary Union free zones programme to promote the recovery of those areas in the Member States most affected by the crisis with the purpose of allowing them to apply tax reductions to new economic entities for the purpose of direct taxes; believes that the Commission should carry out the programme and proceed with the identification of areas of intervention as well as of the conditions of industrial restructuring and growth plans to be coordinated with, on the basis of proposals by the Member State concerned.deleted

Amendment 66 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

Amendment 67 #

Dario TAMBURRANO, David BORRELLI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

Amendment 68 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

Amendment 69 #

Kaja KALLAS, Pavel TELIČKA, Cora van NIEUWENHUIZEN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

Amendment 7 #

Jean-Luc SCHAFFHAUSER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Welcomes the recent initiatives of the Commission and encourages Member States to tackle further tax fraud, tax evasion and tax avoidance, promoting clear and fair tax rulings, combatting aggressive tax planning and re-launching the Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base scheme, stressing the importance tof avoiding any increase in administrative burdens and cost of compliance; and pointing out that the Member States must retain complete freedom with regard to arrangements for tax exemptions and tax relief for strategic sectors of industry;

Amendment 70 #

Evžen TOŠENOVSKÝ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

Amendment 71 #

Paloma LÓPEZ BERMEJO, Marisa MATIAS, Sofia SAKORAFA, Miloslav RANSDORF, Neoklis SYLIKIOTIS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. ~~Proposes to consider the introduction of a temporary Union free zones programme to promote the recovery of those areas in the Member States most~~Suggests the Commission to assess the different special economic zones existing in Europe, used to boost growth and economic recovery in delimited areas deeply affected by the crisis or with the purpose of allowing them to apply tax reductions to new economic entities for the purpose of direct taxes; believes that the Commission should carry out the programme and proceed with the identification of areas of intervention as well as of the conditions of industrial restructuring and growth plans to be coordinated with, on the basis of proposals by the Member State concerned.high rate of unemployment or to promote start- ups; encourages in this regards the exchange of best practices between tax authorities; invites the Commission to develop guidelines to promote a more coordinated approach for the best tax reduction schemes that can be applied at European level, in order not to increase the imbalances but to support the more disadvantaged areas;

Amendment 72 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Condemns the complicity of financial and consultancy corporations in the development of aggressive tax planning in the EU;

Amendment 73 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Requires that the access to the information on ultimate beneficial owner(s) of companies present in the EU under Directive (EU) No 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 financing1 a include also information on global effective corporate tax rate of companies on the basis of financial accounts established and published under Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on the annual financial statements, consolidated financial statements and related reports of certain types of undertakings1 b and that access to those information is direct, online, without unnecessary formalities and provided in a language easily understandable to the relevant public authorities; ___________ 1a OJ L 141, 5.6.2015, p. 73 1b OJ L 182, 29.6.2013, p. 19

Amendment 74 #

Antonio TAJANI, Fulvio MARTUSCIELLO, Massimiliano SALINI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Calls on the Commission to thoroughly assess the impact of existing "tax free zones" in the EU; asks the Commission to evaluate whether the application of tax reductions for SMEs, in order to promote jobs and growth in certain disadvantaged regions, are in line with EU goals of greater tax transparency and tackling tax evasion; stresses that policies designed to provide tax benefits to disadvantaged regions must not undermine the existing EU legal framework for regional aid;

Amendment 75 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Stresses that a precondition to establish economic stability in the Union on the long term is the achievement of a Fiscal Union;

Amendment 76 #

Kaja KALLAS, Philippe DE BACKER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Considers that initiatives for more effective corporate taxation should include proposals to improve the business environment for start-ups such as tax incentives for investors to reinvest capital gains in higher-risk small European businesses or clarified taxation rules for share options ;

Amendment 77 #

Anne SANDER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Notes that the impact of competition within Europe on corporate tax rates is felt most acutely in border areas; supports the Luxembourg Presidency’s proposal that a new legal instrument be considered, along the lines of the European Grouping of Territorial Cooperation (EGTC), to facilitate border areas’ economic development; calls on the Commission, in this regard, to propose ad hoc legal arrangements for simplifying, and achieving convergence between, tax policies in these areas;

Amendment 78 #

Cora van NIEUWENHUIZEN, Kaja KALLAS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Acknowledges that the challenges launched by the digitalisation of the economy have created the basis for a stronger tax competition and can promote potentially harmful tax schemes; recognises at the same time the importance to guarantee the freedom of business location, the freedom of investment decisions and to promote the digital sector in Europe;

Amendment 79 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Strongly believes that, with the objective of securing a global level playing field, the combat against tax fraud, tax evasion and tax avoidance should take place within a wider international context and in line with the OECD recommendations;

Amendment 8 #

Paloma LÓPEZ BERMEJO, Marisa MATIAS, Miloslav RANSDORF

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. ~~Welcom~~Notes the recent initiatives of the Commission and encourages Member States to tackle further tax fraud, tax evasion and tax avoidance, ~~promoting clear and fair~~be transparent in its taxation schemes, including tax rulings, combatting aggressive tax planning and re-launching the Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base scheme~~, stressing the importance to avoid any increase in administrative burdens and cost of compliance~~;

Amendment 80 #

Paloma LÓPEZ BERMEJO, Marisa MATIAS, Sofia SAKORAFA, Miloslav RANSDORF

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)

6b. While and until the full implementation of the CCCTB, underscores the need to support the work of the TAXE special committee investigating the misuse of patent boxes, letterbox companies, and other fiscal engineering practices designed to avoid or minimize taxes, since any tax avoidance ultimately translates into larger public debt and/or an increase of taxes on SME and citizens;

Amendment 81 #

6b. Notes that the fall in corporate tax revenues is one of the main factors driving the public debt crisis and the structural fall in available public resources in many Member States; stresses that industrial development cannot be grounded on aggressive tax dumping, but must rely on the structural transformation of the economy through public investment and planning;

Amendment 82 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)

6b. Recognises in this regard the lack of an European definition of permanent establishment and economic substance; encourages an European answer where single measures at national level will not solve the problem, but could instead increase then complexity and the mismatch among European countries;

Amendment 83 #

Antonio TAJANI, Fulvio MARTUSCIELLO, Massimiliano SALINI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)

6b. Invites to establish a rule that public entities, including the EU, Member States and enterprises owned by them, cannot pay out public money to companies that have not disclosed their ultimate beneficial owner(s), global effective corporate tax rate and country-by-country reports;

Amendment 84 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)

6b. Calls on the Commission to create a harmonised taxation system in all Member States, and across the Union as a whole, in view of fighting unfair competition and enhancing the competitiveness of EU companies;

Amendment 85 #

Anne SANDER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)

6b. Asks the Commission to propose harmonised criteria for the exemption from tax of companies’ R&D investments, with a view to realising the EU target for research spending of 3% of GDP by 2020;

Amendment 86 #

Antonio TAJANI, Fulvio MARTUSCIELLO, Massimiliano SALINI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 c (new)

6c. Calls for the Commission not to refrain from making use of Article 116 TFEU which provides the necessary legal basis for Parliament and the Council to act according to the ordinary legislative procedure in order to eliminate practices that result in a distortion of competition in the internal market, such as fiscal competition as applied by the Member States through non-transparent and unfair tax rulings;

Amendment 87 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 c (new)

6c. Urges the Commission to bring forward as soon as possible a legislative proposal for the introduction of a Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base to improve the business environment and to combat tax avoidance in the EU;

Amendment 88 #

Antonio TAJANI, Fulvio MARTUSCIELLO, Massimiliano SALINI

6d. Calls on the Commission to negotiate tax agreements with third countries on behalf of the EU in order to have a coherent unified stance in tackling tax evasion;

Amendment 89 #

Antonio TAJANI, Fulvio MARTUSCIELLO, Massimiliano SALINI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 e (new)

6e. Calls on the Commission to bring forward a proposal to establish criteria to define 'tax havens' in EU; stresses that the lack of a common definition distorts the EU single market causing legal uncertainty.

Amendment 9 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Welcomes the recent initiatives of the Commission and encourages Member States to tackle further tax fraud, tax evasion and tax avoidance, promoting clear and fair tax rulings, combatting aggressive tax planning ~~and~~; stresses that re-launching of the Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base scheme, shall be carefully evaluated while retaining the principle of subsidiarity in the area of taxation in Member States; stressing the importance to avoid any increase in administrative burdens and cost of compliance; for Member States;

source: 564.915

2015/10/13 ECON 433 amendments...

Amendment 1 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 4 a (new)

- Having regard to the OECD/G20 Final BEPS Project published on 5 October 2015,

Amendment 10 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas the revelations showed that tax advisors and banks have helped multinational companies to obtain at least 548 tax rulings in Luxembourg between 2002 and 2010; whereas those secret deals feature complex financial structures designed to create substantial tax reductions; whereas the tax rulings provide written assurance that multinational companies’ tax-saving plans would be viewed favourably by Luxembourg authorities;

Amendment 100 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital T – point iii

(iii) whereas increased transparency would also be achieved if Member States inform each other and the Commission of any new allowance, relief, exception, incentive or similar measure that could have a material impact on their effective tax rate; whereas such notification would help Member States in identifying harmful tax practices; whereas such notifications could also apply to tax advisory firms whenever they propose a new 'tax optimisation' scheme;

Amendment 101 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital T – point iii a (new)

(iiia) whereas on 9 April 2015 the Commission put forward a proposal for a Directive on Single-Member Limited Liability Companies; whereas such a proposal would considerably raise the risk of multinational companies setting up single-member companies with the specific aim of avoiding tax, and so should not be pursued;

Amendment 102 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital T – point iv

(iv) whereas there is evidence that Member States do not communicate sufficiently between themselves about the possible impact that their tax arrangements with certain companies might have on tax collection in other Member States; whereas national tax authorities should automatically exchange all tax rulings without delay after they have been issued; whereas t~~ax rulings signed up to by tax authorities should be subject to greater transparency, providing that confidential information and business sensitive information is preserved~~he proposal submitted to that end, amending Directive 2011/16/EU as regards mandatory automatic exchange of information in the field of taxation (2015/0068(CNS)), is currently being discussed by the Union legislative authority;

Amendment 103 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital T – point iv

(iv) whereas there is evidence that Member States do not communicate sufficiently between themselves about ~~the possible impact that~~ their tax arrangements with certain companies ~~might have on tax collection in other Member States~~; whereas national tax authorities should automatically exchange all tax rulings without delay after they have been issued; whereas tax rulings signed up to by tax authorities should be subject to greater transparency, providing that confidential information and business sensitive information is preserved;

Amendment 104 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital T – point iv

iv) whereas there is evidence that Member States do not communicate sufficiently ~~between themselves~~and transparently between themselves and with the public about the possible impact that their tax arrangements with certain companies might have on tax collection in other Member States; whereas national tax authorities should automatically exchange all tax rulings without delay after they have been issued; whereas tax rulings signed up to by tax authorities should be subject to ~~greater~~full and total transparency, ~~providing that confidential information and business sensitive information is preserved~~making them accessible free of charge to the public online or on request;

Amendment 105 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital T – point iv

Amendment 106 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital T – point iv

(iv) whereas there is evidence that Member States do not communicate sufficiently between themselves about the possible impact that their tax arrangements with certain companies might have on tax collection in other Member States; whereas national tax authorities should automatically exchange all tax rulings without delay after they have been issued; whereas tax rulings signed up to by tax authorities should be subject to greater transparency, providing that confidential information and business sensitive information is preserved; whereas it is also necessary to take into account that, in the lack of adequate guarantees nor the confidentiality of proprietary information, the result will simply be that taxpayers will shy away from asking for tax rulings; whereas it is important to underline that, as also recognised by the Commission, tax rulings are primarily issued to provide legal certainty for taxpayers with regard to cross-border investments in the Union;

Amendment 107 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital T – point iv

Amendment 108 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital T – point iv

Amendment 109 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital T – point iv a (new)

(iva) whereas the European Commission or one of its agencies should elaborate a public black list of tax havens based on objective criteria;

Amendment 11 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

~~C. whereas, as a result of those tax rulings, some companies have enjoyed effective tax rates of less than 1 % on the profits they have shifted into Luxembourg;~~deleted

Amendment 110 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital T – point iv b (new)

(ivb) whereas the objective criteria for the inclusion of the said public black list of tax havens should be the conduct of any of the following practices: a) Aggressively low or non-existent corporate taxation; b) Granting tax benefits to non-residents that conduct no substantial economic activity in the jurisdiction; c) Lack of automatic exchange of information on tax payers and tax rulings; d) Engaging in secret tax rulings; e) Lack of ad-hoc of administrative and judicial cooperation on tax evasion and tax avoidance files; f) Legal bank secrecy; g) Legal persecution of whistle-blowers; h) Active cooperation of government officials in designing legal or illegal schemes for tax avoidance or evasion; i) Any other government practice conducive to helping and abetting tax fraud, tax evasion and tax avoidance;

Amendment 111 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital T – point iv c (new)

(ivc) whereas the European Commission or one of its agencies should elaborate a public black list of corporate tax evaders and avoiders;

Amendment 112 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital T – point v

(v) whereas customs-free ports are reported to be used to hide transactions from tax authorities; at the same time recognise that in Europe exist different special economic zones, used with success to boost growth and economic recovery in delimited areas deeply affected by the crisis; encourages in this regards the exchange of best practices between tax authorities; invites the European Commission to develop guidelines to promote a more coordinated approach for the best tax reduction schemes that can be applied at European level, in order not to increase the imbalances but to support the more disadvantaged areas;

Amendment 113 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital T – point v a (new)

(va) whereas the conduct of aggressive tax planning by corporations is incompatible with Social Corporate Responsibility, and as such it should be highlighted by the institutions devoted to monitor it;

Amendment 114 #

Sirpa PIETIKÄINEN

Motion for a resolution
Recital T – point v a (new)

(va) whereas the Commission should investigate the role of financial institutions in aiding harmful tax practices;

Amendment 115 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital T – point vi

(vi) whereas progress in the fight against tax avoidance and aggressive tax planning can only be monitored with a harmonised methodology that can be used to estimate the size of the direct and indirect tax gaps in all Member States, and across the European Union as a whole; expresses its support for the intention in the action plan proposed by the Commission on 17 June 2015 to address tax avoidance and promote fair and efficient corporate taxation in the EU; highlights that the European market is not homogeneous and that national markets evolve at different rates and have different needs;

Amendment 116 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital T – point vi

(vi) whereas progress in the fight against tax avoidance and aggressive tax planning can only be monitored with a harmonised methodology that can be used to estimate the size of the direct and indirect tax gaps in all Member States, and across the Union as a whole; whereas an estimate of the tax gap should only represent the start of providing further information on tax matters, and Member States should also use the data arising from automatic exchange of information to reveal the size and source of the offshore assets in their finance sectors;

Amendment 117 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital T – point vi

(vi) whereas progress in the fight against tax evasion and avoidance and aggressive tax planning can only be monitored with a harmonised methodology that can be used to estimate the size of the direct and indirect tax gaps in all Member States, and across the Union as a whole;

Amendment 118 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital T – point vii

~~(vii) whereas the current Union-wi~~de legal framework to protect whistleblowers is insufficient, and there exists significant variation between the ways in which different Member States provide protection for whistleblowers; whereas in the absence of such protection, those employees who hold vital information will understandably be reluctant to come forward and therefore that information will not be made available; whereas since whistleblowers helped to mobilise public attention on the issue of unfair taxation, Member States should consider measures that will protect such activity; whereas it would therefore be appropriate to offer Union-wide protection for whistleblowers who report suspected misconduct, wrongdoing, fraud or illegal activity to national regulators or, in cases of persistently unaddressed illegal activity that could affect the public interest, to the public as a whole; whereas such protection should be coherent with the overall legal system;ted

Amendment 119 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital T – point vii

(vii) whereas the current Union-wide legal framework to protect whistleblowers is insufficient, and there exists significant variation between the ways in which different Member States provide protection for whistleblowers; whereas in the absence of such protection, those employees who hold vital information will understandably be reluctant to come forward and therefore that information will not be made available; whereas since whistleblowers helped to mobilise public attention on the issue of unfair taxation, Member States should consider measures that will protect such activity; whereas it would therefore be appropriate to offer Union-wide protection for whistleblowers who report suspected misconduct, wrongdoing, fraud or illegal activity to national regulators or, in cases of persistently unaddressed illegal activity that could affect the public interest, to the public as a whole; whereas such protection should be coherent with the overall legal system;

Amendment 12 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas, as a result of those tax rulings, some companies have enjoyed effective tax rates of less than 1 % on the profits they have shifted into Luxembourg, with the complicity of the country’s authorities and its Prime Minister, Mr Jean-Claude Juncker;

Amendment 120 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital T – point vii

(vii) whereas the current Union-wide legal framework to protect whistleblowers is insufficient, and there exists significant variation between the ways in which different Member States provide protection for whistleblowers; whereas in the absence of such protection, those employees who hold vital information will understandably be reluctant to come forward and therefore that information will not be made available; whereas since whistleblowers helped to mobilise public attention on the issue of unfair taxation, Member States should consider measures that will protect such activity; whereas it would therefore be appropriate to offer Union-wide protection for whistleblowers who report suspected ~~misconduct, wrongdoing,~~ fraud or illegal activity to national regulators or, in cases of persistently unaddressed illegal activity that could affect the public interest, to the public as a whole; whereas such protection should be coherent with the overall legal system;

Amendment 121 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital T – point vii

(vii) whereas the current European Union- wide legal framework to protect whistleblowers is insufficient, and there exists significant variation between the ways in which different Member States provide protection for whistleblowers; whereas in the absence of such protection, those employees who hold vital information will understandably be reluctant to come forward and therefore that information will not be made available; whereas since whistleblowers helped to mobilise public attention on the issue of unfair taxation, Member States should consider measures that will protect such activity; whereas it would therefore be appropriate to offer Union-wide protection for whistleblowers who report suspected misconduct, wrongdoing, fraud or illegal activity to national regulators or, in cases of persistently unaddressed illegal activity that could affect the public interest, to the public as a whole; whereas such protection should be coherent with the overall legal system;

Amendment 122 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital T – point vii

(vii) whereas the current Union-wide legal framework to protect whistleblowers is insufficient, and there exists significant variation between the ways in which different Member States provide protection for whistleblowers; whereas in the absence of such protection, those employees who hold vital information will understandably be reluctant to come forward and therefore that information will not be made available; whereas since whistleblowers helped to mobilise public attention on the issue of unfair taxation, Member States should consider measures that will protect such activity; whereas it would therefore be appropriate to offer Union-wide protection for whistleblowers who report suspected misconduct, wrongdoing, fraud or illegal activity to national regulators or, in cases of persistently unaddressed misconduct, wrongdoing, fraud or illegal activity that could affect the public interest, to the public as a whole; whereas such protection should be coherent with the overall legal system;

Amendment 123 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital T – point vii

Amendment 124 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital T – point vii

(vii) whereas the current Union-wide legal framework to protect whistleblowers is insufficient, and there exists significant variation between the ways in which different Member States provide protection for whistleblowers; whereas in the absence of such protection, those employees who hold vital information will understandably be reluctant to come forward and therefore that information will not be made available, particularly given the case of Antoine Deltour, on trial in Luxembourg; whereas since whistleblowers helped to mobilise public attention on the issue of unfair taxation, Member States should consider measures that will protect such activity; whereas it would therefore be appropriate to offer Union-wide protection for whistleblowers who report suspected misconduct, wrongdoing, fraud or illegal activity to national regulators or, in cases of persistently unaddressed illegal activity that could affect the public interest, to the public as a whole; whereas such protection should be coherent with the overall legal system;

Amendment 125 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital T – point vii a (new)

(viia) Calls on National Governments, including Luxembourg, to consider amending their national legislation to provide further protection for whistle- blowers and journalists that act in the public interest;

Amendment 126 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital T – point vii a (new)

(viia) whereas the four biggest accounting firms (PricewaterhouseCoopers, Ernst & Young, Deloitte and KPMG) have a crucial role in the design and marketing of rulings and tax avoidance schemes exploiting mismatches between national legislations; whereas those firms, which seem to derive a considerable amount of their revenue from tax services, to dominate most Member States' auditing markets and to prevail in the global tax advising services, constitute a narrow oligopoly; whereas the existence of conflict of interest resulting from the juxtaposition, within the same firms, of tax advice and consulting activities intended, on the one hand, for tax administrations and, on the other, for MNCs' tax planning services, which exploit the weaknesses of national tax laws; whereas the effectiveness of any corporate code of conduct in tackling this issue is questionable; whereas tax rulings and settlement agreements have become, in the Union and worldwide, a common business practice, not only to obtain legal certainty or advantageous tax deals, but also in cases where legislative provisions do not allow any room for interpretation;

Amendment 127 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital U – introductory part

U. whereas the power to legislate on corporate taxation is vested in the Member States, yet the vast majority of problems linked to aggressive tax planning are of a multinational nature; whereas more effective coordination and information exchange of national tax policies between Member States therefore represents ~~the only~~a feasible way to address the problems of BEPS and aggressive tax planning;

Amendment 128 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital U – introductory part

U. whereas the power to legislate on corporate taxation ismust remain vested ~~in the~~within Member States~~, yet~~; whereas the vast majority of problems linked to aggressive tax planning are of a multinational nature; ~~whereas more coordination of national tax policies therefore represents the only feasible way to address the problems of BEPS and aggressive tax planning~~insists that Member States must improve and strengthen administrative cooperation between themselves as well as between tax administrations; in order to ensure fair competition between firms;

Amendment 129 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital U – introductory part

U. whereas Member States have the power to legislate on corporate taxation ~~is vested in the Member States~~, yet the vast majority of problems linked to aggressive tax planning are of a multinational nature; whereas more coordination of national tax policies therefore represents the only feasible way to address the problems of BEPS and aggressive tax planning;

Amendment 13 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas, as a result of those tax rulings, ~~some~~a large number of companies have enjoyed effective tax rates of less than 1 % on the profits they have shifted into Luxembourg;

Amendment 130 #

Costas MAVRIDES, Demetris PAPADAKIS, Lefteris CHRISTOFOROU, Neoklis SYLIKIOTIS

Motion for a resolution
Recital U – point i

(i) whereas a mandatory Union-wide Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base (CCCTB) would be a major step towards solving those problems associated with aggressive tax planning within the Union; whereas the ultimate goal should remain a full, mandatory CCCTB with possible exemptions for small- and medium-sized enterprises and companies with no cross-border activity; whereas until a full CCCTB is in place, the Commission is considering temporary measures to counteract profit shifting opportunities; whereas it is necessary to ensure that those measures, including the offsetting of cross-border losses, do not increase the risk of BEPS;deleted

Amendment 131 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital U – point i

Amendment 132 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital U – point i

i) whereas a mandatory Union-wide Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base (CCCTB) would be a major step towards solving those problems associated with aggressive tax planning within the Union; whereas the ultimate goal should remain a full, mandatory CCCTB with possible exemptions for small- and medium-sized enterprises and companies with no cross-border activity; whereas until a full CCCTB is in place, the Commission is considering temporary measures to counteract profit shifting opportunities; whereas it is necessary to ensure that those measures, including the offsetting of cross-border losses, do not increase the risk of BEPSmust therefore remain a full, mandatory CCCTB;

Amendment 133 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital U – point i

(i) whereas a mandatory Union-wide Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base (CCCTB) would be a major step towards solving those problems associated with aggressive tax planning within the Union, in order to avoid instances of double deductions or double non- taxation; whereas the ultimate goal should remain a full, mandatory CCCTB with possible exemptions for small- and medium-sized enterprises and companies with no cross-border activity; whereas until a full CCCTB is in place, the Commission is considering temporary measures to counteract profit shifting opportunities; whereas it is necessary to ensure that those measures, including the offsetting of cross- border losses, do not increase the risk of BEPS;

Amendment 134 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital U – point i

(i) whereas ait should be investigated by mean~~datory~~s of an impact assessment if a Union-wide Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base (CCCTB) would be a major step towards solving those problems associated with aggressive tax planning within the Union; whereas the ultimate goal should remain a full, mandatory CCCTB with possible exemptions for small- and medium-sized enterprises and companies with no cross-border activity; whereas until a full CCCTB is in place, the Commission is considering temporary measures to counteract profit shifting opportunities; whereas it is necessary to ensure that those measures, including the offsetting of cross- border losses, do not increase the risk of BEPS;

Amendment 135 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital U – point i

(i) whereas a mandatory Union-wide Common ~~Consolidated~~ Corporate Tax Base (CCCTB) would be a major step towards solving those problems associated with aggressive tax planning within the Union; whereas the ultimate goal should remain a full, mandatory CCCTB with possible exemptions for small- and medium-sized enterprises and companies with no cross- border activity; whereas until a full CCCTB is in place, the Commission is considering temporary measures to counteract profit shifting opportunities; whereas it is necessary to ensure that those measures, including the offsetting of cross- border losses, do not increase the risk of BEPS;

Amendment 136 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital U – point i

(i) whereas a mandatory Union-wide Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base (CCCTB) would be a major step towards solving those problems associated with aggressive tax planning within the Union; whereas the ultimate goal should remain a full, mandatory CCCTB with possible exemptions for small- and medium-sized enterprises and companies with no cross-border activity; stresses the importance of a full CCCTB, which does not undermine national tax legislations and respect tax sovereignty of Member States; whereas until a full CCCTB is in place, the Commission is considering temporary measures to counteract profit shifting opportunities; whereas it is necessary to ensure that those measures, including the offsetting of cross- border losses, do not increase the risk of BEPS;

Amendment 137 #

Costas MAVRIDES, Demetris PAPADAKIS, Lefteris CHRISTOFOROU

Motion for a resolution
Recital U – point i

(i) whereas a mandatory Union-wide Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base (CCCTB) ~~would be a major~~is a necessary step towards solving those problems associated with aggressive tax planning within the Union; whereas the ultimate goal should remain a full, mandatory CCCTB with possible exemptions for small- and medium-sized enterprises and companies with no cross- border activity; whereas until a full CCCTB is in place, the Commission is considering temporary measures to counteract profit shifting opportunities; whereas it is necessary to ensure that those measures, including the offsetting of cross- border losses, do not increase the risk of BEPS;

Amendment 138 #

Esther DE LANGE

Motion for a resolution
Recital U – point i

(i) whereas a ~~mandatory~~ Union-wide Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base (CCCTB) on the basis of international transfer pricing rules set out by the OECD would be a major step towards solving those problems associated with aggressive tax planning within the Union; whereas the ultimate goal should remain a full, mandatory CCCTB with possible exemptions for small- and medium-sized enterprises and companies with no cross- border activity; whereas until a full CCCTB is in place, the Commission is considering temporary measures to counteract profit shifting opportunities; whereas it is necessary to ensure that those measures, including the offsetting of cross- border losses, do not increase the risk of BEPS;

Amendment 139 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital U – point i

(i) whereas a ~~mandatory~~ Union-wide Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base (CCCTB) wcould be a major step towards solving those problems associated with aggressive tax planning within the Union; whereas the ultimate goal should remain ~~a full, mandatory~~ CCCTB with possible exemptions for small- and medium-sized enterprises and companies with no cross-border activity; whereas until a full CCCTB is in place, the Commission is considering temporary measures to counteract profit shifting opportunities; whereas it is necessary to ensure that those measures, including the offsetting of cross- border losses, do not increase the risk of BEPS; whereas the introduction of CCCTB should not interfere with tax competition and effective taxation system, since the system does not include harmonisation of tax rates, making CCCTB a tax-neutral operation;

Amendment 14 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)

Ca. whereas the Luxembourg authorities have never contested or challenged this type of tax agreement; whereas for many years Jean-Claude Juncker, the current President of the Commission, was in charge of the Grand Duchy;

Amendment 140 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital U – point i

(i) whereas a mandatory Union-wide Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base (CCCTB) w~~ould~~ill be a major step towards solving those problems associated with aggressive tax planning within the Union and should be introduced as a matter of urgency; whereas the ultimate goal should remain a full, mandatory CCCTB with possible exemptions for small- and medium-sized enterprises and companies with no cross-border activity; whereas until a full CCCTB is in place, the Commission is considering temporary measures to counteract profit shifting opportunities; whereas it is necessary to ensure that those measures, including the offsetting of cross- border losses, do not increase the risk of BEPS;

Amendment 141 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital U – point i

(i) whereas a mandatory Union-wide Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base (CCCTB) would be a major step towards solving those problems associated with aggressive tax planning within the Union; whereas the ultimate goal should remain a full, mandatory CCCTB with possible exemptions for small- and medium-sized enterprises (not subsidiaries of multinational corporations) and companies with no cross-border activity; whereas until a full CCCTB is in place, the Commission is considering temporary measures to counteract profit shifting opportunities; whereas it is necessary to ensure that those measures, including the offsetting of cross- border losses, do not increase the risk of BEPS;

Amendment 142 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital U – point i a (new)

(ia) whereas CCCTB should be complemented in the medium term with a minimum Union corporate tax rate, which will be instrumental in reducing the incentives for the seeking of tax rulings and abusive transfer price mechanisms;

Amendment 143 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital U – point i b (new)

(ib) whereas the new CCCTB initiative launched by the Commission should include a short deadline regarding the consolidation element, which is key to solve the problem of transfer mispricing;

Amendment 144 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital U – point i c (new)

(ic) whereas a fraction of a CCCTB should become an own resource of the European Union, given that companies are the ones that benefit the most from the functioning of the internal market;

Amendment 145 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital U – point ii

Amendment 146 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital U – point ii

(ii) whereas ~~despite~~ the work of the Code of Conduct Group on harmful corporate taxation, has hitherto been virtually useless, as aggressive tax planning measures continue to exist throughout the Union; whereas therefore the functioning of the Group needs to be ~~improv~~totally changed and made more effective and transparent;

Amendment 147 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital U – point ii

Amendment 148 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital U – point ii

(ii) whereas despite the work of the Code of Conduct Group on harmful corporate taxation, aggressive tax planning measures continue to exist throughout the Union; whereas therefore the functioning of the Group and its decision-making procedures needs to be improved and made to be more transparent, and also to be able to take positions on issues arising from tax policies in more than one Member State without a small minority of Member States blocking decision-making by the Group;

Amendment 149 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital U – point ii

(ii) whereas despite the work of the Code of Conduct Group on harmful corporate taxation, aggressive tax planning measures continue to exist throughout the Union; whereas therefore the functioning of the Group needs to be improved and made more transparent; through the publishing of minutes, and annual reports; whereas the Code of Conduct Group has lost momentum for more than a decade now and is used as a reason to prevent further legislative proposals by the Commission; whereas some of the more than 100 measures which have been rolled back as a result of its activity have been replaced in Member States by tax measures with similar harmful effects; whereas that tax authorities have countered the Group's recommendations by creating new structures with the same harmful effects as those rolled back by the Group; whereas past attempts to strengthen its governance and mandate, and to adjust and broaden the working methods and criteria set in the Code, with the aim of combating new forms of harmful tax practices within the current economic environment, have not been successful; whereas Group's activities are characterised by a general lack of transparency and accountability;

Amendment 15 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)

Ca. Stresses that tax avoidance by some MNCs can result in close-to-zero effective tax rates for the profits generated in European jurisdictions, highlighting the fact that such MNCs, while benefiting from various public goods and services where they operate, do not pay their fair share, thereby contributing to national tax base erosion; highlighting with concern that close-to-zero effective tax rates for the profits generated by some MNCs, do not positively impact upon domestic or real economies in the manner other sectors can;

Amendment 150 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital U – point ii a (new)

(iia) Calls also on the Commission, in the absence of any generally accepted definition, to conduct further analyses and studies in order to define harmful tax practices, calls on the Commission, in the absence of any generally accepted definition, to conduct further analyses and studies in order to define aggressive tax planning;

Amendment 151 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital U – point iii

(iii) whereas the overall principle of corporate taxation in the Union should be that taxes are paid in the countries where a company's actual economic activity and value creation takes place; whereas ~~criteria should be developed to ensure that this occurs; whereas any use of 'patent box' or o~~the costs of research and development in Member States can already be claimed against tax and, ther prefeore~~ntial tax regimes must also ensure that taxes are paid in the place where value is generated~~, additional favourable treatment in the form of 'patent boxes' is a tax avoidance incentive that runs counter to established practices;

Amendment 152 #

Lefteris CHRISTOFOROU, Eleni THEOCHAROUS, Georgios KYRTSOS, Manolis KEFALOGIANNIS, Maria SPYRAKI, Theodoros ZAGORAKIS

Motion for a resolution
Recital U – point iii

(iii) whereas the overall principle of corporate taxation in the Union should be that taxes are paid in the countries where a company's actual economic activity and value creation takes place; whereas ~~criteria should be developed to ensure that this occur~~the most effective criteria to ensure that this occurs is to replace the arm's length method with a formula apportionment method based on an objective variable such as giving high weight to companies' sales; whereas this method is already effectively applied in the United States; whereas the Union should promote at global level actions towards a Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base project to tax global profits of non-Union multinationals; whereas any use of 'patent box' or other preferential tax regimes must also ensure that taxes are paid in the place where value is generated;

Amendment 153 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital U – point iii

(iii) whereas the overall principle of corporate taxation in the Union should be that taxes are paid in the countries where a company's actual economic activity and value creation takes place; whereas criteria should be developed to ensure that this occurs; whereas any use of 'patent box' or other preferential tax regimes must also ensure that taxes are paid in the place where value is generated; whereas, any policy, strategy and measures decided on a legal and economic level should be in line with the Union principles taking also into consideration that the corporate sector is inherent with the free services and competition as main pillars of the free market;

Amendment 154 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital U – point iii

Amendment 155 #

Costas MAVRIDES, Demetris PAPADAKIS, Lefteris CHRISTOFOROU

Motion for a resolution
Recital U – point iii

(iii) whereas the overall principle of corporate taxation in the Union should be that taxes are paid in the countries where a company's actual economic activity ~~and~~, value creation takes place and where public services and infrastructures are used; whereas criteria should be developed to ensure that this occurs; whereas any use of 'patent box' or other preferential tax regimes must also ensure that taxes are paid in the place where value is generated;

Amendment 156 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital U – point iii a (new)

(iiia) whereas any potentially serious and harmful effects of the future taxation policies on Member States must be examined and considered in advance with the purpose to accommodate and adjust the Union's policies, especially where a service oriented economy of a Member State relies on a competitive advantage that includes low corporate tax rate;

Amendment 157 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital U – point iv

(iv) whereas some Member States have unilaterally introduced Controlled Foreign Corporation (CFC) rules, in order to adequately ensure that profits parked in low or no tax countries are effectively taxed; whereas those rules need to be coordinated in order to prevent the diversity of national CFC rules within the Union from distorting the functioning of the internal market, while respecting Member States' unanimity rule in the area of taxation as the Treaty foresees it;

Amendment 158 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital U – point vi

~~(vi) whereas for automatic exchange of information in general and on tax rulings in particular to be effective, a common European Tax Identification Number regime is required;~~deleted

Amendment 159 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital U – point vi

(vi) whereas for automatic exchange of information in general and on tax rulings in particular to be effective, a common European Tax Identification Number regime isand a common European business register are required;

Amendment 16 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C b (new)

Cb. whereas, at the hearing before the TAXE Committee on 17 September, the President of the European Commission Jean-Claude Juncker denied any personal involvement in the LuxLeaks case, questioning also the real extent thereof and preferring to speak of EuLeaks;

Amendment 160 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital U – point vii

(vii) whereas the Commission decided to prolong the mandate of the Platform for Tax Good Governance - which was due to expire in 2016 - as well as expand its scope and enhance its working methods; whereas the Platform can help deliver on the new Action Plan to strengthen the fight against tax fraud and tax evasion, facilitate discussions on Member States' tax rulings in light of the proposed new information exchange rules, and provide feedback on new anti-avoidance initiatives; whereas however the Commission needs to boost the profile, broaden the membership, expel Member States guilty of aggressive tax planning operations, and increase the effectiveness of the Platform for Tax Good Governance;

Amendment 161 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital U – point vii

(vii) whereas the Commission decided to prolong the mandate of the Platform for Tax Good Governance - which was due to expire in 2016 - as well as expand its scope and enhance its working methods; whereas the Platform can help deliver on the new Action Plan to strengthen the fight against tax fraud and tax evasion, facilitate discussions on Member States' tax rulings in light of the proposed new information exchange rules, and provide feedback on new anti-avoidance initiatives; whereas however the Commission needs to boost the profile, broaden the membership and increase the effectiveness of the Platform for Tax Good Governance;

Amendment 162 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital U – point viii

(viii) whereas the Commission should analyse the fiscal impact of reforms to tax administrations within the European Semester process, to enhance the capacity of national and European-level tax administrations in order to carry out their roles effectively;deleted

Amendment 163 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital U – point viii

(viii) whereas the Commission should analyse ~~the fiscal impact~~and request the implementation of reforms to tax administrations within the European Semester process, to enhance the tax collection capacity of national ~~and European-le~~tax administrations in order for them to carry out their roles effectively and thus to foster the positive impact of effectivel tax ~~administrations in order to carry out their roles effectively~~collection and effective actions against tax fraud and tax evasion on Member States' revenues; whereas the Commission should in particular take action within the European Semester in case of those Member States that receive financial assistance;

Amendment 164 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital U – point ix

Amendment 165 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital U – point ix

(ix) whereas, in addition to the issues mentioned in this report, the Commission should clearly set out how it will implement all 15 of the OECD/G20 BEPS project deliverables~~, and consider in which areas~~; whereas Union action on corporate taxation must be in line with OECD BEPS principles; whereas the Commission should review the implementation of the OECD/G20 BEPS project deliverables after a number of years to examine if the Union should go further than the minimum standards which the OECD recommends;

Amendment 166 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital U – point ix

(ix) whereas, in addition to the issues mentioned in this report, the Commission should clearly set out how it will implement all 15 of the OECD/G20 BEPS project deliverables, setting an ambitious and concrete deadline for an Anti-BEPS Directive no later than the end of 2016, so as to encourage other countries to follow the Union's lead in the implementation of the Action Plan; whereas the Commission should also and consider in which areas in which the Union should go further than the minimum standards which the OECD recommends;

Amendment 167 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital U – point ix a (new)

(ixa) whereas effective tax corporate coordination requires setting up a European Tax Agency as an independent agency of the European Commission;

Amendment 168 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital U – point ix a (new)

(ixa) whereas specific attention in the design of tax rules and proportionate administrative procedures should be given to SMEs and family businesses, which are the backbone of the Union economy;

Amendment 169 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital U – point ix b (new)

(ixb) whereas the said European Tax Agency shall be tasked with achieving the following goals: a) Coordination of the network of national tax agencies; b) Management of the tax rulings database; c) Management of the cross-border tax evaders and avoiders database; d) Elaboration of the public black list of tax havens; e) Elaboration of the public black list of corporate tax evaders and avoiders; f) Management of the European Tax Identification Number regime; g) Monitoring of the proper implementation and compliance of Union Regulations and Directives on tax matters; h) Conduct of research and analysis on cross-border tax evasion and avoidance;

Amendment 17 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

Amendment 170 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital U a (new)

Ua. whereas by 26 June 2017 a Union- wide register for beneficial ownership has to be operational, aiding in tracking down possible tax avoidance and profit shifting; emphasises the significance of central register for automatic exchange of advanced tax rulings or price arrangements between Member States, which would be accessible to tax authorities and responsible administrations in the Member States and the Commission;

Amendment 171 #

Sirpa PIETIKÄINEN

Motion for a resolution
Recital U a (new)

Ua. whereas some of the issues linked to harmful tax practices can be addressed by amending existing legislation, and whereas the Commission should make better use of existing legislation under Union competences, to address issues linked to tax evasion, tax fraud and aggressive tax planning and other harmful tax practices; whereas the Commission should especially take this opportunity to define aggressive tax planning, including a clear definition of what consists aggressive tax planning, as predicate offence to money laundering in the Directive (EU) 2015/849 of the European Parliament and of the Council1a ; _______________________ 1a 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 of 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)

Amendment 172 #

Costas MAVRIDES, Demetris PAPADAKIS, Lefteris CHRISTOFOROU

Motion for a resolution
Recital V – introductory part

V. whereas improved coordination alone will not solve fundamental problems arising from the fact that different rules regarding corporate taxation exist in different Member States; whereas part of the overall response to aggressive tax planning must involve the convergence of a limited number of national tax practices; whereas this can be achieved while still preserving the sovereignty ofbetween Member States is crucial in order to combat aggressive tax planning; notes that Member States must improve and strengthen administrative cooperation between each country and tax administrations; stresses that all policy formulation should respect the principle of subsidiarity; stresses that issues of subsidiarity and proportionality must be thoroughly agreed upon and should always ensure the competency and autonomy of each Member States is upheld in relation to ~~other elements of their~~each Member State's corporate tax systems;

Amendment 173 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital V – introductory part

V. whereas improved coordination alone will not solve fundamental problems arising from the fact that different rules regarding corporate taxation exist in different Member States; whereas part of the overall response to aggressive tax planning must involve the convergence of a limited number of national tax practices; whereas this can be achieved while still preserving the sovereignty of Member States in relation to other elements of their corporate tax systems; whereas the policies or the measures aiming a level playing field between companies should not contradict or undermine the long term interests of Member States that follow transparency principles and exchange of information on tax rulings and manage an effective tax system with low corporate tax rate;

Amendment 174 #

Lefteris CHRISTOFOROU, Eleni THEOCHAROUS, Georgios KYRTSOS, Manolis KEFALOGIANNIS, Takis HADJIGEORGIOU, Neoklis SYLIKIOTIS, Maria SPYRAKI, Theodoros ZAGORAKIS, Demetris PAPADAKIS

Motion for a resolution
Recital V – introductory part

V. whereas improved coordination alone will not solve fundamental problems arising from the fact that different rules regarding corporate taxation exist in different Member States; whereas part of the overall response to aggressive tax planning must involve the convergence of a limited number of national tax practices; whereas this can be achieved while still preserving the sovereignty of Member States in relation to other elements of their corporate tax systems; whereas, we should take into consideration the sovereign rights of Member States and the diversities on economic, commercial and corporate sectors in terms of affecting the growth, development and national income on which they depend on as well as the social cohesion within the Member State and the Union as such;

Amendment 175 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital V – introductory part

Amendment 176 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital V – introductory part

Amendment 177 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital V – point i

Amendment 178 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital V – point i

(i) whereas aggressive tax planning practices may sometimes arise from the cumulative benefits of double taxation treaties concluded by different Member States, perversely resulting in double non- taxation instead; whereas the proliferation of double tax treaties signed up to by individual Member States with third countries may lead to opportunities for new loopholes; whereas international agreements regarding tax compliance, information exchange and cooperation against tax evasion should be negotiated by the European Commission on behalf of the Member States; whereas the postponement of the entry into force of FATCA and the associated IGAs between US and various Member States, should be used as an opportunity to renegotiate a Union-US agreement, replacing the bilateral agreements, and offering adequate legal safeguards for Union citizens and companies; whereas, in line with Action 15 of the OECD/G20 BEPS project, there is a need to develop a multilateral instrument for amending bilateral tax treaties;

Amendment 179 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital V – point i

(i) whereas aggressive tax planning practices may sometimes arise from the cumulative benefits of double taxation treaties concluded by different Member States, perversely resulting in double non- taxation instead; whereas the proliferation of double tax treaties signed up to by individual Member States with third countries may lead to opportunities for new loopholes; whereas, in line with Action 15 of the OECD/G20 BEPS project, there is a need to develop a multilateral instrument for amending bilateral tax treaties; whereas, in line with the Union approach on trade agreements, there is a need for Member States to agree principles and practices for a common approach to negotiating (or renegotiating) double taxation treaties that are fair to developing countries;

Amendment 18 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. whereas in many cases Luxembourg subsidiaries handling hundreds of millions of euros in business maintain little presence and conduct little economic activity in Luxembourg, with some addresses being home to more than 1,600 companies; whereas much of this economic activity does not positively impact upon domestic or real economies in the manner other sectors can;

Amendment 180 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital V – point i

(i) whereas aggressive tax planning practices may sometimes arise from the cumulative benefits of double taxation treaties concluded by different Member States, perversely resulting in double non- taxation instead; whereas the proliferation of double tax treaties signed up to by individual Member States with third countries may lead to opportunities for new loopholes; whereas, in line with Action 15 of the OECD/G20 BEPS project, there is a need to develop a multilateral instrument for amending bilateral tax treaties; whereas, in line with the Union approach on trade agreements with developing countries, there is a need for Member States to agree principles and practices for a common approach to (re)negotiating double taxation treaties with developing countries which put developing countries first and benefit them, not exploit them;

Amendment 181 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital V – point ii

(ii) whereas the European Union should have its own up to date list of 'tax havens'; calls on the Commission, in particular, to develop a clear definition, a common set of criteria to identify tax havens and appropriate sanctions for countries cooperating with them, on the basis of its December 2012 Recommendation regarding measures intended to encourage third countries to apply minimum standards of good governance in tax matters and on defining appropriate common measures applying to those jurisdictions; refers to its resolution of 21 May 2013 on 'the fight against tax fraud, tax evasion and tax havens' for a non-exhaustive list of such possible measures including among others to suspend or terminate existing Double Tax Conventions with jurisdictions that are on the blacklist, to prohibit access to Union public procurement of goods and services and refuse to grant state aid to companies based in blacklisted jurisdictions, to prohibit Union financial institutions and financial advisors from establishing or maintaining subsidiaries and branches in blacklisted jurisdictions and to consider revoking licences for European financial institutions and financial advisors which maintain, to introduce a special levy on all transactions to or from blacklisted jurisdictions, to examine a range of options for the non-recognition, within the Union, of the legal status of companies set up in blacklisted jurisdictions, to apply tariff barriers in cases of trade with blacklisted third countries; reiterates that genuinely European lists, regularly updated, would be more effective as a means of promoting good tax governance and changing tax behaviours towards and within those jurisdictions;

Amendment 182 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital V – point ii

(ii) whereas the Union should have its own up to date list of 'tax havens' based on a common Union definition; whereas the OECD 1998 report which launched this project defined a tax haven as a jurisdiction which has: (a) no or only nominal taxes (generally or in special circumstances) and offers itself, or is perceived to offer itself, as a place to be used by non-residents to escape tax in their country of residence; (b) laws or administrative practices which prevent the effective exchange of relevant information with other governments on taxpayers benefiting from the low or no tax jurisdiction; (c) lack of transparency, and (d) the absence of a requirement that the activity be substantial, since it would suggest that a jurisdiction may be attempting to attract investment or transactions that are purely tax driven (transactions may be booked there without the requirement of adding value so that there is little real activity, i.e. these jurisdictions are essentially "booking centres"); whereas the proliferation of harmful tax practices to attract investment or transaction that are purely tax driven have proliferated also within the Union; whereas in light of the existence of such harmful tax practices the Union should also have its own definition of harmful preferential tax regimes;

Amendment 183 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital V – point ii

(ii) whereas the Union should have its own up to date list of 'tax havens', which would not preclude an examination of the situation in certain US federal states, such as Delaware;

Amendment 184 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital V – point ii

(ii) whereas the Union should have its own up to date ~~list~~definition of 'tax havens';

Amendment 185 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital V – point iii

(iii) whereas the Union should apply counter measures towards companies who make use of such tax havens; whereas this has already been called for in the European Parliament's Report on the Annual Tax Report 20148 , which asked for the 'introduction of strong sanctions to prevent companies breaching or dodging tax standards, by refraining from granting EU funding and access to state aid or to public procurement to fraudulent companies or companies located in tax havens or countries distorting competition with favourable tax conditions; ~~urges MSs to recover all types of public support given to companies if they are involved in breaching EU tax standards';~~ __________________ 8 http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDo c.do?pubRef=-//EP//TEXT+REPORT+A8- 2015-0040+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN

Amendment 186 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital V – point iii

(iii) whereas the Union should apply counter measures towards companies who make use of such tax havens; whereas this has already been called for in the European Parliament's Report on the Annual Tax Report 20148 , which asked for the 'introduction of strong sanctions to prevent companies breaching or dodging tax standards, by refraining from granting EU funding and access to state aid or to public procurement to fraudulent companies or companies located in tax havens or countries distorting competition with favourable tax conditions; urges MSs to recover all types of public support given to companies if they are involved in breaching EU tax standards'; whereas EU countries should also be subject to counter-measures in case they refuse to act to modify their harmful preferential tax regimes undermining the existence of a level-playing field in the EU; __________________ 8 http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDo c.do?pubRef=-//EP//TEXT+REPORT+A8- 2015-0040+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN

Amendment 187 #

Costas MAVRIDES, Demetris PAPADAKIS, Lefteris CHRISTOFOROU

Motion for a resolution
Recital V – point iii a (new)

(iiia) whereas banks and advisors have played a role in facilitating operations with ‘tax havens’ and stringent rules therefore need to be introduced, providing for harsh penalties and, in the most serious cases, withdrawal of licences;

Amendment 188 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital V – point iii a (new)

(iiia) whereas Member States should retain the power to adopt certain incentives for businesses, in line with Union Competition law;

Amendment 189 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital V – point iv

(iv) whereas a new binding definition of 'permanent establishment' is needed to ensure that taxation takes place where economic activity takes place and value is created; whereas this should be accompanied by minimum binding criteria to determine whether economic activity has sufficient substance to be taxed in a Member State in order to avoid the problem of 'letterbox companies';

Amendment 19 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

Amendment 190 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital V – point iv

(iv) whereas a new binding definition of 'permanent establishment' is needed to ensure that taxation takes place where economic value is created; whereas this should be accompanied by minimum binding criteria to determine whether economic activity has sufficient substance to be taxed in a Member State in order to avoid the problem of 'letterbox companies', in particular regarding the challenges launched by the digital economy;

Amendment 191 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital V – point vii

(vii) whereas the Commission's ongoing investigations into alleged breaches of the Union state aid rules have revealed a degree of uncertainty regarding the way in which those rules should be applied; whereas to rectify this, the Commission should publish binding guidelines to clarify how it will determine instances of tax-related state aid, thereby providing more legal certainty for companies and Member States alike;deleted

Amendment 192 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital V – point vii

(vii) whereas the Commission's ongoing investigations into alleged breaches of the Union state aid rules have revealed a ~~degree of uncertaint~~n unhelpful lack of transparency regarding the way in which those rules should be applied; whereas to rectify this, the Commission should publish binding guidelines to clarify how it will determine instances of tax- related state aid, thereby providing more legal certainty for companies and Member States alike;

Amendment 193 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital V – point vii

(vii) whereas the Commission's ongoing investigations into alleged breaches of the Union state aid rules have revealed a degree of uncertainty regarding the way in which those rules should be applied; whereas ~~to rectify this~~in this regard, the Commission should ~~publish binding guidelines to clarify how it will determine instances of tax-related state aid~~update its guidelines on state aid rules, thereby providing more legal certainty for companies and Member States alike;

Amendment 194 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital V – point vii

(vii) whereas the Commission's ongoing investigations into alleged breaches of the Union state aid rules have revealed a degree of uncertainty regarding the way in which those rules should be applied; whereas to rectify this, the Commission should publish ~~binding~~state aid guidelines to clarify how it will determine instances of tax-related state aid, thereby providing more legal certainty for companies and Member States alike;

Amendment 195 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital V – point vii

(vii) whereas the Commission's ongoing investigations into alleged breaches of the Union state aid rules have revealed a degree of uncertainty regarding the way in which those rules should be applied; whereas to rectify this, the Commission should publish binding guidelines to clarify how it will determine instances of tax- related state aid, thereby providing more legal certainty for companies and Member States alike; whereas in the framework of modernisation of state aid regime the Commission should ensure effective ex- post control of the legality of granted state aid;

Amendment 196 #

Massimiliano SALINI, Antonio TAJANI, Fulvio MARTUSCIELLO

Motion for a resolution
Recital V – point viii a (new)

(viiia) whereas a standard regime for withholding taxes on royalties would make tax relations with non-EU countries more coherent; whereas such a regime should ensure that royalty payments to recipients in non-EU countries not covered by bilateral tax agreements are actually taxed;

Amendment 197 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital V – point ix

(ix) whereas the current Union framework on double taxation dispute resolution between Member States does not work effectively and would benefit from clearer rules and more stringent timelines; calls, in this regard, for the use of tax credit for taxes paid abroad to be simplified through an automatic exchange of information between the tax authorities involved in the taxation, whilst at the same time encouraging SMEs, self-employed workers and the liberal professions to expand their businesses beyond national borders;

Amendment 198 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital V – point ix

Amendment 199 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital V – point ix a (new)

(ixa) whereas it is currently possible for profits made within the Union to be shifted between Member States, and then to leave the Union altogether without being taxed once within the Union; whereas if such profits leave the Union for a jurisdiction classified as a tax haven then the Union should be able to levy a withholding tax on such profits;

Amendment 2 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas a consortium of journalists, the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ), on tax rulings and other harmful practices in Luxembourg (LuxLeaks) revealed in November 2014 that nearly 340 multinational companies secured secret deals from Luxembourg that allowed many of them to slash their global tax bills, while creating little or no economic activity within Luxembourg; whereas further revelations such as the second batch of documents released by the ICIJ on 9 December 2014 on tax deals brokered by Ernst & Young, Deloitte, KPMG along with Luxembourg-based tax and law firms, have highlighted that measures which reduce multinational companies' overall tax liabilities and reduce overall tax revenue by artificially shifting profits across borders are systemic and are endemic to the European Union and beyond;

Amendment 20 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas the investigations carried out under the TAXE Committee revealed that the practice of tax rulings ~~does not exclusively take place in Luxembourg but~~ is common across the Union; whereas the practice of tax rulings can be used legitimately to provide legal certainty for business~~, but is nevertheless open to potential abuse~~ and reduce the financial risk for honest firms, but is nevertheless open to potential abuse and might, in providing legal certainty only to selected actors, create some degree of inequality between companies to which rulings have been granted and companies in the same sector to which they have not been granted; whereas regard is had to the report from the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) published on 12 February 2013 entitled ‘Addressing Base Erosion and Profit Shifting’ proposed new international standards to combat base erosion and profit shifting (BEPS); whereas regard is also had to the Communiqué issued following the Meeting of Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors of the G20 which took place on [to be inserted];

Amendment 200 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital V – point ix b (new)

(ixb) whereas tax advisors play a crucial role in facilitating aggressive tax planning, by helping companies to establish complex legal structures in order to take advantage of the mismatches and loopholes that arise from different tax systems; whereas a fundamental review of the corporate tax system cannot occur without investigating the practices of these advisory firms; whereas such an investigation must include consideration of the conflict of interest inherent in such firms, which simultaneously provide advice to national governments on setting up tax systems and advice to companies on how best to optimise their tax liabilities within such systems;

Amendment 201 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital W

Amendment 202 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital W

W. whereas the overall efficiency of tax collection, the notion of tax fairness and the credibility of national tax administrations are not undermined only by aggressive tax planning and BEPS activities; whereas the Union should take similarly decisive action to address the problems of tax evasion and tax fraud within both corporate and individual taxation as well as problems relating to the collection of taxes other than corporate taxes; whereas those other elements of tax collection and administration represent a substantial part of the existing tax gap; stresses, the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality under Article 5(3) of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) and Protocol (No 2) ; believes in this regard that an erosion or breaches of the principle of subsidiarity can lead to unintended consequences such as undermined faith in the European Union for citizens and that erosion or breaches of the principle of subsidiarity should therefore be avoided;

Amendment 203 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital W

Amendment 204 #

Neoklis SYLIKIOTIS, Takis HADJIGEORGIOU, Costas MAVRIDES, Demetris PAPADAKIS

Motion for a resolution
Recital W

Amendment 205 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital W a (new)

Wa. whereas this report does not aim to harmonise Member States' corporate tax rates and respects their sovereign rights to set their own taxation policy as well as their economic and social cohesion and stability;

Amendment 206 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital X

X. whereas the Commission should therefore also consider how it will address those wider issues, including difficulties in the collection of VAT (which in some Member States constitutes a major source of national income) and the negative consequences of some tax amnesties or non-transparent 'tax forgiveness' schemes; whereas any such new measures should involve consideration of the balance of costs and benefits.deleted

Amendment 207 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital X

X. whereas the Commission should therefore also consider how it will address those wider issues, in~~cluding difficult~~ particular the enforcement of VAT rules in the Member States and of their application in cross- border cases as well as the inefficiencies in the collection of VAT (which in some Member States constitutes a major source of national income) and also the negative consequences of some tax amnesties or non-transparent 'tax forgiveness' schemes; whereas any such new measures should involve consideration of the balance of costs and benefits.

Amendment 208 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital X

X. whereas the Commission should therefore also consider how it will address those wider issues, including difficulties in the collection of VAT (which in some Member States constitutes a major source of national income), VAT-avoidance practices and the negative consequences of ~~some~~ tax amnesties or non-transparent 'tax forgiveness' schemes; whereas any such new measures should involve consideration of the balance of costs and benefits.

Amendment 209 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital X a (new)

Xa. whereas, in particular, greater efforts to comply with the existing VAT directive, greater cooperation between Member States on combating VAT fraud, and a technology-neutral approach to VAT rules could make a major contribution towards more tax justice;

Amendment 21 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas the investigations carried out under the TAXE Committee, despite the lack of collaboration by the Member States and Commission, revealed that the practice of tax rulings does not exclusively take place in Luxembourg but is common across the Union; whereas the practice of tax rulings can be used legitimately to provide legal certainty for business, but is nevertheless open to potential abuse; whereas regard is had to the report from the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) published on 12 February 2013 entitled ‘Addressing Base Erosion and Profit Shifting’ proposed new international standards to combat base erosion and profit shifting (BEPS); whereas regard is also had to the Communiqué issued following the Meeting of Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors of the G20 which took place on [to be inserted];

Amendment 210 #

Antonio TAJANI, Fulvio MARTUSCIELLO, Massimiliano SALINI

Motion for a resolution
Recital X a (new)

Xa. whereas the unanimity requirement included in Article 113 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union makes it extremely difficult to make progress on tax matters, it is necessary to reform it so decisions can be taken by qualified majority vote in the Council and in co-decision with the European Parliament;

Amendment 211 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital X a (new)

Xa. whereas mismatches between different tax systems across the Union distort the functioning of the internal market;

Amendment 212 #

Gianluca BUONANNO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph -1 (new)

-1. Points out that the free movement of services and capital has, in practice, created an environment conducive to fraud, evasion and avoidance regarding both fiscal matters and social and labour rights, undermining the effectiveness of law enforcement systems available to the Member States; draws attention to the fact that the solution lies not in transferring to the Union national powers concerning such matters, but to return pre-existing powers of surveillance and monitoring to the Member States;

Amendment 213 #

Gianluca BUONANNO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph -1 a (new)

-1a. Takes the view that a Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base exceeds the powers of the Union under Article 113 TFEU; urges the Commission to refrain from taking any initiative which might be a forerunner to an EU tax scheme, since this would be in breach of the Treaties;

Amendment 214 #

Gianluca BUONANNO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph -1 b (new)

-1b. Believes that fiscal policies and corporate taxation should once again be used as a tool to support internal demand, without which it is impossible to boost growth, jobs and development; believes that the Member States must, through a more efficient, more transparent and fairer tax treatment for all companies, promote an attractive, competitive and balanced business environment that would allow businesses, including small and medium-sized enterprises, family businesses and self-employed people, to operate more easily;

Amendment 215 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Requests the Commission to submit to Parliament by June 2016 one or more legislative proposals, following the detailed recommendations in the Annex hereto, calling, in particular, for the close monitoring of companies and countries which implement tax practices that distort competition;

Amendment 216 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Requests the Commission to submit to Parliament by June 2016 ~~one or more~~a set of legislative proposals, following the detailed recommendations in the Annex hereto;

Amendment 217 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Confirms that the recommendations respect the principle of subsidiarity and the fundamental rights of citizens pursuant to Article 5(3) of the Treaty on European Union (TFEU) and Protocol No 2 TFEU;

Amendment 218 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

~~3. Considers that the financial implications of the requested proposal should be covered by appropriate budgetary allocations;~~deleted

Amendment 219 #

Pablo ZALBA BIDEGAIN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Considers that the harmonization of budgetary frameworks and fiscal alignment is critical and constitutes a frequently forgotten feature of a prospective fiscal union;

Amendment 22 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas the investigations carried out under the TAXE Committee revealed that the practice of tax rulings does not exclusively take place in Luxembourg but is common across the Union; whereas t~~he practice of tax rulings can be used legitimately to provide~~ax rulings are an important tool to provide the necessary legal certainty for business, but is nevertheless open to potential abuse; whereas regard is had to the report from the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) published on 12 February 2013 entitled ‘Addressing Base Erosion and Profit Shifting’ proposed new international standards to combat base erosion and profit shifting (BEPS); whereas regard is also had to the Communiqué issued following the Meeting of Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors of the G20 which took place on [to be inserted];

Amendment 220 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 1 – title

Recommendation A1. CMandatory, public country-by-country reporting for all sectors by multinational companies

Amendment 221 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 1 – introductory part

The European Parliament calls once again on the European Commission to bring forward a legislative proposal by June 2016 to introduce comprehensive and public country-by-country reporting (CBC- R) for all multinational companies in all sectors.

Amendment 222 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 1 – introductory part

Amendment 223 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 1 – introductory part

The European Parliament calls once again on the European Commission to ~~bring forward a legislative proposal by June 2016~~take all the necessary steps in order to introduce country-by-country reporting (CBC-R) for multinational companies in all sectors.

Amendment 224 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 1 – introductory part

The European Parliament calls once again on the European Commission to bring forward a legislative proposal by ~~June~~the first quarter of 2016 to introduce public country-by-country reporting (CBC-R) for multinational companies in all sectors.

Amendment 225 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 1 – introductory part

The European Parliament calls once again on the European Commission to bring forward a legislative proposal by June 2016 to introduce country-by-country reporting (CBC-R) for multinational companies, with the exception of SMEs, in all sectors.

Amendment 226 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 1 – introductory part

The European Parliament calls once again on the European Commission to bring forward a legislative proposal by June 2016 to introduce public, transparent and easily accessible country-by-country reporting (CBC-R) for multinational companies in all sectors.

Amendment 227 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 1 – indent 1

This proposal should be developed on the basis of the requirements put forward by the OECD in its CBC-R data template published in September 2014 (Action 13 of the OECD/G20 BEPS project) utilising the information requirements set out in the template but going beyond OECD recommendations as regards scope and publication in line with the general aim set out above.

Amendment 228 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 1 – indent 1

This proposal should be developed on the basis of the requirements put forward by the OECD in its CBC-R data template published in September 2014 (Action 13 of the OECD/G20 BEPS project), utilising the information requirements set out in the template but with a particular focus and strengthening of the provisions on targeted transparency and exchange of information.

Amendment 229 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 1 – indent 1

This proposal should ~~be developed on the basis of~~take into account the requirements put forward by the OECD in its CBC-R data template published in September 2014 (Action 13 of the OECD/G20 BEPS project), while also envisaging public CBC-R applying to all ‘large’ undertakings in in all sectors in accordance with the Union’s definition included in the Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council1a and Directive 2013/50/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council1b, including detailed disclosure requirements such as (turnover, staffing levels, investment, profits, taxes paid, taxes deferred) to be part of companies’ annual financial statement and allow the public to have access to this information, for instance by creating a central Union register. _________________ 1aDirective 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on the annual financial statements, consolidated financial statements and related reports of certain types of undertakings, amending Directive 2006/43/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directives 78/660/EEC and 83/349/EEC (OJ L 182, 29.6.2013, p. 19). 1b Directive 2013/50/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2013 amending Directive 2004/109/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the harmonisation of transparency requirements in relation to information about issuers whose securities are admitted to trading on a regulated market, Directive 2003/71/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the prospectus to be published when securities are offered to the public or admitted to trading and Commission Directive 2007/14/EC laying down detailed rules for the implementation of certain provisions of Directive 2004/109/EC (OJ L 294, 6.11.2013, p. 13).

Amendment 23 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas the investigations carried out under the TAXE Committee revealed that the practice of tax rulings does not exclusively take place in Luxembourg but is common across the Union; whereas the practice of tax rulings can be used legitimately to provide legal certainty for business, but is nevertheless open to potential abuse and tax avoidance; whereas regard is had to the report from the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) published on 12 February 2013 entitled ‘Addressing Base Erosion and Profit Shifting’ proposed new international standards to combat base erosion and profit shifting (BEPS); whereas regard is also had to the Communiqué issued following the Meeting of Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors of the G20 which took place on [to be inserted];

Amendment 230 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 1 – indent 1

This ~~proposal~~measure should be developed on the basis of the requirements put forward by the OECD in its CBC-R data template published in September 2014 (Action 13 of the OECD/G20 BEPS project).

Amendment 231 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 1 – indent 2 – introductory part

When developing th~~e proposal~~is measure, the Commission should also consider:

Amendment 232 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 1 – indent 2 – point 1

the results of the Commission’s consultation into CBC-R, conducted between 17 June and 9 September 2015, which examined different options for the possible implementation of CBC-R in the Union and its outcome, which showed a significant majority of public replies in favour of public CBC-R with larger scope than the one foreseen by the OECD;

Amendment 233 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – Subtitle 1 – indent 2 – point 1

the results of the Commission’s consultation into CBC-R, conducted between 17 June and 9 September 2015, which examined different options for the possible implementation of CBC-R in the Union; the results of the consultation should be considered particularly in relation to the protection of sensitive corporate data and company secrets;

Amendment 234 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 1 – indent 2 – point 2

o the proposals for full public CBC-R outlined in the revised Shareholder Rights Directive as voted for by the European Parliament on 8 July 20151 and the ongoing trilogues on this Directive. __________________ 1 Texts adopted of 8.7.2015, P8_TA(2015)0257.

Amendment 235 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 1 – indent 2 - point 2 a (new)

Tougher country-specific tax information reporting requirements at both European and international level must be accompanied by an effective and binding dispute-settlement procedure.

Amendment 236 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 1 – indent 2 a (new)

The Commission should ensure in its future country-by-country proposal that accounting firms have to confirm in the Group Audit Report that the figures in respect of taxes, turnovers, number of employees and profit made are also in line with the ‘true and fair view’ particularly allocated/shown per country;

Amendment 237 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 2

Recommendation A2. A new ‘Fair Tax Payer’ label for companies who engage in good tax practices The European Parliament calls on the European Commission to bring forward a proposal as soon as possible on a voluntary European ‘Fair Tax Payer’ label, as a ‘soft measure’ promoting a standard for companies wishing to indicate they are fully tax compliant. • The proposal should include a European framework of eligibility criteria, under which the label could be awarded by national bodies. • This framework of eligibility criteria should make clear that the ‘Fair Tax Payer’ label is only awarded to those companies that have gone above and beyond the letter of what is required of them under Union and national law.deleted

Amendment 238 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 2

Amendment 239 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 2 – introductory part

The European Parliament calls on the European Commission to bring forward a proposal as soon as possible on a ~~voluntary~~ European ‘Fair Tax Payer’ label, as a ~~‘soft~~ measure’ promoting a standard for companies wishing to indicate they are fully tax compliant.

Amendment 24 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas the investigations carried out under the TAXE Committee ~~reveal~~underlined that the practice of tax rulings does not exclusively take place in Luxembourg but is common ~~across the Union~~in several countries across the Union, including Belgium, Ireland, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom, ; whereas the practice of tax rulings can be used legitimately to provide legal certainty for business, but is nevertheless open to potential abuse; whereas regard is had to the report from the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) published on 12 February 2013 entitled ‘'Addressing Base Erosion and Profit Shifting’' proposed new international standards to combat base erosion and profit shifting (BEPS); whereas regard is also had to the Communiqué issued following the Meeting of Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors of the G20 which took place on [to be inserted];

Amendment 240 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 2 – indent 2 a (new)

Companies should be motivated by this ‘Fair Tax Payer’ label to make paying a fair share of taxes an essential part of their corporate social responsibility policy, and report on their stance on taxation matters in their annual report.

Amendment 241 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 3

Recommendation A3. Mandatory notification of new tax measures The European Parliament calls on the European Commission to bring forward a proposal as soon as possible on a new mechanism whereby Member States are compelled to inform other Member States (initially via the Code of Conduct Group) if they intend to introduce a new allowance, relief, exception, incentive or similar measure that could have a material impact on the effective tax rate in the Member State or on the tax base of another Member State. • These notifications by Member States shall contain spillover analyses of the material impact of the new tax measures on other Member States and developing countries, to support the action of the Code of Conduct Group in identifying harmful tax practices. • These new tax measures should also be assessed by the European Commission, included in the European Semester process, and recommendations should be made for follow-up.deleted

Amendment 242 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 3 – introductory part

The European Parliament calls on the European Commission to bring forward a proposal as soon as possible on a new mechanism whereby Member States are compelled to inform other Member States ~~(initially via the Code of Conduct Group)~~and the public if they intend to introduce a new allowance, relief, exception, incentive or similar measure that could have a material impact on the effective tax rate in the Member State or on the tax base of another Member State.

Amendment 243 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 3 – introductory part

Amendment 244 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 3 – introductory part

The European Parliament calls on the European Commission to bring forward a proposal as soon as possible on a new mechanism whereby Member States are compelled to inform other Member States ~~(initially via the Code of Conduct Group)~~ if they intend to introduce a new allowance, relief, exception, incentive or similar measure that could have a material impact on the effective tax rate in the Member State or on the tax base of another Member State. and to reform the Code of Conduct Group;

Amendment 245 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 3 – introductory part

The European Parliament calls on the European Commission to bring forward a proposal as soon as possible on a new mechanism whereby Member States are compelled to inform other Member States ~~(initially via the Code of Conduct Group)~~without delay if they intend to introduce a new allowance, relief, exception, incentive or similar measure that could have a material impact on the effective tax rate in the Member State or on the tax base of another Member State.

Amendment 246 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 3 – introductory part

The European Parliament calls on the European Commission to bring forward a proposal as soon as possible on a new mechanism whereby Member States are compelled to inform other Member States ~~(initially via the Code of Conduct Group)~~and the Commission’s Directorate- General for Competition if they intend to introduce a new allowance, relief, exception, incentive or similar measure that could have a material impact on the effective tax rate in the Member State or on the tax base of another Member State.

Amendment 247 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 3 – indent 1

These notifications by Member States shall contain spillover analyses, which will be published along with the notification, of the material impact of the new tax measures on other Member States and developing countries, to support the action of the Code of Conduct Group in identifying harmful tax practices.

Amendment 248 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 3 – indent 1

Amendment 249 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 3 – indent 1

These notifications by Member States shall contain spillover analyses of the material impact of the new tax measures on other Member States and developing countries~~, to support the action of the Code of Conduct Group in identifying harmful tax practices~~.

Amendment 25 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas the investigations carried out under the TAXE Committee revealed that the practice of tax rulings does not exclusively take place in Luxembourg but is common across the Union, such as in the Ireland, Netherlands, United Kingdom and many overseas dependencies; whereas the practice of tax rulings can be used legitimately to provide legal certainty for business, but is nevertheless open to potential abuse; whereas regard is had to the report from the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) published on 12 February 2013 entitled ‘Addressing Base Erosion and Profit Shifting’ proposed new international standards to combat base erosion and profit shifting (BEPS); whereas regard is also had to the Communiqué issued following the Meeting of Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors of the G20 which took place on [to be inserted];

Amendment 250 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 3 – indent 1

These notifications by Member States shall contain spillover a~~nalyse~~ssessments of the material impact of the new tax measures on other Member States and developing countries~~, to support the action of the Code of Conduct Group in identifying harmful tax practices~~.

Amendment 251 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 3 – indent 2

~~These new tax measures should also be assessed by the European Commission, included in the European Semester process, and recommendations should be made for follow-up.~~deleted

Amendment 252 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 3 – indent 2

~~These new tax measures should also be assessed by the European Commission, included in the European Semester process, and recommendations should be made for follow-up.~~deleted

Amendment 253 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 3 – indent 2

These new tax measures should also be assessed by the European Commission~~, included in the European Semester process,~~ and recommendations should be made for follow-up.

Amendment 254 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 3 – indent 2

These new tax measures should also be assessed by the European Commission~~, included in the European Semester process,~~ and recommendations should be made for follow-up.

Amendment 255 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 3 – indent 2 a (new)

In addition, the Commission should oblige Member States to publish information on all tax breaks and subsidies which they provide for corporations.

Amendment 256 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 3 – indent 2 a (new)

An infringement procedure of the rule of the internal market should be envisaged with respect to Member States which fail to comply with such reporting requirements.

Amendment 257 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 3 – indent 2 b (new)

The Commission should also consider obliging tax advisory firms to notify national tax authorities whenever they develop and begin promoting a new ‘tax optimisation’ scheme intended to help companies reduce their overall tax liabilities.

Amendment 258 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 3 – indent 3 a (new)

The European Parliament should receive regular update about the notifications and the assessment conducted by the European Commission.

Amendment 259 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 3 a (new)

Recommendation 3a. Withdrawal of the proposal regarding Single-Member private limited liability companies (SUP) The European Parliament calls on the European Commission to withdraw its proposal for a Directive on Single- Member private limited liability companies (SUP) from 9 April 2015. • The decision to withdraw the proposal should be taken due to the significant risks of multinational companies setting up SUPs for tax avoidance purposes. • The Commission should review the 14th Company Law Directive on the cross- border transfer of company seats, as previously called for by the European Parliament in 2012 in its own initiative report (2001/2016(INI)).

Amendment 26 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas the investigations carried out under the TAXE Committee revealed that the practice of tax rulings does not exclusively take place in Luxembourg but is common ~~across~~throughout the Union; whereas the practice of tax rulings can be used legitimately to provide legal certainty for business, but is nevertheless open to potential abuse and is extremely disadvantageous to small and medium- sized enterprises (SME); whereas regard is had to the report from the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) published on 12 February 2013 entitled ‘Addressing Base Erosion and Profit Shifting’ proposed new international standards to combat base erosion and profit shifting (BEPS); whereas regard is also had to the Communiqué issued following the Meeting of Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors of the G20 which took place on [to be inserted];

Amendment 260 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 4

Recommendation A4. Automatic exchange of information on tax rulings to be extended to all tax rulings and to a certain extent made public The European Parliament calls on the European Commission to complement its proposal from March 2015 amending the Directive 2011/16/EU , which includes proposals for the automatic exchange of information (AEOI) on tax rulings, by: • Extending the scope of the automatic exchange of information beyond cross- border tax rulings to include all tax rulings in the corporate tax area. • Significantly increasing the transparency of tax rulings at the EU level, with due consideration given to business confidentiality and trade secrets and taking into account the current best practices applicable in some Member States via one of the following methods: ° requiring Member States or the Commission to produce an annual list, published in a fully public directory accessible to all, of companies with which they have concluded tax rulings, one year at the most after the tax ruling is signed by tax authorities ; ° requiring Member States or the Commission to publish a summary of the main important (anonymised) tax rulings that have been agreed in the previous year. • Assuming full responsibility as proposed in the tax transparency package presented by the Commission on 18 March 2015, which includes the Commission ensuring that it plays a full and meaningful role in the mandatory exchange of information on tax rulings and the creation of a secure central directory accessible by the Member States and the Commission concerning all tax rulings agreed in the Union.deleted

Amendment 261 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 4

Amendment 262 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 4 - title

Recommendation A4. Automatic exchange of information on tax rulings ~~to be extended to all tax rulings and to a certain extent made public~~

Amendment 263 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 4 – title

Recommendation A4. Automatic exchange of information on tax rulings to be extended to all tax rulings and to ~~a certain extent made public~~be made public, transparency on offshore banking statistics and company structure

Amendment 264 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 4 – title

Recommendation A4. Automatic exchange of information on tax rulings to be extended to all tax rulings and ~~to a certain extent~~ made public

Amendment 265 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 4 - indent 1

~~Extending the scope of the automatic exchange of information beyond cross- border tax rulings to include all tax rulings in the corporate tax area.~~deleted

Amendment 266 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 4 – indent 1

Extending the scope of the automatic exchange of information beyond cross- border tax rulings to include all tax rulings in the corporate tax area. Information provided must be comprehensive and in a mutually agreed format to ensure that it can be efficiently used by tax authorities in relevant countries.

Amendment 267 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 4 – indent 1

Extending the scope of the automatic exchange of information beyond ~~cross- border~~ tax rulings to include all tax rulings in the corporate tax area.

Amendment 268 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 4 – indent 2 – introductory part

Significantly increasing the transparency of tax rulings at the EU level, ~~with due consideration given to business confidentiality and trade secrets and taking into account the current best practices applicable in some Member States via one of the following method~~making the information public and easily accessible and comprehensible to citizens:

Amendment 269 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 4 – indent 2 – introductory part

Amendment 27 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)

Ea. whereas the practice of rulings developed, in the framework of a closer and more cooperative relationship between tax administrations and taxpayers, as a tool to tackle the increasing complexity of the tax treatment of certain transactions in an increasingly complex, global and digitalised economy; whereas, as undisclosed and potentially discretionary/negotiated arrangements, rulings could at the same time be used as a means of obtaining derogations and more favourable tax treatments; whereas this seems to particularly be an issue – although not exclusively – with rulings related to pricing of intra-company transfers (so-called Advance Pricing Agreements);

Amendment 270 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 4 – indent 2 – introductory part

~~Significantly i~~Increasing the transparency of tax rulings at the EU level, with dua strong and effective consideration given to business confidentiality and trade secrets and taking into account the current best practices applicable in some Member States via one of the following methods:

Amendment 271 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 4 - indent 2

Significantly increasing the transparency of tax rulings at the EU level, with due consideration given to business confidentiality and trade secrets and taking into account the current best practices applicable in some Member States via one of the following methods: ° requiring Member States or the Commission to produce an annual list, published in a fully public directory accessible to all, of companies with which they have concluded tax rulings, one year at the most after the tax ruling is signed by tax authorities ; ° requiring Member States or the Commission to publish a summary of the main important (anonymised) tax rulings that have been agreed in the previous year.

Amendment 272 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 4 – indent 2

Significantly increasing the transparency of tax rulings at the EU level, with due consideration given to business confidentiality and trade secrets and taking into account the current best practices applicable in some Member States via one of the following methods: ° requiring Member Statesby making publicly available the exchanged tax rulings via the central directory orf the Commission ~~to produce an annual list, published in a fully public directory accessible to all, of companies with which they have concluded tax rulings, one year at the~~ , with the exception of specific parts for which corporations can demonst ~~after the tax ruling is signed by tax authorities ; ° requiring Member States~~rate a financial loss as a consequence orf the ~~Commission to publish a summary of the main important (anonymised) tax rulings that have been agreed in the previous year.~~ir public disclosure. 

Amendment 273 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 4 – indent 2

Significantly increasing the transparency of tax rulings at the EU level, with due consideration given to business confidentiality and trade secrets and taking into account the current best practices applicable in some Member States via one of the following methods: ° requiring Member Statesby making publicly available the exchanged tax rulings via the central directory orf the Commission ~~to produce an annual list, published in a fully public directory accessible to all, of companies with which they have concluded tax rulings, one year at the~~ , with the exception of specific parts for which corporations can demonst ~~after the tax ruling is signed by tax authorities ; ° requiring Member States~~rate a financial loss as a consequence orf the ~~Commission to publish a summary of the main important (anonymised) tax rulings that have been agreed in the previous year~~ir public disclosure.

Amendment 274 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 4 – indent 2 – point 1

requiring Member States or the Commission to produce an annual list~~, published in a fully public directory accessible to all,~~ of companies with which they have concluded tax rulings, one year at the most after the tax ruling is signed by tax authorities ;

Amendment 275 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 4 – indent 2 – point 1

~~° r~~• Requiring Member States orand the Commission to p~~roduce an annual list, published~~ublish all rulings in a fully public directory accessible to all~~, of companies with which they have concluded tax rulings,~~ one year at the most after the tax ruling is signed by tax authorities ;

Amendment 276 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 4 – indent 2 – point 2

~~requiring Member States or the Commission to publish a summary of the main important (anonymised) tax rulings that have been agreed in the previous year.~~deleted

Amendment 277 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 4 – indent 2 – point 2

~~requiring~~Taking stock of Union legislation on taxation after five years and examining whether Member States or the Commission toshould publish a summary of the main important (anonymised) tax rulings that have been agreed in the previous year.

Amendment 278 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 4 – indent 2 - point 2

requiring Member States or the Commission to publish a summary of the main important ~~(anonymised)~~ tax rulings that have been agreed in the previous year.

Amendment 279 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 4 – indent 2 – subparagraph 1 a (new)

In both options, the information provided must be submitted in an agreed, standardised form in order to allow the public to use it effectively.

Amendment 28 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)

Ea. whereas, with some laudable exceptions, national political leaders have not been sufficiently forthcoming in addressing the problem of tax avoidance in corporate taxation;

Amendment 280 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 4 – indent 2 a (new)

• Proposing a common Union framework setting out standard procedural requirements for tax rulings, including: ° the obligation to publish an anonymized and summarized version of all tax rulings, fully respecting confidentiality requirements, ° the obligation to publish the criteria for granting, refusing and revoking tax rulings, ° equal treatment and availability to all taxpayers, ° the requirement that at least two officials (either internally or externally shown) give their approval of decisions on rulings.

Amendment 281 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 4 – indent 3

Assuming full responsibility as proposed in the tax transparency package presented by the Commission on 18 March 2015, which includes the Commission ensuring that it plays a full and meaningful role in the mandatory exchange of information on tax rulings and the creation of a secure, anonymised central directory accessible by the Member States and the Commission concerning all tax rulings agreed in the Union.

Amendment 282 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 4 – indent 3 a (new)

Ensuring that appropriate sanctions are applied to those Member States which do not automatically exchange information on tax rulings as they should.

Amendment 283 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 4 – indent 3 a (new)

Create, on the basis of data to be collected by financial institutions and provided to revenue authorities as part of Automatic Exchange of Information requirements, annual statistics to show the extent of each Member State offshore banking, including value and number of accounts by country of residency of account holders.

Amendment 284 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 4 – indent 3 b (new)

Calls on the Commission to create an obligation for large undertakings to publish they corporate ownership structure, in order to better understand where they have activities and who manages subsidiaries of these undertakings;

Amendment 285 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 4 a (new)

Recommendation A4a. Statistics on AEOI The European Parliament calls on the European Commission to enhance, via its drafting of implementing regulation under the comitology procedure, transparency regarding the AEOI between tax administrations in the Union. This would be achieved, without comprising the privacy of the financial data exchanged, by: • Obliging financial institutions to identify the place of residence for all account holders, including from non-Member States, from the beginning, in order to enhance efficiency of the information gathering process and in order not to insert undue and counterproductive ambiguity in the implementation of AEOI; • Creating specific requirements for comprehensive and public statistics on AEOI by type of asset and by country of residence of the ultimate beneficial owner, for all assets held, including those by residents from non-CRS-participating jurisdictions from the first year of operation, and including a summary statistic for the five years preceding implementation in order to detect avoidance schemes;

Amendment 286 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 5 – title

Recommendation A5. ~~Transparency of~~Competition distortion caused by customs-free ports

Amendment 287 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 5 – indent 2

Oblige customs-free ports authorities to immediately inform the relevant Member States’ and third countries’ tax authorities of any transaction carried on by their tax residents in customs-free ports premises. These communications should be embedded in the automatic exchange of information framework according to the CRS.

Amendment 288 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 5 – indent 2

Amendment 289 #

Antonio TAJANI, Fulvio MARTUSCIELLO, Massimiliano SALINI

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 6

Recommendation A6. Commission estimate of the corporate tax gap The European Parliament calls on the European Commission to: • Create, on the basis of best practices currently used by Member States, a harmonised methodology that can be used to estimate the size of the direct and indirect corporate tax gaps - the difference between corporate taxes owed and corporate taxes paid - in all Member States, and across the Union as a whole. • Work with Member States to ensure the provision of necessary data to be analysed using the methodology in order to produce the most accurate figures possible. • Use the agreed methodology and necessary data in order to produce and publish, biannually, an estimate of the direct and indirect corporate tax gaps in all Member States and across the Union.deleted

Amendment 29 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)

Ea. whereas the European Union has made major steps towards economic integration such as the Economic and Monetary Union as well as the Banking Union and that a Fiscal Union should be the next step in the European integration process;

Amendment 290 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 6 – indent 1

Create, on the basis of best practices currently used by Member States, a harmonised methodology, which should be made public, that can be used to estimate the size of the direct and indirect corporate tax gaps - the difference between corporate taxes owed and corporate taxes paid - in all Member States, and across the Union as a whole.

Amendment 291 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 6 – indent 2

Work with Member States to ensure the provision of ~~necessary~~high quality, relevant data to be analysed using the methodology in order to produce the most accurate figures possible.

Amendment 292 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 6 – indent 3

Use the agreed methodology and ~~necessary~~high quality, relevant data in order to produce and publish, biannually, an estimate of the direct and indirect corporate tax gaps in all Member States and across the Union.

Amendment 293 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 6 – indent 3

Use the agreed methodology and necessary data in order to produce and publish, ~~biannual~~regularly, an estimate of the direct and indirect corporate tax gaps and the way such gaps affect the competitiveness of the companies themselves, in all Member States and across the Union.

Amendment 294 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 6 – indent 3 a (new)

Use the data collected by financial institutions as part of the automatic exchange of information to produce annual statistics showing the extent of each Member State’s offshore banking, including the number and value of accounts by country of residence of the account holders.

Amendment 295 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 7

Recommendation A7. Protection of whistleblowers The European Parliament calls on to the European Commission to bring forward a legislative proposal • Protect whistleblowers who act in the public interest only (and not also for money or any other personal agenda) in order to expose misconduct, wrongdoing, fraud or illegal activity in relation to corporate taxation in any Member State in the European Union. Such whistleblowers should be protected if they report suspected misconduct, wrongdoing, fraud or illegal activity to their relevant competent authority, and should also be protected if, in cases of persistently unaddressed illegal activity in relation to corporate taxation that could affect the public interest, they report their concerns to the public as a whole; • Ensure that the right to freedom of expression and information in relation to corporate taxation is preserved in the European Union; • Such protection should be coherent with the overall legal system; • Such a legislative proposal should take as its basis the existing Market Abuse Regulation, as well as the text of the Directive on the Protection of Trade Secrets once it has been agreed by the European Parliament and European Council; • Such a legislative proposal could also take into consideration the Council of Europe’s ‘Recommendation CM/Rec(2014)71 on the protection of whistleblowers’. _______________ 1.http://www.coe.int/t/dghl/standardsettin g/cdcj/Whistleblowers/protecting_whistleb lowers_en.aspdeleted

Amendment 296 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 7 - introductory part

The European Parliament calls on the ~~European Commission~~Member States to bring forward a legislative proposal as follows:

Amendment 297 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 7 – indent 1

Protect whistleblowers who act in the public interest ~~only (and not also for money or any other personal agenda) in order to expose~~by exposing misconduct, wrongdoing, fraud or illegal activity in ~~relation to corporate tax~~public or private organisations in any Member State in the European Union. Such whistleblowers should be protected if they report suspected misconduct, wrongdoing, fraud or illegal activity to their relevant competent authority, and should also be protected if, in cases of ~~persistently unaddressed illegal activity in relation to corporate taxation that could affect the public interest~~insufficient action by the competent authority, they report their concerns to the public as a whole;

Amendment 298 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 7 – indent 1

Protect whistleblowers who act in the public interest only (and not also for money or any other personal agenda) in order to expose misconduct, wrongdoing, fraud or illegal activity in relation to corporate taxation in any Member State in the European Union. Such whistleblowers should be protected if they report suspected misconduct, wrongdoing, fraud or illegal activity to their relevant competent authority, and should also be protected if, in cases of persistently unaddressed misconduct, wrongdoing, fraud or illegal activity in relation to corporate taxation that could affect the public interest, they report their concerns to the public as a whole;

Amendment 299 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 7 – indent 1

Protect whistleblowers who act in the public interest only (and not also for money or any other personal agenda) in order to expose misconduct, wrongdoing, fraud or illegal activity in relation to corporate taxation in any Member State in the European Union. Such whistleblowers should be protected if they report suspected ~~misconduct, wrongdoing,~~ fraud or illegal activity to their relevant competent authority, and should also be protected if, in cases of persistently unaddressed illegal activity in relation to corporate taxation that could affect the public interest, they report their concerns to the public as a whole;

Amendment 3 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

Amendment 30 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E b (new)

Eb. whereas DG Competition and the European Commission have reacted late to the abuse of tax rulings, given that tax rulings have been used for no less than twenty years;

Amendment 300 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 7 – indent 1

Amendment 301 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 7 – indent 1

Protect whistleblowers who act in the public interest only ~~(and not also for money or any other personal agenda)~~ in order to expose misconduct, wrongdoing, fraud or illegal activity in relation to corporate taxation in any Member State in the European Union. Such whistleblowers should be protected if they report suspected misconduct, wrongdoing, fraud or illegal activity to their relevant competent authority, and should also be protected if, in cases of persistently unaddressed illegal activity in relation to corporate taxation that could affect the public interest, they report their concerns to the public as a whole;

Amendment 302 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 7 – indent 1

Protect whistleblowers who act in the public interest only (and not also for money or any other personal agenda) in order to expose misconduct, wrongdoing, fraud or illegal activity in relation to corporate taxation in any Member State in the European Union. SuchEstablishing a Union legal framework for effective protection of whistle-blowers swho~~uld be protected if they report suspected~~ expose for public interest misconduct, wrongdoing, fraud or illegal activity to their relevant competent authority, and should also be protected if, in cases of persistently unaddressed illegal activity in relation to corporate taxation that could affect the public interest, they report their concerns to the public as a whole;nd tax avoidance activity in relation to corporate taxation, in any Member State in the European Union.

Amendment 303 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 7 – indent 1 a (new)

Setup a European whistleblower common fund, financed by recovered money, to ensure whistleblowers receive an adequate financial assistance for public- interest secret disclosed;

Amendment 304 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 7 – indent 1 b (new)

Consider a range of tools to ensure such protection against unjustified legal prosecutions, economic sanctions and discriminations;

Amendment 305 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 7 – indent 2

~~Ensure that the right to freedom of expression and information in relation to corporate taxation is preserved in the European Union;~~deleted

Amendment 306 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 7 – indent 3

~~Such protection should be coherent with the overall legal system;~~deleted

Amendment 307 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 7 – indent 4

Such a legislative proposal should take as its basis the existing Market Abuse Regulation, as well as the text of the Directive on the Protection of Trade Secrets once it has been agreed by the European Parliament and European Council;deleted

Amendment 308 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 7 – indent 4

Amendment 309 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 7 – indent 4

Amendment 31 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital F

F. whereas corporate income tax revenue for the 28 Member States of the Union amounted to an average of 2,6% of GDP in 20121 ; notes further with concern, that growth rates in some Member States are masked by the impact of foreign multinationals; notes with concern that a substantial proportion of growth in specific Member States, is due to low-tax financial services sectors, which do not positively impact upon domestic or real economies in the manner other sectors can; __________________ 1 http://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/resou rces/documents/taxation/gen_info/economi c_analysis/tax_structures/2014/report.pdf

Amendment 310 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 7 – indent 4 a (new)

Such a legislative proposal must incorporate the definition of the term ‘whistleblower’ as provided by the Council of Europe, which has agreed that: ‘“whistleblower” means any person who reports or discloses information on a threat or harm to the public interest in the context of their work-based relationship, whether it be in the public or private sector’1a. __________________ 1ahttps://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=218 8855&Site=CM

Amendment 311 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 7 – indent 5

Such a legislative proposal could also take into consideration the Council of Europe’s ‘Recommendation CM/Rec(2014)71 on the protection of whistleblowers’. __________________ 1 http://www.coe.int/t/dghl/standardsetting /cdcj/Whistleblowers/protecting_whistlebl owers_en.aspdeleted

Amendment 312 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 7 – indent 5

Such a legislative proposal could also take into consideration the Council of Europe’s ‘Recommendation CM/Rec(2014)7’1 on the protection of whistleblowers’. and Transparency International's ‘International Principles for Whistleblower Legislation: best practices for laws to protect whistleblowers and support whistleblowing in the public interest’. __________________ 1 http://www.coe.int/t/dghl/standardsetting/ http://www.coe.int/t/dghl/standardsetting/ cdcj/Whistleblowers/protecting_whistleblo wers_en.asp

Amendment 313 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 7 a (new)

Recommendation A7a. Registry of financial assets • The European Parliament calls on the European Commission to come forward with a proposal for a European-wide, publicly accessible register for all types of financial securities in circulation as a means to improve financial transparency and hinder tax avoidance through shifts in assets between individual and corporate owners. The gains in terms of transparency, control of financial crimes, tax compliance and financial stability of such a public register far outweigh the losses of confidentiality such a measure entails, in particular as registries of physical wealth such as land have for long been public without tangible negative repercussions and multiple private registries of financial ownership also exist already.

Amendment 314 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 7 a (new)

Recommendation A7a. Reducing the abuse of tax planning practices and preventing conflict of interest The European Parliament calls on the European Commission to bring forward as soon as possible a legislative proposal for: • Regulating the tax advising service industry, namely ensuring the separation of audit and consulting activities of accounting firms or financial and tax services providers, requiring them to register new tax avoidance schemes to the member state concerned and to the European Commission and for the setting-up of a Union incompatibility regime for advisors in tax matters and, as appropriate, for banks, in order to ensure that conflicts of interest between services to the public and private sectors are avoided; calls on the Commission to launch an inquiry in order to assess the state of concentration in the sector; recommends the elimination of payment of accounting firms on success which incentivises the set-up of risky schemes; • Adopting a clear definition of conflict of interests and robust policies to prevent actors at risk of such conflicts of interest of being active members of any expert or advisory body; • Considering rebalancing its group membership through smaller groups and to exclude representatives of organisations convicted of tax evasion or any other criminal wrongdoing or involved in tax avoidance schemes; • Calling on the accounting firms and other financial and tax services providers to seriously strengthen their internal code of conduct in order to avoid supporting harmful tax planning schemes by multinational companies; • Considering introducing provisions to require that tax-planning strategy would be discussed and approved by companies’ shareholders

Amendment 315 #

Costas MAVRIDES, Demetris PAPADAKIS, Lefteris CHRISTOFOROU, Neoklis SYLIKIOTIS, Takis HADJIGEORGIOU

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 1

Recommendation B1. Introduction of a Common Corporate Tax Base The European Parliament calls on the European Commission to bring forward as soon as possible a legislative proposal for the introduction of a common corporate tax base: As a first step, by June 2016, a mandatory Common Corporate Tax Base (CCTB) in the Union, with an exemption for small- and medium-sized enterprises and companies with no cross-border activity, in order to have only one set of rules for companies operating in several Member States to calculate their taxable profits. As a second step, as soon as possible and certainly no later than the end of 2017, a mandatory CCCTB, taking into due consideration the range of different options (factoring in the costs, for example, of incorporating small and medium enterprises and companies with no cross-border activity); During the interim period between the introduction of mandatory CCTB and that of full CCCTB, a set of measures to reduce profit shifting (mainly via transfer pricing) including a Union anti-BEPS legislative proposal. These measures should include a temporary cross-border loss offset regime only if the Commission can guarantee that it will be transparent and will not create the possibility of misuse for aggressive tax planning. The Commission should consider to what extent it would be necessary to harmonise accounting principles in order to prepare the underlying accounting data to be used for CCCTB purposes.deleted

Amendment 316 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 1

Amendment 317 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 1 – title

Recommendation B1. Introduction of a Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base

Amendment 318 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 1 – title

Recommendation B1. Introduction of a Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base

Amendment 319 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 1

The European Parliament calls on the European Commission to bring forward as soon as possible a legislative proposal for the introduction of a common corporate tax base: As a first step, by June 2016, a mandatory Common Corporate Tax Base (CCTB) in the Union, with an exemption for small- and medium-sized enterprises and companies with no cross-border activity, in order to have only one set of rules for companies operating in several Member States to calculate their taxable profits. As a second step, as soon as possible and certainly no later than the end of 2017, a mandatory CCCTB, taking into due consideration the range of different options (factoring in the costs, for example, of incorporating small and medium enterprises and companies with no cross-border activity); During the interim period between the introduction of mandatory CCTB and that of full CCCTB, a set of measures to reduce profit shifting (mainly via transfer pricing) including a Union anti-BEPS legislative proposal. These measures should include a temporary cross-border loss offset regime only if the Commission can guarantee that it will be transparent and will not create the possibility of misuse for aggressive tax planning. The Commission should consider to what extent it would be necessary to harmonise accounting principles in order to prepare the underlying accounting data to be used for CCCTB purposesinvestigate by means of an impact assessment the different possibilities of a common corporate tax base.

Amendment 32 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)

Fa. whereas, in a context where investment and growth are lacking, it is important to retain or attract companies in Europe and whereas, therefore, it is crucial for Europe to foster its attractiveness to local and foreign businesses;

Amendment 320 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 1 – introductory part

The European Parliament calls on the European Commission to bring forward as soon as possible a legislative proposal for the introduction of a common consolidated corporate tax base:

Amendment 321 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 1 – paragraph -1 (new) – introductory part

As a preference, the introduction of a full, mandatory Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base (CCCTB) to be introduced all at once and straight away. However, if this proves impossible, then:

Amendment 322 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 1 – paragraph 1

~~As a first step, b~~By June 2016, a mandatory Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base (CCCTB) in the Union, with an exemption for small- and medium-sized enterprises and companies with no cross-border activity, ibased on a wide Common Cor~~der to have only one set of rules for companies operat~~porate Tax Base (CCTB) ensuring a robust taxation of profits, in combination with a range of minimum rates not below 20% and depending ion ~~several Member States to calculate their taxable profits~~the size, structure and composition of Member States’ economies, and a formula apportionment which does not give weight to intangibles in order to prevent further profit shifting from occurring.

Amendment 323 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 1 – paragraph 1

~~As a first step, b~~By June 2016, a mandatory Common Corporate Tax Base (CCTB) in the Union, with an exemption for small- and medium- sized enterprises and companies with no cross-border activity, in order to have only one set of rules for companies operating in several Member States to calculate their taxable profits.

Amendment 324 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 1 – paragraph 1

Amendment 325 #

Lefteris CHRISTOFOROU, Eleni THEOCHAROUS, Manolis KEFALOGIANNIS, Georgios KYRTSOS, Maria SPYRAKI, Theodoros ZAGORAKIS

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 1 – paragraph 1

~~As a first step, by June 2016,~~• The Commission should refrain from splitting the common and the consolidated parts of the Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base (CCCTB) and must come forward, by June 2016, with a single legislative proposal for a mandatory Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base (CCCTB) in the Union~~, with~~. It should include an exemption for small- and medium-sized enterprises (not subsidiaries of multinational corporations) and companies with no cross-border activity, in order to have only one set of rules for companies operating in several Member States to calculate their taxable profits.

Amendment 326 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 1 – paragraph 1

As a first step, by June 2016, a mandatory Common Corporate Tax Base (CCTB) in the Union, with an exemption for small- and medium-sized enterprises and companies with no cross-border activity, in order to have only one set of rules for companies operating in several Member States to calculate their taxable profits, with respect to the acquis communautaire, the sovereign rights of Member States and their economic and social cohesion and stability ;an exception should also be implemented regarding the economies of Member States depending on corporate and service providing sectors will also contribute to the growth and development of the Union economy.

Amendment 327 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 1 – paragraph 1

As a first step, by June 2016, a mandatory Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base (CCCTB) in the Union, with an exemption for small- and medium-sized enterprises and companies with no cross- border activity, in order to have only one set of rules for companies operating in several Member States to calculate their taxable profits.

Amendment 328 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 1 – paragraph 1

As a first step, by June 2016, a ~~mandatory~~ Common Corporate Tax Base (CCTB) in the Union, with an exemption for small- and medium- sized enterprises and companies with no cross-border activity, in order to have only one set of rules for companies operating in several Member States to calculate their taxable profits.

Amendment 329 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 1 – paragraph 1 a (new)

• The CCCTB should be based on a formula apportionment method based for instance on Company sales in each Member State in order to reflect the real economic activities of companies and does not unduly advantage certain Member States.

Amendment 33 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)

Fa. whereas the so-called tax competition among Member States is incompatible with the philosophy of an internal market in which resources are allocated in terms of productive and technological efficiency and comparative advantages;

Amendment 330 #

Alain LAMASSOURE

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 1 – paragraph 1 a (new)

The European Parliament would like the Commission proposal to establish harmonised criteria exempting from taxation all profits that are allocated to company investments in research and development in order to achieve the EU target of 3% of GDP to be devoted to research expenditure by 2020.

Amendment 331 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 1 – paragraph 1 b (new)

• The introduction of a CCCTB should be coupled with the introduction of a minimum tax rate.

Amendment 332 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 1 – paragraph 2

As a second step, as soon as possible and certainly no later than the end of 2017, a mandatory CCCTB, taking into due consideration the range of different options (factoring in the costs, for example, of incorporating small and medium enterprises and companies with no cross-border activity).deleted

Amendment 333 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 1 – paragraph 2

Amendment 334 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 1 – paragraph 2

Amendment 335 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 1 – paragraph 2

Amendment 336 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 1 – paragraph 2

As a second step, as soon as possible and certainly no later than the end of 2017, a mandatory CCCTB~~, taking into due consideration the range of different options (factoring in the costs, for example, of incorporating small and medium enterprises and companies with no cross-border activity)~~;

Amendment 337 #

Esther DE LANGE

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 1 – paragraph 2

As a second step, as soon as possible and certainly no later than the end of 2017, a ~~mandatory CCCTB~~CCCTB on the basis of international transfer pricing rules set out by the OECD, taking into due consideration the range of different options (factoring in the costs, for example, of incorporating small and medium enterprises and companies with no cross- border activity);

Amendment 338 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 1 – paragraph 2

As a second step, as soon as possible and certainly no later than the end of 2017, a ~~mandatory~~ CCCTB, taking into due consideration the range of different options (factoring in the costs, for example, of incorporating small and medium enterprises and companies with no cross- border activity);

Amendment 339 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 1 – Paragraph 3

During the interim period between the introduction of mandatory CCTB and that of full CCCTB, a set of measures to reduce profit shifting (mainly via transfer pricing) including a Union anti-BEPS legislative proposal. These measures should include a temporary cross-border loss offset regime only if the Commission can guarantee that it will be transparent and will not create the possibility of misuse for aggressive tax planning.deleted

Amendment 34 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital F b (new)

Fb. whereas all tax planning should take place within the boundaries of the law and the applicable treaties;

Amendment 340 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 1 – paragraph 3

Amendment 341 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 1 – paragraph 3

Amendment 342 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 1 – paragraph 3

~~During the interim period between the introduction of mandatory CCTB and that of full C~~In conjunction with a CCTB, a set of measures to reduce profit shifting (mainly via transfer pricing) including a Union anti-BEPS legislative proposal. These measures should include a temporary cross-border loss offset regime only if the Commission can guarantee that it will be transparent and will not create the possibility of misuse for aggressive tax planning.

Amendment 343 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 1 – paragraph 3

• During the interim period ~~between~~prior to the introduction of mandatory ~~CCTB and that of full~~ CCCTB, a set of measures to reduce profit shifting (mainly via transfer pricing) including a Union anti-BEPS legislative proposal. These measures should include a temporary cross-border loss offset regime only if the Commission can guarantee that it will be transparent and will not create the possibility of misuse for aggressive tax planningshould be introduced including as a minimum a Union-wide anti-BEPS legislative proposal.

Amendment 344 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 1 – paragraph 3

During the interim period between the introduction of mandatory CCTB and that of full CCCTB, - which should be as brief as possible - a set of measures to reduce profit shifting (mainly via transfer pricing) including a Union anti-BEPS legislative proposal. These measures should not include a temporary cross-border loss offset regime ounl~~y if~~ess the Commission can guarantee that it will be transparent and will not create the possibility of misuse for aggressive tax planning.

Amendment 345 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 1 – paragraph 3

Amendment 346 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 1 – paragraph 3 a (new)

The CCCTB should be conceived as optional given the fact that any shift from a domestic tax system to a common system within the Union will present significant costs for companies. A compulsory shift could therefore prove to be contradictory in terms of economic growth and competitiveness.

Amendment 347 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 1 – paragraph 4

~~The Commission should consider to what extent it would be necessary to harmonise accounting principles in order to prepare the underlying accounting data to be used for CCCTB purposes.~~deleted

Amendment 348 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 1 – paragraph 4

The Commission should consider to what extent it would be necessary to ~~harmonise~~produce a single set of generally accepted accounting principles in order to prepare the underlying accounting data to be used for CCCTB purposes.

Amendment 349 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 1 – paragraph 4 a (new)

• The Commission should promote, in global forum where it participates, actions towards a Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base project to tax global profits of non-Union multinational companies;

Amendment 35 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital G

G. whereas aggressive tax planning consists in taking advantage of the technicalities of a tax system, or of mismatches between two or more tax systems, for the purpose of reducing tax liability; whereas aggressive tax planning schemes often result in the use of a combination of international tax mismatches, very favourable specific national tax rules and the use of tax havens; whereas, unlike aggressive tax planning, tax fraud and tax evasion constitute an illegal activity of evading tax liabilities; whereas the most adequate response to aggressive tax planning appears to be good legislation and international coordination as to desired outcomes;

Amendment 350 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 1 – paragraph 4 a (new)

Any proposal for either CCTB or full CCCTB should include an Anti- Avoidance Clause.

Amendment 351 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 2

Recommendation B2. Strengthen the mandate and improve transparency of the Council’s Code of Conduct on Business Taxation Group The European Parliament calls on the Commission to bring forward a proposal to incorporate the Code of Conduct Group into the Community method, as a CounciThe European Parliament calls on the Commission to bring forward a proposal for further developing the Directorate- General Wforking group, with the participation of the European Commission and the European Parliament as an observer. • The Code of Conduct group (CoC Group) shall become more transparent and more accountable, including through: ° Regular provision, update and publication of its oversight of the extent to which Member States meet the recommendations set out by the Group in its six-monthly progress report to finance ministers; ° Regular provision, update and publication of a list every two years of harmful tax practices; ° Regular provision and publication of its minutes; ° Regular participation of Finance Ministers or senior officials, to raise the profile of the body. • The tasks of the CoC Group shall include: ° Identifying harmful tax practices in the Union; ° Proposing measures and timelines for the elimination of harmful tax practices, and monitoring the results of the recommendations/measures proposed; ° Review Competition to turn it into an autonomous Competition Agency independent of the Commission. The remit of the Competition Agency should include what are currently the tasks of the Directorate-General for Competition. The new Agency should also be tasked with proceeding against distortions of competition ing the reports on spillover effects of new tax measures provided by Member States as stipulated above, and assessing whether action is required; ° Proposing other initiatives focused on tax measures in the external policy of the Union; ° Improving enforcement mechanisms against those practices which facilitate aggressive tax planningsingle market caused by Member States’ granting companies selective tax advantages.

Amendment 352 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 2 – indent 1 – introductory part

The Code of Conduct group (CoC Group) shall become more transparent ~~and~~, more accountable, and more effective, including through:

Amendment 353 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 2 – indent 1 – point 3 a (new)

The appointment of a political Chair by the Ministers in ECOFIN;

Amendment 354 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 2 – indent 1 – point 3 a (new)

A decision procedure by which a qualified majority of CoC Group members can decide on which action to take against tax measures of a Member State;

Amendment 355 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 2 – indent 1 – point 3 b (new)

The appointment by each Member State of a high level representative and a deputy;

Amendment 356 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 3 – title

Recommendation B3. P~~atent box and other preferential regimes: Linking preferential regimes to where value is generated~~rohibition of patent box regimes

Amendment 357 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 3 – introductory part

The European Parliament calls on the European Commission ~~to continue providing guidance to Member States on how to implement patent box regimes, in line with the ‘modified nexus approach’ so as to ensure that they are not harmful~~and the Member States to work towards prohibiting patent box regimes because the costs of research and development in Member States can already be claimed against tax and, therefore, additional favourable treatment in the form of patent boxes is a tax avoidance incentive that runs counter to established practices.

Amendment 358 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 3 – indent 1

This guidance should make clear that preferential regimes, such as patent boxes, must be based on the ‘modified nexus approach’ on the basis of BEPS Action 5 works, meaning that there must be a direct link between the tax benefits and the underlying research and development activities.

Amendment 359 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 3 – indent 3

~~If, within 12 months, Member States are not applying this new approach consistently, the Commission should bring forward a binding legislative proposal.~~deleted

Amendment 36 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital G

G. whereas aggressive tax planning consists in taking advantage of the technicalities of a tax system, ~~or of~~ mismatches between two or more tax systems or legal loopholes, for the purpose of reducing tax liability; whereas aggressive tax planning schemes often result in the use of a combination of international tax mismatches, very favourable specific national tax rules and the use of tax havens; whereas, unlike aggressive tax planning, tax fraud and tax evasion constitute above all an illegal activity of evading tax liabilities;

Amendment 360 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 3 – paragraph 1 a (new)

The Commission should bring forward proposals for common European standards and definitions on what qualifies as R&D promotion, and what does not, and for harmonising the use of patent and innovation boxes including advancing to 30 June 2017 the abolition of the old regime by shortening the timing of grandfathering rules;

Amendment 361 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 4 – indent 1

To ~~coordinate~~provide a framework for national Controlled Foreign Corporation rules, ~~in order to ensure that profits parked in low or no tax countries are effectively taxed and~~ to prevent the diversity of national CFC rules within the EU from distorting the functioning of the internal market. This shall not prevent individual Member State from introducing stricter rules.

Amendment 362 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 4 – indent 1 a (new)

To revise Union legislation on controlled foreign companies and its application according to the Cadbury Schweppes judgment of the European Court of Justice (C-196/04) in order to ensure full use of controlled foreign companies beyond situations of wholly artificial arrangements in order to ensure that profits parked in low or no tax countries are effectively taxed.

Amendment 363 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 5 – title

Recommendation B5. Improving EU and Member States’ coordination on tax audits and ensuring adequate staffing of tax authorities

Amendment 364 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 5 – indent -1 (new)

Create a Union-wide tax authority, similarly to OLAF, in charge of investigations of the 250 biggest companies operating in Europe and their subsidiaries.

Amendment 365 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 5 – indent 2 – introductory part

Ensure that a parent company and its subsidiaries located in the Union are audited by their respective tax authorities at the same period of time, under the ~~leadership~~coordination and the support of the Union tax authorit~~ies of the parent compan~~y, in order to ensure efficient cooperation and flows of information between tax authorities. As part of this:

Amendment 366 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 5 – indent 2 – point 1

Tax authorities should regularly report to the Union tax authority and exchange information on their investigations in order to ensure that groups do not benefit from mismatches or loopholes in the combination of various national tax systems.

Amendment 367 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 5 – indent 2 – point 3 a (new)

No decision regarding the outcome of a tax audit by a tax authority should be taken before informing the other tax authorities concerned.

Amendment 368 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 5 – indent 2 a (new)

Monitoring that national tax administrations are endowed with proper funding and staff in line with the recommendation already provided with respect to National Competition Authorities in the framework of the European Semester.

Amendment 369 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 6 – title

Recommendation B6. The introduction of a common European Tax Identification Number and a common European business register

Amendment 37 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital G

G. whereas aggressive tax planning consists in taking advantage of the technicalities of a tax system, or of ~~mismatch~~loopholes between two or more tax systems, for the purpose of reducing tax liability; whereas aggressive tax planning schemes often result in the use of a combination of international tax mismatches, very favourable specific national tax rules and the use of tax havens; whereas, unlike aggressive tax planning, tax fraud and tax evasion constitute an illegal activity of evading tax liabilities;

Amendment 370 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 1

Recommendation C1. A new approach to international tax arrangements The European Parliament calls on the European Commission to bring forward a legislative proposal to allow the Union to speak with one voice in relation to international tax arrangements. • The Commission should negotiate tax agreements with third countries on behalf of the EU instead of the current practice under which bilateral negotiations are conducted, which produce sub-optimal results. • A common Union multilateral double tax agreement should be introduced to replace the multitude of bilateral tax agreements agreed between Member States themselves and with other countries. • All new international trade agreements concluded by the Union should include a clause on good tax governance.deleted

Amendment 371 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 1

Amendment 372 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 1

Amendment 373 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 1 – indent 1

Amendment 374 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 1 – indent 1

Amendment 375 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 1 – indent 1

The Commission should negotiate tax agreements with third countries on behalf of the EU instead of the current practice under which bilateral negotiations are conducted, which produce sub-optimal results. The Commission has to ensure that such agreements are in full compliance with Union law, and take measures against extraterritorial application of third country legislation within the jurisdiction of the Union and its Member States.

Amendment 376 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 1 – indent 2

A common Union multilateral double tax agreement - based on the UN model rather than the OECD model - should be introduced to replace the multitude of bilateral tax agreements agreed between Member States themselves and with other countries.

Amendment 377 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 1 – indent 3 a (new)

All international tax arrangements shall foresee an enforcement mechanism.

Amendment 378 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 1 – indent 3 a (new)

The Commission should develop a Union approach for tax treaties, according to the UN guidelines, for discussion with developing countries.

Amendment 379 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 1 – indent 3 b (new)

The Commission and Member States should support a greater role for the United Nations in future international tax discussions, for instance by supporting the creation of a global tax body under the auspices of the United Nations.

Amendment 38 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital G

G. whereas aggressive tax planning consists in taking advantage of the technicalities of a tax system, or of mismatches between two or more tax systems, for the purpose of reducing tax liability; whereas aggressive tax planning schemes often result in the use of a combination of international tax mismatches, ~~very favourable~~ specific national tax rules and the use of tax havens; whereas, unlike aggressive tax planning, tax fraud and tax evasion constitute an illegal activity of evading tax liabilities;

Amendment 380 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 2 – title

Recommendation C2. Create a common definition of ‘tax havens’ and of harmful preferential tax regimes

Amendment 381 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 2 – title

Recommendation C2. Create a common and cogent definition of ‘tax havens’

Amendment 382 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 2 – introductory part

The European Parliament calls on the European Commission to bring forward a proposal to establish, in cooperation with the OECD and the UN among others, criteria to define ‘tax havens’. and harmful preferential tax regimes:

Amendment 383 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 2 – introductory part

The European Parliament calls on the European Commission to bring forward a proposal to establish, in cooperation with the OECD and the UN among others, cogent criteria to define ‘tax havens’.

Amendment 384 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 2 – indent 1 a (new)

Those criteria should cover concepts such as banking secrecy, recording and publication of ownership of companies, trusts and foundations, the publication of company accounts, fitness for information exchange, efficiency of tax administration, promotion of tax evasion, existence of harmful legal vehicles, prevention of money laundering, automaticity of information exchange, existence of bilateral treaties, and international transparency commitments and judicial cooperation.

Amendment 385 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 2 – indent 1 a (new)

• A definition of harmful preferential tax regimes characterised by: ° No or very low nominal tax on the relevant income; ° Negotiable tax rate or tax bases; Artificial definition of tax bases; ° Unfair legal provisions and practices aimed at favouring the establishment of shell companies, disconnection of legal and beneficial ownership, attracting real investment; ° Well-established financial links with offshore jurisdictions ° Private wealth management;

Amendment 386 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 2 – indent 2 a (new)

This list of tax havens should be linked to the relevant taxation legislation as a reference point for other policies and Directives, such as levying a withholding tax on financial flows to these tax havens.

Amendment 387 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 3

Recommendation C3. Counter-measures towards companies who make use of tax havens The European Parliament calls on the European Commission to bring forward a proposal for a catalogue of counter- measures the Union and Member States should apply as shareholders and financers of public bodies, banks and funding programmes, to be applied to companies which use tax havens in order to put in place aggressive tax planning schemes and therefore do not comply with Union tax good governance standards. • Those counter-measures should include: ° Being banned from accessing state aid or public procurement opportunities at Union or national level ° Being banned from accessing certain Union funds • This should be achieved via, amongst other measures: Amending the European Investment Bank (EIB) Statute (Protocol No. 5 annexed to the treaties) to ensure that no EIB funding can go to ultimate beneficiaries or financial intermediaries which make use of tax havens or harmful tax practices1 Amending the European Fund for Strategic Investment (EFSI) Regulation to ensure that no EFSI funds can go to such companies2 Amending the four Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) Regulations to ensure that no CAP funding can go to such companies Continuing the process of State Aid Modernisation to ensure that Member States do not provide State Aid to any such companies3 ° Amending the Common Provisions Regulation to ensure that no money from the five European Structural and Investment Funds (European Regional Development Fund, European Social Fund, Cohesion Fund, European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development, European Maritime and Fisheries Fund) can go to any such companies4 ° Amending the Agreement Establishing the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) to ensure no EBRD funding can go to any such companies5 ° Forbidding the conclusion of trade agreements by the EU with jurisdictions defined by the Commission as ‘tax havens’ __________________ 1 http://www.eib.org/attachments/general/ governance_of_the_eib_en.pdf 2 http://ec.europa.eu/priorities/jobs- growth- investment/plan/docs/proposal_regulation _efsi_en.pdf 3 http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/get Doc.do?pubRef=-//EP//TEXT+TA+P7- TA-2013-0026+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN 4 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal- content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:3201 3R1303&:PDF 5 http://www.ebrd.com/news/publications/i nstitutional-documents/basic-documents- of-the-ebrd.htmldeleted

Amendment 388 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 3 – introductory part

The European Parliament calls on the European Commission to bring forward a proposal for a catalogue of counter- measures the Union and Member States should apply as shareholders and financers of public bodies, banks and funding programmes, to be applied to companies which use tax havens in order to put in place aggressive tax planning schemes or which assist companies, through advisory, legal, financial or other services, in designing and implementing aggressive tax planning schemes and therefore do not comply with Union tax good governance standards.

Amendment 389 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 3 – introductory part

The European Parliament calls on the European Commission to bring forward a proposal for a catalogue of counter- measures the Union and Member States should apply as shareholders and financers of public bodies, banks and funding programmes, to be applied to companies which use tax havens as well as to companies advising, assisting or in other ways enabling the use of tax havens in order to put in place aggressive tax planning schemes and therefore do not comply with Union tax good governance standards. 

Amendment 39 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)

Ga. whereas fiscal policies and corporate taxation could be used instead as a tool to boost growth, jobs and development; whereas the Union must, through a more efficient, more transparent and fairer tax treatment for all companies, promote an attractive, competitive and balanced business environment that would make it easier for businesses, including small and medium-sized enterprises, family businesses, self-employed people and liberal professions, to operate across borders within the Union;

Amendment 390 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 3 – indent 1 – point 2 a (new)

Harsh penalties and, in the most serious cases, withdrawal of licences for those banks which play an active role, including through their branches, in operations with tax havens.

Amendment 391 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 3 – indent 1 – point 2 a (new)

Suspending the banking or advisory licences of financial institutions, accountants, law firms or other financial advisers that have been proven to be complicit in tax fraud and tax evasion.

Amendment 392 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 3 – indent 3 - point 7 a (new)

The Commission shall check whether existing trade agreements with countries identified as tax havens can be suspended or terminated.

Amendment 393 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 3 a (new)

Recommendation C3a. The European Parliament calls on the European Commission to develop a legal proposal providing for more significant sanctions for those companies which systematically use tax havens in order to put in place aggressive tax planning schemes or which repeatedly assist companies, through advisory, legal, financial or other services, in designing and implementing aggressive tax planning schemes: • Those further counter measures should include, but not necessarily be limited to: ° The possibility to temporarily withdraw or permanently revoke business licences, in particular for legal and financial service providers. ° The imposition of significant fines being attributed to those Member States whose tax bases are being eroded as a consequence of the aggressive tax planning schemes.

Amendment 394 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 4

Recommendation C4. Permanent Establishment The European Parliament calls on to the European Commission to bring forward a legislative proposal • To adjust the definition of ‘permanent establishment’ so that companies cannot artificially avoid having a taxable presence in Member States in which they have economic activity. • To introduce a Union definition of minimum ‘economic substance’. The foregoing two definitions should form part of a concrete ban on so-called ‘letter box companies’.deleted

Amendment 395 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 4 – title

Recommendation C4. ~~Permanent Establishment~~Union anti-BEPs legislation

Amendment 396 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 4 – introductory part

The European Parliament calls on to the European Commission to bring forward a legislative proposal to introduce a comprehensive Union anti BEPS legislation to:

Amendment 397 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 4 – indent -1 (new) – introductory part

review the concept of Permanent Establishment so as:

Amendment 398 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 4 – indent 1

To adjust the definition of ‘permanent establishment’ so that companies cannot artificially avoid having a taxable presence in Member States in which they have economic activity. This definition should also address situations in which companies which engage in fully dematerialised digital activities, are considered to have a permanent establishment in a Member State if they maintain a significant digital presence in the economy of that country;

Amendment 399 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 4 – indent 2

To introduce a Union definition of minimum ‘economic substance’. so as to ensure that companies are genuinely creating value and adding to the economy of the Member State in which they have a taxable presence.

Amendment 4 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas the revelations showed that tax advisors have ~~helped~~obtained for multinational companies ~~to obtain~~ at least 548 tax rulings in Luxembourg between 2002 and 2010; whereas those secret deals feature complex financial structures designed to create substantial tax reductions; whereas ~~the~~ tax rulings ~~provide written assurance that multinational companies’ tax-saving plans would be viewed favourably by Luxembourg~~can, as envisaged by their initial objective, give taxpayers legal security in cases where tax legislation, or its particular application in certain circumstances, is not clear or is subject to divergent interpretations, particularly in the case of complex operations, and thus avoid future legal action between the taxpayer and the tax authorit~~ies;~~ y;

Amendment 40 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)

Ga. whereas the overall loss in State revenues due to tax avoidance from corporate taxation is generally compensated for by either raising the overall level of taxation, cutting public services, or increased national borrowing - hence damaging other taxpayers and posing issues of social justice;

Amendment 400 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 4 – indent 2

•° To introduce a Union definition of minimum ‘economic substance’ covering also the digital economy.

Amendment 401 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 5

Recommendation C5. Improving the Transfer Pricing framework in the EU The European Parliament calls on the European Commission to bring forward a legislative proposal: • to develop, based on its experience and on analysis of the new OECD principles on transfer pricing, specific Union Guidelines setting out how the OECD principles should be applied and how they should be interpreted within the EU context, so as: ° To reflect the economic reality of the internal market; ° To provide certainty, clarity and fairness for Member States and for companies operating within the Union; ° To reduce the risk of misuse of the rules for profit shifting purposes.deleted

Amendment 402 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 5 – indent 1 - point 3 a (new)

To ensure that all Member States potentially affected by a transfer pricing approval decision in any given Member State are informed of that decision by the Member State in question.

Amendment 403 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 6

Recommendation C6. Hybrid mismatches The European Parliament calls on the European Commission to bring forward a legislative proposal to either: • harmonise national definitions of debt, equity, opaque and transparent entities, harmonise the attribution of assets and liabilities to permanent establishment, and harmonise the allocation of costs and profits between different entities within the same group; or • prevent double non-taxation, in the event of a mismatch.deleted

Amendment 404 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 7 – introductory part

The European Parliament calls on the European Commission to bring forward a proposal inat the ~~medium term~~latest by mid-2017 for:

Amendment 405 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 7 – introductory part

The European Parliament calls on the European Commission to bring forward ~~a proposal in the medium term~~without delay a proposal for:

Amendment 406 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 7 – indent 1

~~Binding~~State aid guidelines that clarify how the Commission will determine instances of tax-related state aid, thereby providing more legal certainty for businesses and Member States., taking into consideration the fact that, in other sectors, such guidelines have proven to be highly effective in putting a stop to and pre- empting practices in Member States which are in conflict with Union state aid law; an effect which can only be achieved via a high degree of detail in the guidelines, including numerical thresholds.

Amendment 407 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 7 – indent 2

Tax policies that are not consistent with state aid policy should be ~~spec~~publicly identified by the Commission in order to give companies and Member States guidance and improved legal certainty.

Amendment 408 #

Renato SORU

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 7 – indent 2 a (new)

In line with the Commission Regulation (EU) No 651/2014, increased flexibility should also be granted to Regions experiencing severe economic problems, such as the Regions included in the Convergence and in the Competitiveness Objective, and to insular regions;

Amendment 409 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 7 – indent 2 a (new)

Member States to be given more freedom to consider companies’ tax policies and behaviour as a factor in procurement contracts.

Amendment 41 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital H

H. whereas a study2 estimates that revenue losses for the Union due to tax avoidance from corporate taxation could amount to around EUR 50-70 billion, a year, this figure representing the sum lost to profit shifting; whereas the same study estimates that those revenue losses for the Union due to tax avoidance from corporate taxation could in reality amount to around EUR 160-190 billion if special tax arrangements, inefficiencies in collection and other such activities were taken into account; __________________ 2 European added value of legislative report on bringing Transparency, coordination and convergence to corporate tax policies in the European Union’ by Dr Benjamin Ferrett, Daniel Gravino and Silvia Merler – To be published.

Amendment 410 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 7 – indent 2 a (new)

Allowing Member States legislation to include provisions take into account companies’ tax policies and behaviour as a relevant factor in public procurement contracts;

Amendment 411 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 7 – indent 2 b (new)

Assessing the possibility of modifying the existing rules in order to allow the amounts recovered following an infringement of Union state aid rules to be allocated preferably to the Union budget or returned to the Member States which have suffered from an erosion of their tax bases, and not to the Member State which granted the illegal tax-related aid, as is currently the case;

Amendment 412 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 7 – introductory part a (new)

The European Parliament calls on the Commission to: • Modify the existing rules to ensure punitive sanctions can be adopted against the relevant countries and companies in case of breach of state aid rules; • Urgently enact changes to its horizontal rules for expert groups with a view to ensure policy making in the public interest by effectively shielding law making processes from the influence of specific private interests;

Amendment 413 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 8 – indent 3

In relation to the Directive 2003/49/EC, in addition to the introduction of a GAAR, also remove the requirement for Member States to give beneficial treatment to interest and royalty payments if there is no effective taxation elsewhere in the Union.deleted

Amendment 414 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 8 – indent 4

In relation to the Directive 2005/19/EC, in addition to the introduction of a GAAR, also introduce additional transparency obligations and - if these changes prove insufficient to prevent aggressive tax planning - introduce a minimum tax provision as the requirement for the use of ‘tax advantages’ (such as, no taxation of dividends) or other measures of similar impact.deleted

Amendment 415 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 8 – indent 4

Amendment 416 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 9 – indent 1 a (new)

As part of this, the Commission should consider the most efficient way of making the results available to relevant users in order to reduce any uncertainty for corporations in the application of tax law.

Amendment 417 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 9 a (new)

Recommendation 9a. Introduce a Union- wide withholding tax The European Parliament calls on the European Commission to bring forward a proposal by summer 2016 to: • Introduce a Union-wide withholding tax, to ensure that all profits generated within the Union are taxed at least once within the Union before they leave the Union’s borders. • This tax to only apply to profits which are leaving the Union to go to jurisdictions in which the Union cannot be confident that they are likely to be taxed (such as those countries on the proposed Union tax havens list), and where the company cannot provide evidence that due taxes over those profits were paid.

Amendment 418 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 9 b (new)

Recommendation 9b. New rules governing firms providing tax advice The European Parliament calls on the European Commission to bring forward a legislative proposal: • To produce a mandatory European Ethical Code of Conduct to apply to all firms providing taxation advice operating within the Single Market so as to prevent aggressive tax planning practices (following the example of Denmark). • To produce guidance for such firms on acceptable behaviour when it comes to providing tax advice, to include a ban on aggressive tax planning practices and on knowingly helping firms to reduce their tax burden below that which is reasonable within the spirit of the law. • To require companies which currently provide both audit and taxation compliance functions to separate these functions either through the use of firewalls or, should this prove insufficient to prevent conflicts of interest, through mandatory separation into separate companies. • To impose concrete sanctions on those individual advisors and advisory firms that do not abide by the rules of the new Code of Conduct, to range from fines and repayment of lost tax revenues to the withdrawal of the licence to operate within the Single Market. For all of the above measures, the European Commission should make clear what sanctions will be applied to Member States or firms for non-compliance.

Amendment 419 #

Costas MAVRIDES, Demetris PAPADAKIS, Lefteris CHRISTOFOROU

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 4 – subtitle 1

Recommendation D1. Additional measures to address the tax gap The European Parliament calls on the European Commission to also focus on other factors beyond aggressive tax planning and BEPS activity which contribute to the existing tax gap, including: • Investigating sources of low efficiency regarding tax collection, including VAT collection; • Investigating sources of tax unfairness or weak credibility of tax administrations in the areas other than corporate taxation; • Setting principles for tax amnesties, in order to eliminate the negative consequences of these policies on future tax collection; • Proposing a minimum level of transparency for ‘tax forgiveness’ schemes run by national governments; • Ensuring that tax authorities have full and meaningful access to central registers of beneficial ownership for both companies and trusts, and that those registers are properly maintained and verified.deleted

Amendment 42 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital I a (new)

Ia. whereas the goal of a level playing field between companies should not be pursued at the expense of a level playing field between Member States, in particular with regards to the small countries of the periphery that have built their economies on a competitive advantage that includes an effective tax system with low corporate tax rate;

Amendment 420 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 4 – subtitle 1

Recommendation D1. Additional measures to address the tax gap The European Parliament calls on the European Commission to also focus on other factors beyond aggressive tax planning and BEPS activity which contribute to the existing tax gap, including: • Investigating sources of low efficiency regarding tax collection, including VAT collection; • Investigating sources of tax unfairness or weak credibility of tax administrations in the areas other than corporate taxation; • Setting principles for tax amnesties, in order to eliminate the negative consequences of these policies on future tax collection; • Proposing a minimum level of transparency for ‘tax forgiveness’ schemes run by national governments; • Ensuring that tax authorities have full and meaningful access to central registers of beneficial ownership for both companies and trusts, and that those registers are properly maintained and verified.deleted

Amendment 421 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 4 – subtitle 1 – indent 1 a (new)

Direct collection of VAT through public payment systems to be used at the moment of the transaction;

Amendment 422 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 4 – subtitle 1 – indent 1 b (new)

Alternative sources of corporate taxation, moving from taxation on gross profits to taxation on real revenues and on the cost of labour paid in a given country; that would act as a strong deterrent against aggressive and/or fraudulent fiscal practices, as it would be more difficult to move real revenues and the costs borne in another location;

Amendment 423 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 4 – subtitle 1 – indent 3

~~Setting principles for~~Condemning tax amnesties, in order to eliminate the negative consequences of these policies on future tax collection;

Amendment 424 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 4 – subtitle 1 – indent 3 – point 1 (new)

Those principles should include the circumstances in which such amnesties would either violate the provisions of the Union Treaty relating to the free circulation of capital and the freedom to provide services, or in which they would count as state aid and require notification to the Commission;

Amendment 425 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 4 – subtitle 1 – indent 3 – point 2 (new)

They should also clearly set out when the Commission would deem a corporate tax amnesty to be appropriate, and when other policy options would be preferable (including suggestions for what those alternative policy options might be);

Amendment 426 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 4 – subtitle 1 – indent 3 – point 3 (new)

They should include a requirement for Member States to inform the Commission in advance of any decision to implement a corporate tax amnesty, so as to ensure that it does not undermine the internal market or breach Union competition law;

Amendment 427 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 4 – subtitle 1 – indent 4

Proposing a ~~minimum~~high level of transparency ~~for~~as regards ‘tax forgiveness’ schemes run by national governments;

Amendment 428 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 4 – subtitle 1 – indent 5 – point 1 (new)

This can be achieved by Member States swiftly transposing the fourth Anti-Money Laundering Directive, ensuring broad and simplified access to information contained in central registers of beneficial owners, including to civil society organisations, journalists and citizens;

Amendment 429 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 4 – subtitle 1 – indent 5 – point 2 (new)

Action should also include requiring those who provide banking services to Union-registered companies or trusts to provide direct confirmation to the relevant registering authority of the data they are required to collect and update on the beneficial owners of all companies and trusts to whom they provide services on an annual basis.

Amendment 43 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital J

J. whereas the loss arising from BEPS also clearly demonstrates the lack of a level playing- field between those companies which operate only in one country and pay their taxes there, and certain multinational co~~mpanie~~rporations which are able to shift profits from high tax to specific low tax jurisdictions and engage in aggressive tax planning, thereby reducing their overall tax base and placing additional pressure on public finances to the detriment of EU citizens and SMEs;

Amendment 430 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 4 – subtitle 1 – indent 5 a (new)

a comprehensive revision of Directive 90/435/EEC and Directive 2003/49/EC to plug all loopholes facilitating corporate tax dodging and to introduce effective minimum tax rates as called for by previous European Parliament resolutions

Amendment 431 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 4 – subtitle 1 a (new)

Recommendation D1a. Measures for fair tax competition in relation to VAT The European Parliament calls on the European Commission to: • do more to ensure compliance with the existing VAT Directive in order to prevent unfair tax competition in relation to VAT, • to step up cooperation with the Member States so that VAT fraud can be tackled jointly, • to examine whether the reverse charge mechanism can be extended to cover inter-company goods trading in the same way that it already applies to trading in digital products and services.

Amendment 432 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 4 – subtitle 1 b (new)

Recommendation D1b. Additional provision in the VAT Directive The European Parliament calls on the European Commission to bring forward a proposal to amend the VAT Directive, Directive 2006/112/EU, in order to: • ensure that the physical and digital versions of a given product are treated equally and that VAT rules are thus applied in a technology-neutral way.

Amendment 433 #

Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 4 – subtitle 1 c (new)

Recommendation D1c. Standard regime for withholding taxes on royalties The European Parliament calls on the European Commission to bring forward a proposal for a standard regime for withholding taxes on royalties so as to ensure that royalty payments to recipients in non-EU countries not covered by bilateral tax agreements are actually taxed.

Amendment 44 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital J

J. whereas the loss arising from BEPS also demonstrates the lack of a level playing- field between those companies which operate only in one country and pay their taxes there, and certain multinational companies which are able to shift profits from high tax to low tax jurisdictions and engage in aggressive tax planning, thereby reducing their overall tax base and placing additional pressure on public finances, and therefore on the Member States’ taxpayers;

Amendment 45 #

Massimiliano SALINI, Antonio TAJANI, Fulvio MARTUSCIELLO

Motion for a resolution
Recital J

J. whereas the loss arising from BEPS also clearly demonstrates the lack of a level playing- field between ~~those companie~~corporations which operate only in one country and pay their taxes there, and certain multinational co~~mpanie~~rporations which are able to shift profits from high tax to low tax jurisdictions and engage in aggressive tax planning, thereby reducing their overall tax base and placing additional pressure on public finances;

Amendment 46 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital J

J. whereas the loss arising from BEPS also demonstrates the lack of a level playing- field between those companies which operate only in one country, in particular SMEs, family business, self-employed people and liberal professions, and pay their taxes there, and certain multinational companies which are able to shift profits from high tax to low tax jurisdictions and engage in aggressive tax planning, thereby reducing their overall tax base and placing additional pressure on public finances;

Amendment 47 #

Pablo ZALBA BIDEGAIN

Motion for a resolution
Recital J a (new)

Ja. whereas the Union should ensure swift implementation of proposals to favour the exchange of information and the widest possible scope of application for the automatic exchange principle;

Amendment 48 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital K

K. whereas multinational companies’ use of aggressive tax planning practices conflicts with the principle of fair competition and corporate responsibility since devising tax planning strategies requires resources which are only available to large firms and since this results in an absence of level playing field between SMEs and large corporations, which needs to be urgently addressed;

Amendment 49 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital K

K. whereas multinational companies’ use of aggressive tax planning practices conflicts with the principle of fair competition and corporate responsibility; stresses further, that tax competition in the Union and vis-à-vis third countries is harmful and leads to a race to the bottom in terms of tax rates and regulatory standards and should therefore be replaced by a consistent cooperative framework; this should take place within a clear framework of rules in order to guarantee fair competition between firms in the Union;

Amendment 5 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

Amendment 50 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital K

K. whereas multinational companies’ use of aggressive tax planning practices conflicts with the principle of fair competition and corporate responsibility, embodied in communication COM (2011) 681 final;

Amendment 51 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital K a (new)

Ka. whereas supply-side aggressive tax planning is incompatible with the principle of loyal cooperation among Member States;

Amendment 52 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital L

L. whereas aggressive tax planning is facilitated by increasing business complexity and by the digitalisation and globalisation of the economy, among other factors, leading to distortions of competition harmful ~~to Union undertakings~~in the long term to Union SMEs in particular and to growth;

Amendment 53 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital M

M. whereas the fight against aggressive tax planning cannot be tackled by Member States individually; whereas the dynamic of non-transparent corporate tax competition carries the risk of Member States getting caught in a race to the bottom with an unproductive outcome and at the expense of less mobile tax bases; whereas the lack of coordinated action is causing many Member States to adopt unilateral national measures3 ; whereas such measures have often proven ineffective, insufficient and in some cases even detrimental to the cause; whereas what is needed is therefore a coordinated and multi-pronged approach at national, Union and international level; __________________ 3 Such as the UK's 'diverted profits tax'. Such as the UK's 'diverted profits tax'.

Amendment 54 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital N

N. whereas the Union has ~~been a pioneer~~played an important role in the global fight against aggressive tax planning, notably in promoting progress at OECD level on the BEPS project ; whereas the Union should continue to play a p~~ioneering role as the BEPS project develops~~ositive and proactive role as the BEPS project develops; notes with concern the late and still unequal inclusion of developing countries in the OECD BEPS process as well as the rejection of Member States of an intergovernmental body on taxation under the auspice of the UN at the third Financing for Development Conference;

Amendment 55 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital N

N. whereas the Union ~~has been a pioneer~~should play a fundamental role in the global fight against aggressive tax planning, notably in promoting progress at OECD level on the BEPS project ~~; whereas the Union should continue to play a pioneering role as the BEPS project develops~~;

Amendment 56 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital N

Amendment 57 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital N

N. whereas the Union has been a pioneer in the global fight against aggressive tax planning, notably in promoting progress at OECD level on the BEPS project ; whereas the Union should continue to play a pioneering role as the BEPS project develops;, including ensuring action on the BEPS and beyond BEPS issues of significance to developing countries such as those detailed in the report to the G20 Development Working Group in 20141 a; __________________ 1a http://www.oecd.org/tax/tax- global/report-to-g20-dwg-on-the-impact- of-beps-in-low-income-countries.pdf

Amendment 58 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital N a (new)

Na. whereas the OECD adopted comprehensive package of measures on BEPS (The OECD/G20 Base Erosion Profit Shifting (BEPS) Project); whereas the European Commission and Member States shall ensure that those are implemented as a minimum standard at Union level and remain ambitious; whereas it is of crucial importance that all Member Countries of OECD do implement them;

Amendment 59 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital O

~~O. whereas the power to legislate on corporate taxation is currently vested in the Member States;~~deleted

Amendment 6 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas the revelations showed that tax advisors have helped multinational companies to obtain at least 548 tax rulings in Luxembourg between 2002 and 2010; whereas those secret deals feature complex financial structures designed to create substantial tax reductions; whereas the tax rulings provide written assurance that multinational companies’ tax-saving plans would be viewed favourably by Luxembourg authorities; whereas such revelations highlight the need for measures to be implemented in order to ensure a functional split between tax advisory and auditing services for large auditing firms in order to firmly exclude conflicts of interest;

Amendment 60 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital O

O. whereas the power to legislate on corporate taxation ~~is currently vested in the~~must always remain vested in the Member States; whereas Union law contains no specific requirement with regard to the way in which a Member State must deal with corporate tax, provided that the conditions governing it do not constitute a discrimination, either direct or indirect; stresses that corporate tax as a component of direct taxation is a competence of Member States;

Amendment 61 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital O

O. whereas the power to legislate on corporate taxation is currently vested in the Member States, while European coordination will be necessary to create a level playing field and avoid fiscal dumping measures that favour large multinationals to the detriment of European small and medium-sized enterprises;

Amendment 62 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital O

O. whereas the power to legislate on corporate taxation is currently vested in the Member States and must continue to be;

Amendment 63 #

Marian HARKIN

Motion for a resolution
Recital O

O. whereas according to the Union treaties the power to legislate on corporate taxation is currently vested in the Member States;

Amendment 64 #

Pablo ZALBA BIDEGAIN

Motion for a resolution
Recital O a (new)

Oa. whereas the Union should protect internal markets from tax avoidance and engage in transversal and coordinated actions with other countries in the fight against tax havens;

Amendment 65 #

Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS

Motion for a resolution
Recital O a (new)

Oa. whereas at a time of spending cuts at government level, the fact that multinational companies avoid paying their due makes more difficult to achieve the ambitious objectives fixed for budgetary matters without hurting social expenditure and disposable income of families;

Amendment 66 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital P

P. whereas the ~~lack of coordinated tax~~abuse of tax legislation and policies in the European Union leads to significant cost and administrative burden for citizens and businesses operating cross- border within the ~~Union, and results in unintended non-taxation or facili~~European Union, which facilitates aggressive tax planning; notes that Union action on direct tax beyond administrative cooperation can have consequences for individual Member States' a~~ggressive tax planning~~bility to shape their domestic tax systems to raise revenue and to support domestic growth;

Amendment 67 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital P

P. whereas the lack of coordinated tax policies in the Union leads to significant cost and administrative burden for citizens and businesses operating ~~cross-border~~in more than one Member State within the Union, and results in unintended non-taxation or facilitates aggressive tax planning;

Amendment 68 #

Massimiliano SALINI, Antonio TAJANI, Fulvio MARTUSCIELLO

Motion for a resolution
Recital P

Amendment 69 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital P

P. whereas the lack of coordinated tax policies in the Union leads to significant cost and administrative burden for citizens and businesses operating cross-border within the Union, and results in unintended non-taxation or facilitates aggressive tax planning; recalls at the same time that there are still cases of double taxation that must be eliminated; urges in this respect the adoption of more transparent and simpler solutions;

Amendment 7 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas the revelations showed that ~~tax advisors have helped~~ multinational companies to obtained at least 548 tax rulings in Luxembourg between 2002 and 2010 with the help of tax advisory services; whereas those secret deals feature complex financial structures designed to create substantial tax reductions; whereas the tax rulings provide written assurance that multinational companies’ tax-saving plans would be viewed favourably by Luxembourg authorities;

Amendment 70 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital P

P. whereas the lack of coordinated tax policies in the Union leads to significant cost and administrative burden for citizens and businesses operating ~~cross-border~~ within the Union, and results in unintended non-taxation or facilitates aggressive tax planning;

Amendment 71 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital Q

Amendment 72 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital Q

Q. whereas the revelations of the LuxLeaks scandal and the work carried out by the TAXE Committee clearly show the need for Union legislative measures to improve transparency, coordination and convergence ~~within~~of policies on the corporate tax ~~policies~~base in the Union;

Amendment 73 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital Q

Q. whereas the revelations of the LuxLeaks scandal and the work carried out by the TAXE Committee clearly show the need for ~~Union legislative measures to improve transparency, coordination and convergence within corporate tax policies in the Union~~Member States to improve and strengthen administrative cooperation between themselves as well as between tax administrations; stresses that all policy formulation should respect the tax sovereignty of national governments; stresses that issues of subsidiarity and proportionality must be thoroughly agreed upon and should always ensure the competency and autonomy of each Member States' is upheld;

Amendment 74 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital Q a (new)

Qa. whereas corporate taxation should be guided by the principle of taxing profits where they are realized;

Amendment 75 #

Tibor SZANYI

Motion for a resolution
Recital R

R. whereas the European Commission and the Member States should continue to play a very active role in the international arena in order to work for the establishment of international standards based ~~at least~~primarily on principles of transparency, exchange of information and abolition of harmful tax measures;

Amendment 76 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital R

R. whereas ~~the European Commission and the~~ Member States should continue to play a very active role in the international arena in order to work for the establishment of international standards based at least on principles of transparency, exchange of information and abolition of harmful tax measures;

Amendment 77 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital R a (new)

Ra. whereas corporate taxation should not be used to fuel a race to the bottom by Member States;

Amendment 78 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital R b (new)

Rb. whereas the Union should strive to eliminate the gap between high deducibility of commercial expenditures and investments in a given Member State, and low taxation of profits in a another Member State or third jurisdiction;

Amendment 79 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital R c (new)

Rc. whereas tax avoidance and aggressive tax planning is facilitated by tax havens;

Amendment 8 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas the revelations showed that tax advisors have helped multinational companies to obtain at least 548 tax rulings in Luxembourg between 2002 and 2010; whereas those secret deals feature complex financial structures designed to create substantial tax reductions; whereas the tax rulings provide written assurance that multinational companies’ tax-saving plans would be viewed favourably by Luxembourg authorities, such a revelation would not have been possible without the brave actions of Antoine Deltour, now on trial in Luxembourg;

Amendment 80 #

Antonio TAJANI, Fulvio MARTUSCIELLO, Massimiliano SALINI

Motion for a resolution
Recital R d (new)

Rd. whereas trade, travel and political sanctions should be applied to uncooperative jurisdictions in the fight against tax evasion and avoidance;

Amendment 81 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital S a (new)

Sa. whereas a harmonised taxation system across the European Union would allow to tackle unfair competition and enhance the competitiveness of Union companies, in particular SMEs;

Amendment 82 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital T – introductory part

T. whereas increased transparency in the area of corporate taxation can improve tax collection~~, make work of tax authorities m~~ and is crucial fore e~~fficient or c~~nsuring an increase in public trust and confidence in tax systems and governments;

Amendment 83 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital T – introductory part

T. whereas increased transparency in the area of corporate taxation can improve tax collection, make the work of tax authorities more efficient or can increase public confidence in tax systems and governments, and that should be adopted as a long-term objective;

Amendment 84 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital T – point i

(i) whereas increased transparency regarding the activities of large multinational companies, and in particular regarding profits made, taxes on profit paid, subsidies received and tax returns, is essential for ensuring that tax administrations tackle BEPS efficiently; whereas one vital form for this transparency to take is country-by-country reporting; whereas any Union proposals for country-by-country reporting should in the first instance be based on the OECD guidelines; whereas ~~it is possible for the Union to go further than the OECD guidelines, and the European Parliament voted in favour of full public~~the European Commission conducted an impact assessment into country-by- country reporting ~~in its amendments adopted on 8 July 20154 on the proposal for a revised Shareholder Rights Directive; whereas the European Commission conducted a consultation on this subject~~ between 17 June and 9 September 2015 in order to explore different options for the implementation of country-by-country reporting5 ; __________________ ~~4Texts adopted of 8.7.2015, P8_TA(2015)0257. 5~~ 5 http://ec.europa.eu/finance/consultations/2 015/further-corporate-tax- transparency/index_en.htm.

Amendment 85 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital T – point i

(i) whereas increased transparency regarding the activities of large multinational companies, and in particular regarding profits made, taxes on profit paid, subsidies received and tax returns, is essential for ensuring that tax administrations tackle BEPS efficiently; whereas a right balance needs to be struck between the need for transparency, the necessity to protect the vital commercial interests of European businesses and the need to refrain from imposing additional adjustment costs that would be too burdensome; whereas one vital form for this transparency to take is country-by- country reporting; whereas any Union proposals for country-by-country reporting should in the first instance be based on the OECD guidelines; whereas it is possible for the Union to go further than the OECD guidelines, and the European Parliament voted in favour of full public country-by- country reporting in its amendments adopted on 8 July 20154 on the proposal for a revised Shareholder Rights Directive; whereas the European Commission conducted a consultation on this subject between 17 June and 9 September 2015 in order to explore different options for the implementation of country-by-country reporting5 ; __________________ 4 Texts adopted of 8.7.2015, P8_TA(2015)0257. 5 http://ec.europa.eu/finance/consultations/2 015/further-corporate-tax- transparency/index_en.htm.

Amendment 86 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital T – point i

(i) whereas increased transparency regarding the activities of large multinational companies, and in particular regarding profits made, taxes on profit paid, subsidies received and tax returns, is essential for ensuring that tax administrations tackle BEPS efficiently; whereas one vital form for this transparency to take is country-by-country reporting; whereas any Union proposals for country-by-country reporting should in the first instance be based on the OECD guidelines template; whereas it is possible for the Union to go further than the OECD guidelines and make such country-by- country reporting mandatory and public, and the European Parliament voted in favour of full public country-by- country reporting in its amendments adopted on 8 July 20154 on the proposal for a revised Shareholder Rights Directive; whereas the European Commission conducted a consultation on this subject between 17 June and 9 September 2015 in order to explore different options for the implementation of country-by-country reporting5 ; whereas 88% of those who responded publicly to that consultation said that they supported public disclosure of tax-related information by enterprises; __________________ 4 Texts adopted of 8.7.2015, P8_TA(2015)0257. 5 http://ec.europa.eu/finance/consultations/2 015/further-corporate-tax- transparency/index_en.htm.

Amendment 87 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital T – point i

(i) whereas increased transparency regarding the activities of large multinational companies, and in particular regarding profits made, taxes on profit paid, subsidies received and tax returns, is essential for ensuring that tax administrations tackle BEPS efficiently; whereas one vital form for this transparency to take is country-by-country reporting where there is no risk that it may damage proposed investment projects in certain countries; whereas any Union proposals for country-by-country reporting should in the first instance be ~~based on~~aligned with the OECD guidelines; whereas it is possible for the Union to go further than the OECD guidelines, and the European Parliament voted in favour of full public country-by- country reporting in its amendments adopted on 8 July 20151 on the proposal for a revised Shareholder Rights Directive; whereas the European Commission conducted a consultation on this subject between 17 June and 9 September 2015 in order to explore different options for the implementation of country-by-country reporting2 ; __________________ 1 Texts adopted of 8 July 2015, P8_TA(2015)0257. 2 http://ec.europa.eu/finance/consultations/2 015/further-corporate-tax- transparency/index_en.htm.

Amendment 88 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital T – point i

(i) whereas increased transparency regarding the activities of large multinational companies, and in particular regarding profits made, taxes on profit paid, subsidies received and tax returns, is essential for ensuring that tax administrations tackle BEPS efficiently; whereas one vital form for this transparency to take is country-by-country reporting; whereas any Union proposals for country-by-country reporting should in the first instance be based on the OECD guidelines; whereas it is possible for the Union to go further than the OECD guidelines~~, and~~; whereas it should be ensured that any stricter reporting obligation does not unnecessarily disadvantage Union- based companies; whereas the European Parliament voted in favour of full public country-by- country reporting in its amendments adopted on 8 July 20154 on the proposal for a revised Shareholder Rights Directive; whereas the European Commission conducted a consultation on this subject between 17 June and 9 September 2015 in order to explore different options for the implementation of country-by-country reporting5 ; __________________ 4 Texts adopted of 8.7.2015, P8_TA(2015)0257. 5 http://ec.europa.eu/finance/consultations/2 015/further-corporate-tax- transparency/index_en.htm.

Amendment 89 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital T – point i

(i) whereas increased transparency regarding the activities of large multinational companies, and in particular regarding profits made, taxes on profit paid, subsidies received and tax returns, is essential for ensuring that tax administrations tackle BEPS efficiently; whereas one vital form for this transparency to take is country-by-country reporting; whereas any Union proposals for country-by-country reporting should in the first instance be based on the OECD guidelines; whereas ~~it is possible for the Union to go further than the OECD guidelines, and the Europea~~the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission Par~~liament voted in favour of full~~e now discussing a public country-by- country reporting ~~in its amendments adopted on 8 July 20154 o~~requirement in the proposal for a revised Shareholder Rights Directive; whereas the European Commission conducted a consultation on this subject between 17 June and 9 September 2015 in order to explore different options for the implementation of country-by-country reporting5 ; __________________ ~~4Texts adopted of 8.7.2015, P8_TA(2015)0257. 5~~ 5 http://ec.europa.eu/finance/consultations/2 015/further-corporate-tax- transparency/index_en.htm.

Amendment 9 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas the revelations showed that tax advisors have helped multinational companies deliberately, and in a targeted fashion, to obtain at least 548 tax rulings in Luxembourg between 2002 and 2010; whereas those secret deals feature complex financial structures designed to create substantial tax reductions; whereas the tax rulings provide written assurance that multinational companies’ tax-saving plans would be viewed favourably by Luxembourg authorities;

Amendment 90 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital T – point i

(i) whereas increased transparency regarding the activities of large multinational companies, and in particular regarding profits made, taxes on profit paid, subsidies received and tax returns, is essential for ensuring that tax administrations tackle BEPS efficiently; whereas one vital form for this transparency to take is country-by-country reporting; whereas ~~any~~the Union ~~proposals for~~should go further than the OECD guidelines, by introducing mandatory and public country- by- country reporting ~~should in the first instance be based on the OECD guidelines; whereas it is possible for the Union to go further than the OECD guideline~~for Union- based multinational companies of all economic sectors, and the European Parliament voted in favour of full public country-by-country reporting in its amendments adopted on 8 July 20154 on the proposal for a revised Shareholder Rights Directive; whereas the European Commission conducted a consultation on this subject between 17 June and 9 September 2015 in order to explore different options for the implementation of country-by-country reporting5 ; whereas the tax information of multinational companies cannot be considered a business or commercial secret as defined by the OECD and can therefore be automatically exchanged, or in the case of country-by-country reporting, be made publicly available without leading to serious damage for the multinational companies concerned; __________________ 4 Texts adopted of 8.7.2015, P8_TA(2015)0257. 5 http://ec.europa.eu/finance/consultations/2 015/further-corporate-tax- transparency/index_en.htm.

Amendment 91 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital T – point i

(i) whereas increased transparency regarding the activities of large multinational companies, and in particular regarding profits made, taxes on profit paid, subsidies received and tax returns, is essential for ensuring that tax administrations tackle BEPS efficiently; whereas one ~~vital~~ form for this transparency to take is country-by-country reporting; whereas any Union proposals for country- by-country reporting should ~~in the first instance~~ be based on the OECD guidelines; whereas ~~it is possible fo~~any Union initiative must not jeopardize the anti- BEPS process within the OECD; whereas the question whether the Union to goes further than the OECD guidelines~~, and~~ has to take account of the level playing field for Union companies in global competition; whereas the European Parliament voted in favour of ~~full~~ public country-by- country reporting of certain elements, including exemptions for companies according to size and relevance, in its amendments adopted on 8 July 20154 on the proposal for a revised Shareholder Rights Directive; whereas the European Commission conducted a consultation on this subject between 17 June and 9 September 2015 in order to explore different options for the implementation of country-by-country reporting5 ; __________________ 4 Texts adopted of 8.7.2015, P8_TA(2015)0257. 5 http://ec.europa.eu/finance/consultations/2 015/further-corporate-tax- transparency/index_en.htm.

Amendment 92 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital T – point i a (new)

(ia) whereas tougher country-specific tax information reporting requirements at both European and international level must be accompanied by an effective and binding dispute settlement procedure;

Amendment 93 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital T – point ii

(ii) whereas ~~some companies within the Union have already begun to demonstrate that they are fully tax compliant by applying for and promoting their ownership of~~voluntary measures such as a 'Fair Tax Ppayer' label~~3 ; whereas firms and citizens alike across the Union would benefit from wider take- up of such labels by comp~~ can be no substitute for chaniges ~~who are fully tax compliant in order to set a high standard for others to emulate; __________________ 3Such as the Fair Tax Mark: http://www.fairtaxmark.net/.~~that are needed to the legal framework;

Amendment 94 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital T – point ii

(ii) whereas some companies within the Union have already begun to demonstrate that they are fully ~~tax~~ compliant with national tax legislation by applying for and promoting their ownership of a 'Fair Tax Payer' label3 ; whereas f~~irms and citizens alike across the Union would benefit from wider take-up of such labels by companies who are fully tax compliant in order to set a high standard for others to emulat~~or the present only firms whose economic activities are confined exclusively to national territory may obtain such labels; whereas these labels are as diverse as national tax laws; whereas these labels are not assigned by the competent national tax authorities; whereas these labels do not exempt firms from tax audits; whereas only a label based on common criteria at European level which is issued by a European competent authority would make it possible to encourage firms to fully comply with their tax obligations in order to increase public confidence; __________________ 3 Such as the Fair Tax Mark: http://www.fairtaxmark.net/.

Amendment 95 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital T – point ii

(ii) whereas some companies within the Union have already begun to demonstrate that they are fully tax compliant by applying for and promoting their ownership of a 'Fair Tax Payer' label6 ; whereas firms and citizens alike across the Union would benefit from wider take-up of such labels by companies who are fully tax compliant in order to set a high standard for others to emulate; Underlines that such measures can have a strong deterrent effect and change behaviours, through both the reputational risk for non- compliant firms and the provision of information to the competent authorities, which can then adopt appropriate corrective measures and sanctions; __________________ 6 Such as the Fair Tax Mark: http://www.fairtaxmark.net/.

Amendment 96 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital T – point ii

(ii) whereas paying a fair share of taxes on profits made should be an important element of any company's corporate social responsibility (CSR) policy, and information about taxes being paid in different countries should form part of the CSR section of a company's annual report; whereas while a small minority of some companies within the Union have already begun to demonstrate that they are fully tax compliant by applying for and promoting their ownership of a 'Fair Tax Payer' label6 , most firms disregard the issue of fair taxation in their annual reporting; whereas firms and citizens alike across the Union would benefit from wider take-up of such labels by companies who are fully tax compliant in order to set a high standard for others to emulate; __________________ 6 Such as the Fair Tax Mark: http://www.fairtaxmark.net/.

Amendment 97 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital T – point iii

(iii) whereas increased transparency would be achieved if Member States inform each other and the Commission of any new allowance, relief, exception, incentive or similar measure that could have a material impact on their effective tax rate; whereas such notification would help Member States in identifying harmful tax practices;deleted

Amendment 98 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital T – point iii

Amendment 99 #