Progress: Awaiting final decision
Role | Committee | Rapporteur | Shadows |
---|---|---|---|
Lead | ECON | TANG Paul ( S&D) | FERBER Markus ( PPE), LOONES Sander ( ECR), JEŽEK Petr ( ALDE), JOLY Eva ( Verts/ALE), VALLI Marco ( EFDD), KAPPEL Barbara ( ENF) |
Committee Opinion | IMCO | ||
Committee Opinion | JURI | REGNER Evelyn ( S&D) | Constance LE GRIP ( PPE), Jiří MAŠTÁLKA ( GUE/NGL), Jens ROHDE ( ALDE) |
Lead committee dossier:
Legal Basis:
T, r, e, a, t, y, , o, n, , t, h, e, , F, u, n, c, t, i, o, n, i, n, g, , o, f, , t, h, e, , E, U, , T, F, E, U, , 1, 1, 5
Legal Basis:
T, r, e, a, t, y, , o, n, , t, h, e, , F, u, n, c, t, i, o, n, i, n, g, , o, f, , t, h, e, , E, U, , T, F, E, U, , 1, 1, 5Subjects
Events
The European Parliament adopted by 451 to 141, with 59 abstentions, following Parliament’s consultation, a legislative resolution on the proposal for a Council directive on a Common Corporate Tax Base.
Parliament approved the Commission proposal subject to the following amendments:
Members noted that in times of globalisation and digitalisation, taxation of in particular financial and intellectual capital on a source base is becoming increasingly harder to retrace and easier to manipulate. The mainstream digitalisation of many sectors of the economy coupled with the fast developing digital economy calls into question the suitability of the Union corporate tax models.
Subject matter : Parliament called a Directive which establishes a system of a common base for the taxation in the Union of certain companies and lays down rules for the calculation of that base, including rules on measures to prevent tax avoidance and on measures relating to the international dimension of the proposed tax system.
Considering the need to act swiftly in order to ensure a proper functioning of the internal market by making it, on the one hand, friendlier to trade and investment and, on the other hand, more resilient to tax avoidance schemes, Members stated the need to ensure simultaneous entry into force of the Directive on a Common Corporate Tax Base and the Directive on a Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base.
Once implemented in all Member States, a CCCTB would ensure that taxes are paid where profits are generated and where companies have permanent establishment.
Digital presence in a country to determine taxable profits : the rules of this Directive shall apply to a company that is established under the laws of a Member State, including its permanent and digital permanent establishments in other Member States, where the company meets specific conditions, in particular, that they belong to a consolidated group for financial accounting purposes with a total consolidated group revenue that exceeded EUR 750 million during the financial year preceding the relevant financial year. That threshold shall be lowered to zero over a maximum period of seven years .
The amended text stipulates that a taxpayer shall be considered to have a permanent establishment which includes a digital permanent establishment in a Member State other than the jurisdiction in which it is resident for tax purposes when it has a fixed place of business or a digital presence in that other Member State through which it carries on its business, wholly or partly.
If a taxpayer resident in one jurisdiction provides access to or offers a digital platform such as an electronic application, database, online marketplace, or storage room, or offers search engine or advertising services on a website or in an electronic application, that taxpayer shall be deemed to have a digital permanent establishment in a Member State other than the jurisdiction in which it is resident for tax purposes if the total amount of revenue of the taxpayer or associated enterprise due to remote transactions generated from aforementioned digital platforms in the non-resident jurisdiction exceeds EUR 5 million per year in the jurisdiction where he does not reside, and provided that the monthly number of individual users domiciled in a Member State other than the jurisdiction in which the taxpayer is resident for tax purposes have logged in or visited the taxpayer's digital platform is at least or equal to a 1000.
A taxpayer shall be required to disclose to the tax authorities all information relevant to the determination of permanent establishment or digital permanent establishment.
Deductible expenses : for research and development costs not exceeding EUR 20 million and that relate to staff including wages, subcontractors agency workers and freelancers, the taxpayer shall receive a tax credit of 10% of the costs incurred.
Exceeding borrowing costs shall be deductible in the tax year in which they are incurred for maximum of 10% of the taxpayer's earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortisation ('EBITDA') or for a maximum amount of EUR 1 million , whichever is higher.
Specific exemptions : Parliament introduced a new Article which stipulates that earnings retained to a reserve by cooperatives and consortia, both during the current activity of a company and after its expiration, as well as the benefits granted by cooperatives and consortia to their own members, are deductible whenever the deductibility is allowed by fiscal national law.
Losses incurred in a tax year by a resident taxpayer or a permanent establishment of a non-resident taxpayer may be carried forward and deducted in subsequent tax years, up to a maximum period of five years .
Controlled foreign companies : an entity, or a permanent establishment of which the profits are not subject to tax or are exempt from tax in the Member State of its head office’, shall be treated as a controlled foreign company where the profits of the entity are subject to a corporate tax rate lower than 15 %; that rate shall be revised each year in line with economic developments in world trade.
European tax identification number : the Commission is called on to present a legislative proposal for a harmonised, common European taxpayer identification number by 31 December 2018, in order to make automatic exchange of tax information more efficient and reliable within the Union.
Mandatory automatic exchange of information on tax matters : in order to guarantee full transparency and the proper implementation of this Directive, the exchange of information on tax matters shall be automatic and mandatory, as laid down by Council Directive 2011/16/EU . Member States shall allocate adequate staff, expertise and budget resources to their national tax administrations as well as resources for the training of tax administration staff focusing on cross-border tax cooperation, and on automatic exchange of information in order to ensure full implementation of this Directive.
Measures against tax treaty abuses : the amended text called on Member States to amend their bilateral tax treaties in accordance with this Directive to ensure such treaties contain all of the following: (i) a clause ensuring that both parties to the treaty undertake to laying down measures whereby tax is to be paid where economic activities are taking place and where value is created ; (ii) an addendum to clarify that the objective of bilateral treaties, beyond avoiding double taxation is also to fight tax evasion and aggressive tax planning; (iii) a clause for a principal purpose test based on a general anti-avoidance rule.
Reporting : the Commission shall, 10 years after the entry into force. It shall communicate its findings in a report to the European Parliament and Member States with the aim of taking those findings into account for the design and implementation of national corporate tax systems accompanied, if appropriate, by a legislative proposal to amend this Directive.
Text adopted by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
The Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs adopted, following Parliament’s consultation, the report by Paul TANG (S&D, NL) on the proposal for a Council directive on a Common Corporate Tax Base.
The committee recommended that the European Parliament approve the Commission proposal subject to the following amendments:
The report noted that in times of globalisation and digitalisation, taxation of in particular financial and intellectual capital on a source base is becoming increasingly harder to retrace and easier to manipulate. The mainstream digitalisation of many sectors of the economy coupled with the fast developing digital economy calls into question the suitability of the Union corporate tax models.
Subject matter : Members are calling for a Directive which establishes a system of a common base for the taxation in the Union of certain companies and lays down rules for the calculation of that base, including rules on measures to prevent tax avoidance and on measures relating to the international dimension of the proposed tax system.
Considering the need to act swiftly in order to ensure a proper functioning of the internal market by making it, on the one hand, friendlier to trade and investment and, on the other hand, more resilient to tax avoidance schemes, it is very important to ensure simultaneous entry into force of the Directive on a Common Corporate Tax Base and the Directive on a Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base . Because such a change of regime is a significant step in the completion of the internal market, it needs flexibility in order to be properly executed from the outset.
Permanent establishment in a Member State of a taxpayer who is resident for tax purposes in the Union : the rules of this Directive shall apply to a company that is established under the laws of a Member State, including its permanent and digital permanent establishments in other Member States, where the company meets specific conditions, in particular, that they belong to a consolidated group for financial accounting purposes with a total consolidated group revenue that exceeded EUR 750 million during the financial year preceding the relevant financial year. That threshold shall be lowered to zero over a maximum period of seven years .
The amended text stipulates that a taxpayer shall be considered to have a permanent establishment which includes a digital permanent establishment in a Member State other than the jurisdiction in which it is resident for tax purposes when it has a fixed place of business or a digital presence in that other Member State through which it carries on its business, wholly or partly.
If a taxpayer resident in one jurisdiction provides access to or offers a digital platform such as an electronic application, database, online marketplace, or storage room, or offers search engine or advertising services on a website or in an electronic application, that taxpayer shall be deemed to have a digital permanent establishment in a Member State other than the jurisdiction in which it is resident for tax purposes if the total amount of revenue of the taxpayer or associated enterprise due to remote transactions generated from aforementioned digital platforms in the non-resident jurisdiction exceeding EUR 5 000 000 per year in a Member State other than the jurisdiction in which the taxpayer is resident for tax purposes, under certain circumstances.
A taxpayer shall be required to disclose to the tax authorities all information relevant to the determination of permanent establishment or digital permanent establishment.
Deductible expenses : for research and development costs not exceeding EUR 20 000 000 and that relate to staff including wages, subcontractors agency workers and freelancers, the taxpayer shall receive a tax credit of 10 % of the costs incurred.
Specific exemptions : Members sought to include a new Article which stipulates that earnings retained to a reserve by cooperatives and consortia, both during the current activity of a company and after its expiration, as well as the benefits granted by cooperatives and consortia to their own members, are deductible whenever the deductibility is allowed by fiscal national law.
Member States may exclude from the scope an entity or permanent establishment:
with accounting profits of no more than EUR 750 000, and non-trading income of no more than EUR 75 000; or of which the accounting profits amount to no more than 10 percent of its operating costs for the tax period.
European tax identification number : the Commission is called on to present a legislative proposal for a harmonised, common European taxpayer identification number by 31 December 2018, in order to make automatic exchange of tax information more efficient and reliable within the Union.
Mandatory automatic exchange of information on tax matters : in order to guarantee full transparency and the proper implementation of this Directive, the exchange of information on tax matters shall be automatic and mandatory, as laid down by Council Directive 2011/16/EU. Member States shall allocate adequate staff, expertise and budget resources to their national tax administrations as well as resources for the training of tax administration staff focusing on cross-border tax cooperation, and on automatic exchange of information in order to ensure full implementation of this Directive.
Measures against tax treaty abuses : the amended text called on Member States to amend their bilateral tax treaties in accordance with this Directive to ensure such treaties contain all of the following: (i) a clause ensuring that both parties to the treaty undertake to laying down measures whereby tax is to be paid where economic activities are taking place and where value is created; (ii) an addendum to clarify that the objective of bilateral treaties, beyond avoiding double taxation is also to fight tax evasion and aggressive tax planning; (iii) a clause for a principal purpose test based on a general anti-avoidance rule.
Reporting : the Commission shall, 10 years after the entry into force of this Directive, review its application and report to the European Parliament and the Council on the operation of this Directive. It shall communicate its findings in a report to the European Parliament and Member States with the aim of taking those findings into account for the design and implementation of national corporate tax systems accompanied, if appropriate, by a legislative proposal to amend this Directive.
Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading
PURPOSE: to present a re-launched proposal on a Common Corporate Tax Base to ensure a corporate tax system that encourages growth and fairness in the internal market.
PROPOSED ACT: Council Directive.
ROLE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT: the Council adopts the act after consulting Parliament but without being obliged to follow the latter’s opinion.
BACKGROUND: currently, businesses with cross-border activity have to comply with up to 28 divergent corporate tax systems. Generally, corporate income is taxed at national level, but the economic environment has become more globalised, mobile and digital. Business models and corporate structures are more complex, making it easier to shift profits.
In March 2011, the Commission proposed a directive for a Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base (CCCTB). The proposal, which is still pending in Council, aims to provide companies with a single set of corporate tax rules for doing business across the internal market, thereby facilitating their cross-border activity.
The discussions in Council since 2011 have shown that the CCCTB proposal is unlikely to get adopted, in its entirety, without a staged approach. The Commission, in its action plan of June 2015, advocated a step-by-step approach to the CCCTB .
Considering the need to act swiftly in order to ensure a proper functioning of the internal market by making it, on the one hand, friendlier to trade and investment and, on the other hand, more resilient to tax avoidance schemes, the Commission considers it necessary to divide the ambitious CCCTB initiative into two separate proposals. It proposes, at a first stage, rules on a common corporate tax base before addressing, at a second stage, the issue of consolidation.
This proposal for a Directive focuses on the 'first step' of the staged approach. It is thus limited to the elements of the common base, i.e. the rules for calculating the corporate tax base. Consolidation will be addressed in a separate proposal for a directive (i.e. second step), due for examination at a second stage, i.e. after the elements of the common base have politically been agreed. Until then, the 2011 proposal for a CCCTB will remain pending for examination in Council . The Commission will submit the two proposals, i.e. for a common corporate tax base and a CCCTB, simultaneously and as part of a single initiative. The proposal of 2011 will be withdrawn at the same time as the Commission adopts the new proposals.
This initiative on re-launching the CCCTB features prominently in the Commission’s larger project in the field of fairer taxation. It will be presented at the same time as the proposal for a directive on hybrid mismatches involving third countries (which will amend the Directive tax avoidance) and a directive on dispute settlement.
IMPACT ASSESSMENT: the main policy option that has been considered is a proposal for a common consolidated corporate tax base, but the implications of the first stage without consolidation have also been assessed. A key choice to be made relates to the scope of such a tax base, i.e. to whom it would apply.
Valuing the different options has led to a preferred option: a CCCTB mandatory for large companies, equipped with an 'Allowance for Growth and Investment' and with an allowance for R&D expenses.
With regard to the economic benefits, a common corporate tax base with cross-border loss relief and an allowance for growth and investment would lead to an increase in investment and employment of up to 3.6% and 0.5%, respectively. Overall, growth would increase by up to 1.3%.
CONTENT : this proposal is the 'first step' (common corporate tax base) in a 2-stage approach towards an EU-wide corporate tax system and lays down common corporate tax rules for computing the tax base of companies and permanent establishments in the Union.
The current initiative includes points that were not in the 2011 proposal:
Scope: in contrast to the proposal of 2011, which laid down an optional system for all, this proposal will be mandatory for groups of companies beyond a certain size (whose consolidated turnover is above EUR 750 million).
Furthermore, to reach a degree of coherence between the two steps (i.e. common corporate tax base and CCCTB), companies will be required to meet the conditions for consolidation in order to fall within the mandatory scope of the common base. These common rules will also be available, as an option, for the companies that do not comply with these conditions.
Tax base: this is designed broadly. All revenues will be taxable unless expressly exempted. Income consisting in dividends or proceeds from the disposal of shares held in a company outside the group will be exempt for participations of at least 10%, in order to prevent the double taxation of foreign direct investment. In the same vein, the profits of permanent establishments will also be exempt from tax in the state of the head office. Taxable revenues will be reduced by business expenses and certain other items.
To support innovation in the economy, this re-launched initiative introduces a super-deduction for research and development costs into the R&D regime set out in the proposal of 2011. In addition, taxpayers will be entitled, for R&D expenditure up to EUR 20 000 000, to a yearly extra super-deduction of 50%. To the extent that R&D expenditure go beyond EUR 20 000 000, taxpayers may deduct 25% of the exceeding amount.
The proposal will also grant an enhanced super-deduction for small starting companies without associated enterprises, which are particularly innovative (a category that will in particular cover start-ups).
Interest limitation rule : this new rule (not in the proposal of 2011) features in the Anti-Tax Avoidance Directive. It limits the deductibility of interest (and other financial) costs, in order to discourage practices of profit shifting towards low-tax countries.
Allowance for Growth and Investment : the proposal aims to tackle the asymmetry whereby interest paid out on loans is deductible (subject to some limits) from taxpayers' common base whilst this is not the case for profit distributions.
This is a definitive advantage in favour of financing through debt as opposed to equity. Given the risks that such a situation entails for the indebtedness of companies, the proposal includes a rule against debt bias. Taxpayers will be given an allowance for growth and investment according to which increases in their equity will be deductible from their taxable base subject to certain conditions, such as measures against potential cascading effects and anti-tax avoidance rules.
DELEGATED ACTS: the proposal contains provisions empowering the Commission to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
Legislative proposal
PURPOSE: to present a re-launched proposal on a Common Corporate Tax Base to ensure a corporate tax system that encourages growth and fairness in the internal market.
PROPOSED ACT: Council Directive.
ROLE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT: the Council adopts the act after consulting Parliament but without being obliged to follow the latter’s opinion.
BACKGROUND: currently, businesses with cross-border activity have to comply with up to 28 divergent corporate tax systems. Generally, corporate income is taxed at national level, but the economic environment has become more globalised, mobile and digital. Business models and corporate structures are more complex, making it easier to shift profits.
In March 2011, the Commission proposed a directive for a Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base (CCCTB). The proposal, which is still pending in Council, aims to provide companies with a single set of corporate tax rules for doing business across the internal market, thereby facilitating their cross-border activity.
The discussions in Council since 2011 have shown that the CCCTB proposal is unlikely to get adopted, in its entirety, without a staged approach. The Commission, in its action plan of June 2015, advocated a step-by-step approach to the CCCTB .
Considering the need to act swiftly in order to ensure a proper functioning of the internal market by making it, on the one hand, friendlier to trade and investment and, on the other hand, more resilient to tax avoidance schemes, the Commission considers it necessary to divide the ambitious CCCTB initiative into two separate proposals. It proposes, at a first stage, rules on a common corporate tax base before addressing, at a second stage, the issue of consolidation.
This proposal for a Directive focuses on the 'first step' of the staged approach. It is thus limited to the elements of the common base, i.e. the rules for calculating the corporate tax base. Consolidation will be addressed in a separate proposal for a directive (i.e. second step), due for examination at a second stage, i.e. after the elements of the common base have politically been agreed. Until then, the 2011 proposal for a CCCTB will remain pending for examination in Council . The Commission will submit the two proposals, i.e. for a common corporate tax base and a CCCTB, simultaneously and as part of a single initiative. The proposal of 2011 will be withdrawn at the same time as the Commission adopts the new proposals.
This initiative on re-launching the CCCTB features prominently in the Commission’s larger project in the field of fairer taxation. It will be presented at the same time as the proposal for a directive on hybrid mismatches involving third countries (which will amend the Directive tax avoidance) and a directive on dispute settlement.
IMPACT ASSESSMENT: the main policy option that has been considered is a proposal for a common consolidated corporate tax base, but the implications of the first stage without consolidation have also been assessed. A key choice to be made relates to the scope of such a tax base, i.e. to whom it would apply.
Valuing the different options has led to a preferred option: a CCCTB mandatory for large companies, equipped with an 'Allowance for Growth and Investment' and with an allowance for R&D expenses.
With regard to the economic benefits, a common corporate tax base with cross-border loss relief and an allowance for growth and investment would lead to an increase in investment and employment of up to 3.6% and 0.5%, respectively. Overall, growth would increase by up to 1.3%.
CONTENT : this proposal is the 'first step' (common corporate tax base) in a 2-stage approach towards an EU-wide corporate tax system and lays down common corporate tax rules for computing the tax base of companies and permanent establishments in the Union.
The current initiative includes points that were not in the 2011 proposal:
Scope: in contrast to the proposal of 2011, which laid down an optional system for all, this proposal will be mandatory for groups of companies beyond a certain size (whose consolidated turnover is above EUR 750 million).
Furthermore, to reach a degree of coherence between the two steps (i.e. common corporate tax base and CCCTB), companies will be required to meet the conditions for consolidation in order to fall within the mandatory scope of the common base. These common rules will also be available, as an option, for the companies that do not comply with these conditions.
Tax base: this is designed broadly. All revenues will be taxable unless expressly exempted. Income consisting in dividends or proceeds from the disposal of shares held in a company outside the group will be exempt for participations of at least 10%, in order to prevent the double taxation of foreign direct investment. In the same vein, the profits of permanent establishments will also be exempt from tax in the state of the head office. Taxable revenues will be reduced by business expenses and certain other items.
To support innovation in the economy, this re-launched initiative introduces a super-deduction for research and development costs into the R&D regime set out in the proposal of 2011. In addition, taxpayers will be entitled, for R&D expenditure up to EUR 20 000 000, to a yearly extra super-deduction of 50%. To the extent that R&D expenditure go beyond EUR 20 000 000, taxpayers may deduct 25% of the exceeding amount.
The proposal will also grant an enhanced super-deduction for small starting companies without associated enterprises, which are particularly innovative (a category that will in particular cover start-ups).
Interest limitation rule : this new rule (not in the proposal of 2011) features in the Anti-Tax Avoidance Directive. It limits the deductibility of interest (and other financial) costs, in order to discourage practices of profit shifting towards low-tax countries.
Allowance for Growth and Investment : the proposal aims to tackle the asymmetry whereby interest paid out on loans is deductible (subject to some limits) from taxpayers' common base whilst this is not the case for profit distributions.
This is a definitive advantage in favour of financing through debt as opposed to equity. Given the risks that such a situation entails for the indebtedness of companies, the proposal includes a rule against debt bias. Taxpayers will be given an allowance for growth and investment according to which increases in their equity will be deductible from their taxable base subject to certain conditions, such as measures against potential cascading effects and anti-tax avoidance rules.
DELEGATED ACTS: the proposal contains provisions empowering the Commission to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
Legislative proposal
Documents
- Contribution: COM(2016)0685
- Commission response to text adopted in plenary: SP(2018)242
- Decision by Parliament: T8-0088/2018
- Results of vote in Parliament: Results of vote in Parliament
- Debate in Parliament: Go to the page
- Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading: A8-0050/2018
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE609.574
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE610.813
- Committee opinion: PE602.948
- Committee draft report: PE608.050
- Contribution: COM(2016)0685
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE604.720
- Contribution: COM(2016)0685
- Contribution: COM(2016)0685
- Reasoned opinion: PE599.833
- Reasoned opinion: PE599.679
- Reasoned opinion: PE597.704
- Reasoned opinion: PE597.679
- Contribution: COM(2016)0685
- Reasoned opinion: PE597.421
- Contribution: COM(2016)0685
- Reasoned opinion: PE597.420
- Reasoned opinion: PE597.410
- Reasoned opinion: PE597.409
- Contribution: COM(2016)0685
- Contribution: COM(2016)0685
- Contribution: COM(2016)0685
- Document attached to the procedure: Go to the pageEur-Lex
- Document attached to the procedure: SWD(2016)0342
- Document attached to the procedure: Go to the pageEur-Lex
- Document attached to the procedure: SWD(2016)0341
- Legislative proposal: COM(2016)0685
- Legislative proposal: Go to the pageEur-Lex
- Legislative proposal published: COM(2016)0685
- Legislative proposal published: Go to the page Eur-Lex
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE604.720
- Committee draft report: PE608.050
- Committee opinion: PE602.948
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE609.574
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE610.813
- Legislative proposal: COM(2016)0685 Go to the pageEur-Lex
- Document attached to the procedure: Go to the pageEur-Lex SWD(2016)0342
- Document attached to the procedure: Go to the pageEur-Lex SWD(2016)0341
- Commission response to text adopted in plenary: SP(2018)242
- Contribution: COM(2016)0685
- Contribution: COM(2016)0685
- Contribution: COM(2016)0685
- Reasoned opinion: PE597.409
- Reasoned opinion: PE597.410
- Reasoned opinion: PE597.420
- Contribution: COM(2016)0685
- Reasoned opinion: PE597.421
- Contribution: COM(2016)0685
- Reasoned opinion: PE597.679
- Reasoned opinion: PE599.679
- Reasoned opinion: PE597.704
- Reasoned opinion: PE599.833
- Contribution: COM(2016)0685
- Contribution: COM(2016)0685
- Contribution: COM(2016)0685
- Contribution: COM(2016)0685
Activities
- Hugues BAYET
Plenary Speeches (2)
- Bill ETHERIDGE
Plenary Speeches (2)
- Alain LAMASSOURE
Plenary Speeches (2)
- Sander LOONES
Plenary Speeches (2)
- Lieve WIERINCK
Plenary Speeches (2)
- Pervenche BERÈS
Plenary Speeches (1)
- David CAMPBELL BANNERMAN
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Nicola CAPUTO
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Brian HAYES
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Diane JAMES
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Ramón JÁUREGUI ATONDO
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Petr JEŽEK
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Barbara KAPPEL
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Jeppe KOFOD
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Werner LANGEN
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Ivana MALETIĆ
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Jiří MAŠTÁLKA
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Notis MARIAS
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Bernard MONOT
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Luigi MORGANO
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Marcus PRETZELL
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Dariusz ROSATI
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Marco VALLI
Plenary Speeches (1)
Votes
A8-0050/2018 - Paul Tang - Am 84=89 15/03/2018 12:19:20.000 #
A8-0050/2018 - Paul Tang - Am 5/2 15/03/2018 12:19:41.000 #
A8-0050/2018 - Paul Tang - Am 6 15/03/2018 12:19:52.000 #
A8-0050/2018 - Paul Tang - Am 23 15/03/2018 12:20:06.000 #
A8-0050/2018 - Paul Tang - Am 40 15/03/2018 12:20:15.000 #
A8-0050/2018 - Paul Tang - Am 85 15/03/2018 12:20:26.000 #
A8-0050/2018 - Paul Tang - Am 81 15/03/2018 12:20:40.000 #
A8-0050/2018 - Paul Tang - Am 94 15/03/2018 12:20:51.000 #
A8-0050/2018 - Paul Tang - Am 86 15/03/2018 12:21:02.000 #
A8-0050/2018 - Paul Tang - Am 88 15/03/2018 12:21:21.000 #
A8-0050/2018 - Paul Tang - Am 82 15/03/2018 12:21:39.000 #
A8-0050/2018 - Paul Tang - Am 78 15/03/2018 12:21:53.000 #
A8-0050/2018 - Paul Tang - Am 79 15/03/2018 12:22:03.000 #
A8-0050/2018 - Paul Tang - Am 91 15/03/2018 12:22:14.000 #
A8-0050/2018 - Paul Tang - Am 80 15/03/2018 12:22:24.000 #
A8-0050/2018 - Paul Tang - Proposition de la Commission 15/03/2018 12:22:46.000 #
Amendments | Dossier |
380 |
2016/0337(CNS)
2017/05/15
JURI
35 amendments...
Amendment 26 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 1 (1)
Amendment 27 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 1 (1) Companies which seek to do business across frontiers within the Union encounter serious obstacles and market distortions owing to the existence and interaction of 28 disparate corporate tax systems. Furthermore, tax planning structures have become ever-more
Amendment 28 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 1 (1) Companies which seek to do business across frontiers within the Union encounter serious obstacles and market distortions owing to the existence and interaction of 28 disparate corporate tax systems. Furthermore, tax planning structures have become ever-more sophisticated over time, as they develop across various jurisdictions and effectively take advantage of the technicalities of a tax system or of mismatches between two or more tax systems for the purpose of reducing the tax liability of companies. Although those situations highlight shortcomings that are completely different in nature, they both create obstacles which impede the proper functioning of the
Amendment 29 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 1 (1) Companies which seek to do business across frontiers within the Union encounter serious obstacles and market distortions owing to the existence and interaction of 28 disparate corporate tax systems. Furthermore, tax planning structures have become ever-more aggressive and sophisticated over time, as they develop across various jurisdictions and effectively take advantage of the technicalities of a tax system or of mismatches between two or more tax systems for the purpose of reducing the tax liability of companies. Although those situations highlight shortcomings that are completely different in nature, they both create obstacles which impede the proper functioning of the internal market. Action to rectify those problems should therefore address both types of market deficiencies.
Amendment 30 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 2 (2) To support the proper functioning of the internal market, the corporate tax environment in the Union should be shaped in accordance with the principle that companies pay their fair share of tax in the jurisdiction(s) where their profits are generated. A corporate tax system which treats the Union as a single market for the purpose of computing the corporate tax base of companies would increase transparency of activities of multinational enterprises and enable the public to assess their impact on the economy. It is therefore necessary to provide for mechanisms that
Amendment 31 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 4 (4) Considering the need to act swiftly in order to ensure a proper functioning of the internal market by making it, on the one hand, friendlier to trade and investment and, on the other hand, more resilient to tax avoidance schemes, it is necessary to
Amendment 32 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 4 a (new) (4a) In this way, the CCCTB is in line with Commission efforts to achieve fairer and more effective taxation, being largely complementary to EU company law; it is also is broadly in line with projects such as the Capital Markets Union and efforts to ensure tax transparency, promote the exchange of information and combat money laundering.
Amendment 33 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 5 (5)
Amendment 34 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 5 (5) Many aggressive tax planning structures tend to feature in a cross-border context, which implies that the
Amendment 35 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 6 (6) It is necessary to define the concept of a permanent establishment situated in the Union and belonging to a taxpayer who is resident for tax purposes within the Union. The aim would be to ensure that all concerned taxpayers share a common understanding and to exclude the possibility of a mismatch due to divergent definitions.
Amendment 36 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 6 (6) It is necessary to define the concept of a permanent establishment situated in the Union and belonging to a taxpayer who is resident for tax purposes within the Union, and to extend it to include the concept of ‘virtual establishment’, in order to cover non-resident taxpayers in the Union, all or part of whose turnover is installed in a fixed manner in one or more Member States, without their having a physical establishment. The aim would be to ensure that all concerned taxpayers share a common understanding and to exclude the possibility of a mismatch due to divergent definitions. On the contrary, it should not be seen as essential to have a common definition of permanent establishments situated in a third country, or in the Union but belonging to a taxpayer who is resident for tax purposes in a third country. This dimension should better be left to bilateral tax treaties and national law due to its complicated interaction with international agreements.
Amendment 37 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 6 a (new) (6a) Given the digital change in the business environment, it is necessary to define and implement the concept of a ‘digital business establishment’. Companies that generate profits in a Member State without having a physical establishment there should be treated in the same way as companies that do have a physical establishment in that Member State. Therefore, the CCCTB should also apply to digital corporations.
Amendment 38 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 8 (8) Taxable revenues should be reduced by business expenses and certain other items
Amendment 39 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 10 Amendment 40 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 14 (14) To avoid the base erosion of higher tax jurisdictions through shifting profits via inflated transfer prices towards lower tax countries, transactions between a taxpayer and its associated enterprise(s) should be subject to pricing adjustments in line with the 'arm's length' principle, which is a generally applied criterion. In this way, loopholes between national tax systems, in particular transfer pricing, which accounts for around 70% of all profit shifting in the EU, could be eliminated and a major step taken towards a fair, efficient and transparent tax system.
Amendment 41 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 21 (21) Since the objectives of this Directive, namely to improve the functioning of the internal market through countering practices of international tax avoidance and to facilitate businesses in expanding across borders within the Union, cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States acting individually and in a disparate fashion because coordinated action is necessary to obtain these objectives, but can rather, by reason of the fact that the Directive targets inefficiencies of the internal market that originate in the interaction between disparate national tax rules which impact on the internal market and discourage cross-border activity, be better achieved at Union level, the Union may adopt measures, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in
Amendment 42 #
Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 1. This Directive establishes a system of a common base for the taxation of certain companies and lays down rules for the calculation of that base, including certain provisions regarding measures to prevent tax avoidance and on the international dimension of the proposed tax system.
Amendment 43 #
Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 2 2. A company that applies the rules of this Directive
Amendment 44 #
Proposal for a directive Article 2 – paragraph 1 – introductory part 1. The rules of this Directive shall apply to a company that is established under the laws of a Member State, including its permanent establishments in other Member States and digital business establishments, where the company meets all of the following conditions:
Amendment 45 #
Proposal for a directive Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c (c) it belongs to a consolidated group for financial accounting purposes with a total consolidated group revenue that exceeded EUR 750 000 000 (or equivalent in domestic currency) during the
Amendment 46 #
Proposal for a directive Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c (c) it belongs to a consolidated group for financial accounting purposes with a total consolidated group revenue that exceeded EUR
Amendment 47 #
Proposal for a directive Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c (c) it belongs to a consolidated group for financial accounting purposes with a total consolidated group revenue that exceeded EUR
Amendment 48 #
Proposal for a directive Article 2 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 This Directive shall also apply to a company that is established under the laws of a third country in respect of its permanent establishments situated in one or more Member State and of the turnover installed in a fixed manner in one or more Member States where the company meets the conditions laid down in points (b) to (d) of paragraph 1.
Amendment 49 #
Proposal for a directive Article 2 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 This Directive shall also apply to a company that is established under the laws of a third country in respect of its permanent establishments situated in one or more Member State, and with regard to income earned in a Member State, where the company meets the conditions laid down in points (b) to (d) of paragraph 1.
Amendment 50 #
Proposal for a directive Article 2 – paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. This Directive shall also apply to businesses established under the laws of a third country in respect of their digital business establishments that are specifically directed towards consumers or businesses in a Member State or that principally receive their revenue from activity in a Member State, where the business meets the conditions laid down in points (b) to (d) of paragraph 1. For the purpose of ascertaining whether a digital establishment is specifically directed towards consumers or businesses in a Member State, the physical locations of the consumers or users and suppliers of the goods and services provided shall be taken into account, in accordance with the OECD’s BEPS Action 1. If these cannot be ascertained, regard shall be had to whether the establishment is conducting its business under the top level domain of the Member State or of the Union or, in relation to mobile- application-based businesses, is distributing its application via the Member State-specific part of a mobile application distribution centre or whether the business is conducted under a domain which – for example as a result of the use of names of Member States, regions or towns – makes it clear that the establishment is directed towards consumers or businesses in a Member State, or the business activity is subject to General Terms and Conditions applicable specifically for the European Union or a Member State, or the web presence of the business provides advertising space specifically aimed at consumers and businesses in a Member State.
Amendment 51 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point 33 a (new) (33a) ‘digital establishment’ means - as defined by the OECD’s BEPS Action 1 - an establishment which is specifically directed towards consumers or businesses in a Member State, with due regard for the physical locations of the consumers or users and of suppliers of the goods and services provided. If these cannot be ascertained, regard shall be had to whether the establishment is conducting its business under the top level domain of the Member State or of the Union or, in relation to mobile-application-based businesses, is distributing its application via the Member State-specific part of a mobile application distribution centre or whether the business is conducted under a domain which – for example as a result of the use of names of Member States, regions or towns – makes it clear that the establishment is directed towards consumers or businesses in a Member State, or the business activity is subject to General Terms and Conditions applicable specifically for the European Union or a Member State, or the web presence of the business offers advertising space specifically aimed at consumers and businesses in a Member State.
Amendment 52 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point 33 a (new) (33a) ‘digital business establishment’ means an establishment specifically directed towards consumers and businesses in a Member State and, to that end, account shall be taken of whether the activity is being carried out in the top level domain of the Member State or of the Union and whether mobile applications are being distributed through part of a distribution centre specifically intended for that purpose in the Member State concerned.
Amendment 53 #
Proposal for a directive Article 5 – paragraph 1 – introductory part 1. A taxpayer shall be considered to have a permanent establishment in a Member State other than the Member State in which it is resident for tax purposes when it has a fixed or virtual place in that other Member State through which it carries on its business, wholly or partly, including in particular:
Amendment 54 #
Proposal for a directive Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point f a (new) (fa) a digital business establishment.
Amendment 55 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 3 Amendment 57 #
Proposal for a directive Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point j a (new) (ja) expenses to beneficiaries situated in countries listed on the European list of non-cooperative tax jurisdictions (tax havens)1a; __________________ 1a See the European list of non- cooperative tax jurisdictions currently being developed by the Council: http://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/docu ment/ST-14166-2016-INIT/en/pdf
Amendment 58 #
Proposal for a directive Article 59 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 Financial undertakings shall not be treated as controlled foreign companies under paragraph 1 where not more than one third of the income accruing to the entity or permanent or digital business establishment from categories (a) to (f) of paragraph 2 comes from
Amendment 59 #
Proposal for a directive Article 69 – paragraph 1 The Commission shall, five years after the entry into force of this Directive, review its application and report to the Council and the European Parliament on the operation of this Directive.
Amendment 60 #
Proposal for a directive Article 71 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 Member States
source: 604.720
2017/09/29
ECON
345 amendments...
Amendment 100 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 3 a (new) (3a) The European Commission, in its communication to the European Parliament and the Council of 21 September 2017 entitled "A fair and efficient tax system in the European Union for the Digital Single Market", believes that the CCCTB offers the basis to address the tax challenges posed by the digital economy.
Amendment 101 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 3 a (new) (3a) In addition, improving the internal market is the key factor for encouraging growth and job creation. The introduction of a CCCTB should improve growth and lead to more jobs in the Union by reducing the administrative costs for companies, particularly for small businesses operating in several Member States.
Amendment 102 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 3 b (new) (3b) The ability to set tax rates and control tax-collection systems must remain in the hands of Member States.
Amendment 103 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 3 c (new) (3c) The adoption of proposals relating to taxation must continue to be made according to the principle of unanimity in the Council.
Amendment 104 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 4 (4) Considering the need to act swiftly in order to ensure a proper functioning of the internal market by making it, on the one hand, friendlier to trade and investment and, on the other hand, more resilient to tax avoidance schemes, it is necessary to divide the ambitious CCCTB initiative into two separate proposals. At a first stage, rules on a common corporate tax base should be enacted, before addressing, at a second stage, the issue of consolidation. Whereas (partial) harmonisation of the corporate tax base across the Union could be beneficial to businesses and also help in the fight against tax avoidance by dealing with (hybrid) mismatches between two or more corporate tax regimes, it also has the potential to put more emphasis on competition between Member States based solely on the corporate tax rate, leading to an intensified 'race to the bottom'.
Amendment 105 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 4 (4) Considering the need to act swiftly in order to ensure a proper functioning of the internal market by making it, on the one hand, friendlier to trade and investment and, on the other hand, more resilient to tax
Amendment 106 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 4 (4)
Amendment 107 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 4 (4) Considering the need to act swiftly in order to ensure a proper functioning of the internal market by making it, on the one hand, friendlier to trade and investment and, on the other hand, more resilient to tax avoidance schemes, it is necessary to d
Amendment 108 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 4 (4) Considering the need to act swiftly in order to ensure a proper functioning of the internal market by making it, on the one hand, friendlier to trade and investment and, on the other hand, more resilient to tax avoidance schemes, it is
Amendment 109 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 4 (4) Considering the need to act swiftly in order to ensure a proper functioning of the internal market by making it, on the one hand, friendlier to trade and investment and, on the other hand, more resilient to tax avoidance schemes, it is necessary to divide the ambitious CCCTB initiative into two separate proposals
Amendment 110 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 4 (4) Considering the need to act swiftly in order to ensure a proper functioning of the internal market by making it, on the one hand, friendlier to trade and investment and, on the other hand, more resilient to tax avoidance schemes, it is
Amendment 111 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 4 (4) Considering the need to act swiftly in order to ensure a proper functioning of the internal market by making it, on the one hand, friendlier to trade and investment and, on the other hand, more resilient to tax avoidance schemes, it is
Amendment 112 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 4 (4) Considering the need to act swiftly in order to ensure a proper functioning of the internal market by making it, on the one hand, friendlier to trade and investment and, on the other hand, more resilient to tax avoidance schemes, it is necessary to divide the ambitious CCCTB initiative into two separate proposals. At a first stage, rules on a common corporate tax base should be enacted, before addressing, at a second stage, the issue of consolidation. Consolidation should take place only after the rules on the common base have been fully implemented.
Amendment 113 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 4 (4) Considering the need to act swiftly in order to ensure a proper functioning of the internal market by making it, on the one hand, friendlier to trade and investment and, on the other hand, more resilient to tax avoidance schemes, it is
Amendment 114 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 4 (4) Considering the need to
Amendment 115 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 4 a (new) (4a) It should be considered that no sufficiently detailed impact assessment has been conducted on either the CCTB or CCCTB proposals. To understand the true impact of the proposals, particularly in terms of the impact on Member State's corporate tax revenue, it is necessary for a detailed impact assessment to be conducted on a country-by-country basis, which considers all different national systems of corporate tax collection.
Amendment 116 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 4 a (new) (4a) The proposal to separate the implementation of the CCTB and CCCTB proposals is likely to result in significant declines in corporate tax bases across the EU; if loss consolidation were to be implemented with no switch to unitary taxation and formula apportionment at the same time the revenue impact would be dramatic and immediate; and any possible gains would be gradual and quite likely small in comparison.
Amendment 117 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 4 a (new) (4a) This directive is not about harmonisation of the corporate tax rates of the Member States and thus, should not affect the discretion of Member States with regards to their national corporate taxation rates.
Amendment 118 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 5 Amendment 119 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 5 Amendment 120 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 5 (5) Many aggressive tax planning structures tend to feature in a cross-border context, which implies that the participating groups of companies possess a minimum of resources. On this premise, for reasons of proportionality, the rules on a common base should be
Amendment 121 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 5 (5) Many aggressive tax planning structures tend to feature in a cross-border context, which implies that the participating groups of companies possess a minimum of resources. On this premise, for reasons of proportionality, the rules on a common base should be mandatory only for companies which belong to a group of a
Amendment 122 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 5 (5) Many aggressive tax planning structures tend to feature in a cross-border context, which implies that the participating groups of companies possess a minimum of resources. On this premise, for reasons of proportionality, the rules on a common base should be mandatory only for companies which belong to a group of a substantial size. For that purpose, a size- related threshold should be fixed on the basis of the total consolidated revenue of a group which files consolidated financial statements. Since this Directive aims at a new standard for corporate taxation for all business in Europe, no more than five years after implementation and conditional on a positive assessment of what has been achieved, the threshold should be lowered to zero. In addition, to ensure coherence between the two steps of the
Amendment 123 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 5 (5) Many aggressive tax planning structures tend to feature in a cross-border context, which implies that the participating groups of companies possess a minimum of resources. On this premise,
Amendment 124 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 5 (5) Many aggressive tax planning structures tend to feature in a cross-border context, which implies that the participating groups of companies possess a minimum of resources. On this premise, for reasons of proportionality, the rules on a common base should be mandatory only for companies which belong to a group of a substantial size. For that purpose, a size- related threshold should be fixed on the basis of the total consolidated revenue of a group which files consolidated financial statements. In addition, to ensure coherence between the two steps of the CCCTB initiative, the rules on a common base should be mandatory for companies which would be considered as a group should the full initiative materialise. In order to better serve the aim of facilitating trade and investment in the internal market, the rules on a common corporate tax base should also be available, as an option, to companies which do not meet those criteria. When evaluating the impact of this directive, five years after its implementation, the Commission should examine whether the new rules should also be made mandatory for SME.
Amendment 125 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 5 (5) Many aggressive tax planning structures tend to feature in a cross-border context, which implies that the participating groups of companies possess a minimum of resources. On this premise, for reasons of proportionality, the rules on a common base should initially be mandatory only for companies which belong to a group of a substantial size. For that purpose, a size-
Amendment 126 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 5 (5) Many aggressive tax planning structures tend to feature in a cross-border
Amendment 127 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 5 a (new) (5a) For reasons of proportionality, the rules for the CCTB and CCCTB should in a first step only be mandatory for companies which belong to a group above a certain size. For that purpose, a size- related threshold should be fixed on the basis of the total consolidated revenue of a group which files consolidated financial statements. In addition, to ensure coherence between the two steps of the CCCTB initiative, the rules on a common base should be mandatory for companies which would be considered as a group. After a transitional period of several years, the new rules should be compulsory for all companies.
Amendment 128 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 5 a (new) (5a) One of the main problems encountered by the tax authorities is the impossibility of gaining access in due time to comprehensive and relevant information about MNEs' tax planning strategies. Such information should be made publicly available, in order for tax authorities to react quickly to tax risks, by assessing those risks more effectively, targeting checks and alerting about changes required to the legislation in force.
Amendment 129 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 5 a (new) (5a) Aggressive tax planning by multinational companies is a global problem that requires a global solution. The ideal way to tackle this problem is on an internationally agreed basis through the OECD Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS) initiative.
Amendment 130 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 5 a (new) (5a) Figures on Member States’ effective rates shall be based on homogeneous and comparable data provided by companies.
Amendment 131 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 5 b (new) (5b) In order to put a halt to the detrimental race to the bottom in tax rates across the EU, the Commission should put forward a proposal ensuring a minimum effective corporate tax rate of 25% across Member States.
Amendment 132 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 5 b (new) (5b) In order to create a level playing field and to eliminate tax competition and the resulting race to the bottom as regards corporate taxation levels, minimum effective corporate tax rate should be introduced in parallel of the common consolidated corporate tax base so as to avoid transferring unfair competition on the tax base to unfair competition on the tax rates. This Directive therefore sets a minimum corporate tax rate at 20% in each Member State, applicable two years after the date of implementation of the present Directive, with a possibility for Member States to extend this deadline up to five years subject to a prior authorisation by the Commission.
Amendment 133 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 5 c (new) (5c) A severe lack in investments has been one of the root causes of the Union economic troubles but the Union budget is still insufficiently geared towards future- oriented investments. Creating additional Union budget related resources is possible according to the existing flexibilities of the Treaty. This proposal, together with the proposal for a CCCTB, should therefore aim at having a part of the EU fiscal revenues financed from the common consolidated corporate tax base.
Amendment 134 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 6 Amendment 135 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 6 (6) One of the main shortcomings of the current international tax rules is that the taxing right of a jurisdiction only arises when the business has a physical presence in that jurisdiction. It is necessary to redefine the concept of a permanent establishment situated in the Union and belonging to a taxpayer who is resident for tax purposes within the Union to also include a digital presence, without hampering the potential of the digital sector. The aim would be to ensure that all concerned taxpayers share a common
Amendment 136 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 6 (6) It is necessary to define the concept of a permanent establishment situated in the Union and belonging to a taxpayer who is resident for tax purposes within the Union. The aim would be to ensure that all concerned taxpayers share a common understanding and to exclude the possibility of a mismatch due to divergent definitions.
Amendment 137 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 6 (6) It is necessary to define the concept of a permanent establishment situated in the Union and belonging to a taxpayer who is resident for tax purposes within the Union. The aim would be to ensure that all concerned taxpayers share a common understanding and to exclude the possibility of a mismatch due to divergent definitions.
Amendment 138 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 6 (6) Too often, multinational companies make arrangements to transfer their profits to tax havens without paying any or very low rates of tax. The concept of permanent establishment will provide a precise, binding definition of the criteria which must be met if a multinational company is to prove that it is situated in a given country. This will force multinational companies to pay their taxes fairly. It is necessary to define the concept of a permanent establishment situated in the Union and belonging to a taxpayer who
Amendment 139 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 6 (6) It is necessary to define the concept of a permanent establishment situated in the Union and belonging to a taxpayer who is resident for tax purposes within the Union. The aim would be to ensure that all
Amendment 140 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 6 a (new) Amendment 141 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 6 a (new) (6a) Taxing the digital economy at a global level has been a number one priority in the OECD BEPS Action Plan. Therefore, any attempt made to impose a new tax on the digital economy at EU level could put Europe at a mismatch to the rest of the world given that the digital economy is global in nature. As part of the OECD BEPS Action Plan, a report with recommendations on taxing the digital economy at a global level will be published in Spring 2018; any decision to plan for a tax on the digital economy at an EU level in advance of this report would be unnecessary and premature.
Amendment 142 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 6 a (new) (6a) Current corporate tax legislation is not suited to the challenges of the digital economy. Digital services are largely decoupled from physical establishments. Current corporate tax legislation therefore needs to be expanded to include the concept of virtual establishment. Particular account should be taken in this connection of the work carried out by the OECD on an internationally consistent set of rules.
Amendment 143 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 7 Amendment 144 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 7 (7) To mitigate tax avoidance risks, which distort the functioning of the internal market, a common corporate tax base should be designed broadly. Based on this premise, all revenues should be taxable unless expressly exempted.
Amendment 145 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 8 (8) Taxable revenues should be
Amendment 146 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 8 (8) Taxable revenues should be reduced by business expenses and
Amendment 147 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 8 (8) Taxable revenues should be reduced by business expenses and certain other items. Deductible business expenses should normally include all costs relating to sales and expenses linked to the production, maintenance and securing of income. To support innovation in the economy and modernise the internal market,
Amendment 148 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 8 (8) Taxable revenues should be reduced by business expenses and certain other items. Deductible business expenses should normally include all costs relating to sales and expenses linked to the production, maintenance and securing of income. To support innovation in the economy and moderni
Amendment 149 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 8 (8) Taxable revenues should be reduced by business expenses and certain other items. Deductible business expenses should normally include all costs relating to sales and expenses linked to the production, maintenance and securing of income. To support innovation in the economy and modernise the internal market, deductions should be provided for research and development costs relating to expenses on staff, subcontractors, agency workers and freelancers, including super- deductions, and those should be fully expensed in the year incurred (with the exception of immovable property). Small starting companies without associated enterprises which are particularly innovative (a category which will in particular cover start-ups) should also be supported through enhanced super- deductions for research and development costs. In order to ensure legal certainty, there should also be a list of non-deductible expenses. A clear definition of costs of research and development is needed to avoid misuse of the deductions.
Amendment 150 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 8 (8) Taxable revenues should be reduced by business expenses and certain other items. Deductible business expenses should normally include all costs relating to sales and expenses linked to the
Amendment 151 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 8 (8) Taxable revenues should be reduced by business expenses and certain other items. Deductible business expenses should normally include all costs relating to sales and expenses linked to the production, maintenance and securing of income. To support innovation in the economy and modernise the internal market, deductions should be provided for research and development costs, including super-deductions, and those should be fully expensed in the year incurred (with the exception of immovable property). Small starting companies without associated enterprises which are particularly innovative (a category which will in
Amendment 152 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 9 Amendment 153 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 9 (9) Recent developments in international taxation have highlighted that, in an effort to reduce their global tax liability, multinational groups of companies have increasingly engaged in tax avoidance arrangements leading to base erosion and profit shifting, through excessive interest payments. It is therefore necessary to limit the deductibility of interest (and other financial) costs, in order to discourage such practices. In that context, the deductibility of interest (and other financial) costs should only be allowed without restrictions to the extent that those costs can be offset against taxable interest (and other financial) revenues. Any surplus of interest costs should however be subject to deductibility restrictions, to be determined by reference to a taxpayer’s taxable earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortisation (‘EBITDA’). Member States could further restrict the amount of the deductibility of interest (and other financial) costs to ensure a higher level of protection.
Amendment 154 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 9 (9) Recent developments in international taxation have highlighted that, in an effort to reduce their global tax liability, multinational groups of companies have increasingly engaged in tax avoidance arrangements leading to base erosion and profit shifting, through excessive interest payments. It is therefore necessary to limit the deductibility of interest (and other financial) costs, in order to discourage such practices.
Amendment 155 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 10 (10) The fact that interest paid out on loans is deductible from the tax base of a taxpayer whilst this is not the case for profit distributions creates a definitive advantage in favour of financing through debt as opposed to equity. Given the risks that this entails for the indebtedness of companies, it is critical to provide for
Amendment 156 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 10 (10) The fact that interest paid out on loans is deductible from the tax base of a taxpayer whilst this is not the case for profit distributions creates a definitive advantage in favour of financing through debt as opposed to equity. Given the risks that this entails for the indebtedness of companies, it is critical to provide for measures which neutralise the current bias against equity financing.
Amendment 157 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 10 (10) The fact that interest paid out on loans is deductible from the tax base of a taxpayer whilst this is not the case for profit distributions creates a definitive advantage in favour of financing through debt as opposed to equity. Given the risks that this entails for the indebtedness of companies, it is critical to
Amendment 158 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 10 (10) The fact that interest paid out on loans is deductible from the tax base of a taxpayer whilst this is not the case for profit distributions creates a definitive advantage in favour of financing through debt as opposed to equity. Given the risks that this entails for the indebtedness of companies, it is critical to provide for measures which neutralise the current bias against equity financing. In this light, it is
Amendment 159 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 10 (10) The fact that interest paid out on loans is deductible from the tax base of a taxpayer whilst this is not the case for profit distributions creates a definitive advantage in favour of financing through debt as opposed to equity. Given the risks
Amendment 160 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 12 Amendment 161 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 12 (12) In order to discourage the shifting of passive (mainly, financial) income out of highly-taxed companies, any losses that such companies may incur at the end of a tax year should be presumed to mostly correspond to the results of trading activity. Based on that premise, taxpayers should be allowed to carry losses forward
Amendment 162 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 12 (12) In order to discourage the shifting of passive (mainly, financial) income out of highly-taxed companies, any losses that such companies may incur at the end of a tax year should be presumed to mostly correspond to the results of trading activity. Based on that premise, taxpayers should be allowed to carry losses forward indefinitely with
Amendment 163 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 12 (12) In order to discourage the shifting of passive (mainly, financial) income out of highly-taxed companies, any losses that such companies may incur at the end of a
Amendment 164 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 13 Amendment 165 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 13 Amendment 166 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 13 Amendment 167 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 13 Amendment 168 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 13 (13) In order to facilitate the cash-flow capacity of businesses
Amendment 169 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 14 Amendment 170 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 14 (14) To avoid the base erosion of higher tax jurisdictions through shifting profits via inflated transfer prices towards lower tax countries,
Amendment 171 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 15 (15) It is crucial to provide for appropriate anti-tax avoidance measures in order to reinforce the resilience of the rules on a common base against aggressive tax planning practices. Specifically, the system should include a strong and effective general anti-abuse rule (‘GAAR’), supplemented by measures designed to curb specific types of avoidance. Given that GAARs have the function of tackling abusive tax practices that have not yet been dealt with through specifically targeted provisions, they fill in gaps, which should not affect the applicability of specific anti- avoidance rules. Within the Union, GAARs should be applied to arrangements that are not genuine. It is furthermore important to ensure that the GAAR apply in a uniform manner to domestic situations, cross-border situations within the Union and cross- border situations involving companies established in third countries, so that their scope and results of application do not differ.
Amendment 172 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 15 (15) It is crucial to provide for appropriate anti-tax avoidance measures in order to reinforce the resilience of the rules on a common base against aggressive tax planning practices. Specifically, the system should include an effective general anti- abuse rule (‘GAAR’), supplemented by measures designed to curb specific types of
Amendment 173 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 16 (16) As far as specific anti-tax avoidance measures are concerned, it is often necessary to ascertain the level of taxation on the other side of the border, in order to determine whether the taxpayer is liable to pay tax on foreign generated income. This would create a level-playing field regarding the level of tax and competition within the internal market and also protect the market from base erosion vis-à-vis third countries. In this context, it is necessary to provide for a switch-over clause targeting some types of income earned in a third country, such as profit distributions and proceeds from the disposal of shares, in order to ensure that income be taxable in the Union if it has been taxed below a certain level in a third country. Controlled foreign company (‘CFC’) legislation is also an indispensable
Amendment 174 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 16 (16)
Amendment 175 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 16 (16) As far as specific anti-tax avoidance measures are concerned, it is often necessary to ascertain the level of taxation on the other side of the border, in order to determine whether the taxpayer is liable to pay tax on foreign generated income. This would create a level-playing field regarding the level of tax and competition within the internal market and also protect the market from base erosion vis-à-vis third countries.
Amendment 176 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 17 (17) Taking into account that the effect of branch and hybrid mismatches is usually a double deduction (i.e. deduction in both states) or a deduction of the income in one state without inclusion in the tax base of another, such situations clearly affect the internal market by distorting its mechanisms and creating loopholes for tax avoidance practices to flourish. Given that mismatches generate from national differences in the legal qualification of certain types of entities or financial payments, they normally do not occur amongst companies which apply the common rules for calculating their tax base. Mismatches would however persist in the interaction between the framework of the common base and national or third- country corporate tax systems. To neutralise the effects of branch and hybrid mismatch arrangements, it is necessary to lay down
Amendment 177 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 17 (17) Taking into account that the effect of hybrid mismatches is usually a double deduction (i.e. deduction in both states) or a deduction of the income in one state without inclusion in the tax base of another, such situations clearly affect the internal market by distorting its mechanisms and creating loopholes for tax avoidance practices to flourish. Given that mismatches generate from national differences in the legal qualification of certain types of entities or financial payments, they normally do not occur amongst companies which apply the common rules for calculating their tax base. Mismatches would however persist in the interaction between the framework of the common base and national or third- country corporate tax systems.
Amendment 178 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 17 (17) Taking into account that the effect of hybrid mismatches is usually a double deduction (i.e. deduction in both states) or a deduction of the income in one state without inclusion in the tax base of another, such situations clearly affect the internal market by distorting its mechanisms and creating loopholes for tax avoidance practices to flourish. Given that mismatches generate from national differences in the legal qualification of certain types of entities or financial payments, they normally do not occur amongst companies which apply the common rules for calculating their tax base. Mismatches would however persist in the interaction between the framework of the common base and national or third- country corporate tax systems. To neutralise the effects of hybrid mismatches or related arrangements, it is necessary to lay down rules whereby one of the two jurisdictions in a mismatch deny the deduction of a payment or ensures that the corresponding income is included in the corporate tax base.
Amendment 179 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 17 a (new) (17a) Member States should not be prevented from introducing additional anti-tax avoidance measures in order to reduce the negative effects of shifting profits to low-tax countries outside the Union, which do not necessarily automatically exchange tax information according to Union standards.
Amendment 180 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 17 a (new) (17a) Since consolidation is only part of the second phase of the new approach to CCCTB, there will be a need for effective dispute resolution mechanisms. Furthermore, taking into account the fact that not all companies will be within the mandatory scope of the upcoming CCCTB, it can be expected that even after the implementation of this directive, a number of double taxation disputes will continue to arise, for which the mechanisms laid down by the Council Directive on Double Taxation Dispute Resolution Mechanisms in the EU shall apply.
Amendment 181 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 19 Amendment 182 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 19 (19) In order to supplement or amend certain non-essential elements of this Directive, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union should be delegated to the Commission with respect of (i) taking into account changes to the laws of Member States concerning the company forms and corporate taxes and amend Annexes I and II accordingly; (ii)
Amendment 183 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 19 (19) In order to supplement or amend certain non-essential elements of this
Amendment 184 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 20 Amendment 185 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 21 Amendment 186 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 21 a (new) (21a) Within a period of six months after the adoption of this Directive, the Commission shall present a legislative proposal for a minimum effective tax rate at the European level, based on a comparative analysis of different national effective tax rates and Member States' best practices.
Amendment 187 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 21 a (new) (21a) Recalls that EU treasuries lose up to 5.4 billion euros in tax revenue so far from not being able to tax the two biggest digital multinationals. The reason lies in the fact that activities in countries where these enterprises do not have a physical presence cannot be ascertained by tax authorities. This is a real and urgent social injustice that should be tackled via this directive. This directive offers a way to ascertain the presence of a digital permanent establishment in a Member State. Furthermore, for a phasing in period of two years, this directive first applies to digital enterprises with a substantial size and activity within the EU.
Amendment 188 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 21 a (new) (21a) The two directives of the CCCTB proposal will enter into force at the same moment and thus imply a radical change in corporate taxation in Europe. Ahead of the implementation of this directive, national tax administrations should work in good cooperation with some selected companies as to ensure a smooth implementation. National tax administrations may encourage and incentivize companies to participate in this phase.
Amendment 189 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 22 a (new) (22a) It should be acknowledged that seven Member State national parliaments have issued reasoned opinions to state that this legislative act does not comply with the principle of subsidiarity as defined in Article 5(3) TEU.
Amendment 190 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 23 (23)
Amendment 191 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 23 (23) The Commission should be required to review the application of the Directive five years after its entry into force and report to the Council and the European Parliament on its
Amendment 192 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 23 (23) The Commission should be required to review the application of the Directive five years after its entry into force and report to the Council and the European Parliament on its operation. Member States should be required to communicate to the Commission the text of the provisions of national law which they adopt in the field covered by this Directive,
Amendment 193 #
Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 1. This Directive establishes an optional system of a common base for the taxation of c
Amendment 194 #
Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 1. This Directive establishes a system of a common base for the taxation of certain companies and lays down rules for the calculation of that base. This Directive does not establish minimum corporate tax rates, effective or statutory, and does not lay basis for introduction of minimum corporate tax rates in future.
Amendment 195 #
Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 1. This Directive establishes a system of a common base for the taxation of certain companies and lays down rules for the calculation of that base. This Directive does not establish a minimum corporate tax rate, including effective or statutory corporate tax rates, and does not provide for the introduction of minimum corporate tax rates in the future.
Amendment 196 #
Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 1. This Directive establishes a system of a common base for the taxation of certain companies and lays down rules for the calculation of that base. The Member State concerned shall decide on the amount of the corporate tax rate.
Amendment 197 #
Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 2 Amendment 198 #
Proposal for a directive Article 2 – paragraph 1 – introductory part 1. The rules of this Directive
Amendment 199 #
Proposal for a directive Article 2 – paragraph 1 – introductory part 1. The rules of this Directive shall apply to a company that is established under the laws of a Member State, including its permanent and virtual permanent establishments in other Member States, where the company meets all of the following conditions:
Amendment 200 #
Proposal for a directive Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c Amendment 201 #
Proposal for a directive Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c (c) it belongs to a consolidated group for financial accounting purposes with a total consolidated group revenue that exceeded EUR
Amendment 202 #
Proposal for a directive Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c (c) it belongs to a consolidated group for financial accounting purposes with a total consolidated group revenue that exceeded EUR
Amendment 203 #
Proposal for a directive Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c (c) it belongs to a consolidated group for financial accounting purposes with a total consolidated group revenue that exceeded EUR
Amendment 204 #
Proposal for a directive Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c (c) it belongs to a consolidated group for financial accounting purposes with a total consolidated group revenue that exceeded EUR 750 000 000 during the financial year preceding the relevant financial year. The turnover threshold shall be reduced by EUR 75 000 000 per year over a ten-year period;
Amendment 205 #
Proposal for a directive Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c (c) it belongs to a consolidated group for financial accounting purposes with a total consolidated group revenue that exceeded EUR 750 000 000 during the financial year preceding the relevant financial year; the total consolidated group revenue of EUR 750 000 000 shall be lowered to zero over a time period of ten years;
Amendment 206 #
Proposal for a directive Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c (c) it belongs to a consolidated group for financial accounting purposes with a total consolidated group revenue that exceeded EUR
Amendment 207 #
Proposal for a directive Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c (c) it belongs to a consolidated group for financial accounting purposes with a total consolidated group revenue that exceeded EUR 750 000 000 during the two financial years preceding the relevant financial year;
Amendment 208 #
Proposal for a directive Article 2 – paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Without prejudice to the conditions laid down in points (c) to (d) in paragraph1, this directive shall, for a phasing in period of two years after its implementation, apply first to a tax payer or an associated enterprise that is deemed to have a permanent establishment in the EU by offering a digital platform as laid down in article 5, paragraph 2a(new) of this directive.
Amendment 209 #
Proposal for a directive Article 2 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 This Directive shall also apply to a company that is established under the laws of a third country in respect of its permanent establishments situated in one or more Member State, where the company meets the conditions laid down in points (b) to (d) of paragraph 1. Furthermore, it shall also apply to any entity located in a Member State that is the place of effective management of the group's business within the EU, meaning the place where key management and commercial decisions related to the operations inside the EU are implemented;
Amendment 210 #
Proposal for a directive Article 2 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 This Directive
Amendment 211 #
Proposal for a directive Article 2 – paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. This Directive shall also apply to a company that is established under the laws of a third country in respect of its virtual permanent establishments that are specifically directed towards consumers or businesses in a Member State or that principally receive their revenue from activity in a Member State, where the company meets the conditions laid down in points (b) to (d) of paragraph 1.
Amendment 212 #
Proposal for a directive Article 2 – paragraph 3 Amendment 213 #
Proposal for a directive Article 2 – paragraph 3 3. A company that meets the conditions of points (a) and (b) of paragraph 1, but does not meet the conditions of points (c) or (d) of that paragraph, may opt, including for its permanent establishments situated in other Member States, to apply the rules of this Directive for a period of five tax years. That period shall automatically be extended for successive terms of five tax years, unless there is a notice of termination as referred to in Article 65(3). The conditions under points (a) and (b) of paragraph 1 shall be met each time the extension takes place. The commission should develop a tool that mitigates the administrative burden and costs for SMEs that voluntary opt-in the new system.
Amendment 214 #
Proposal for a directive Article 2 – paragraph 4 Amendment 215 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a (a) it has a right to exercise more than 25
Amendment 216 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a (a) it has a right to exercise more than 50 % of the voting rights;
Amendment 217 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b (b) it has an ownership right amounting to more than
Amendment 218 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b (b) it has an ownership right amounting to more than
Amendment 219 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. The use of letterbox companies by taxpayers operating in the Union should be prohibited. Taxpayers should communicate to tax authorities evidence demonstrating the economic substance of each of the entities in their group, as part of their annual country-by-country reporting obligations.
Amendment 220 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point 2 (2) 'non-taxpayer' means a company that does not meet the conditions of Article 2(1)
Amendment 221 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point 10 (10) 'consolidated group for financial accounting purposes' means all entities that are fully included in consolidated financial statements
Amendment 222 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point 11 (11) 'research and development' means experimental or theoretical work undertaken primarily to acquire new knowledge of the underlying foundations of phenomena and observable facts, without any particular application or use in view (basic research); original investigation undertaken in order to acquire new knowledge but directed primarily towards a specific, practical aim or objective (applied research); systematic work, drawing on knowledge gained from research and practical experience and producing additional knowledge, which is directed to producing new products or processes or to improving existing products or processes (experimental development). R&;D investments generally include the costs of labour and to a lesser extend costs of machinery and equipment, costs of buildings and other current expenses related to the research activities;
Amendment 223 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point 12 (12) 'borrowing costs' means interest expenses on all forms of debt, other costs economically equivalent to interest and expenses incurred in connection with the raising of finance, as defined in national law, including payments under profit participating loans, imputed interest on convertible bonds and zero coupon bonds, payments under alternative financing arrangements, the finance cost elements of finance lease payments, capitalised interest included in the balance sheet value of a related asset, the amortisation of capitalised interest, amounts measured by reference to a funding return under transfer pricing rules, notional interest amounts under derivative instruments or hedging arrangements related to an entity's borrowings,
Amendment 224 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point 30 a (new) (30a) 'secrecy or low tax jurisdiction' means any jurisdiction which, from 31 December 2016, meets any of the following criteria: (a) a lack of automatic exchange of information with all signatories of the multilateral competent authority agreement in line with the standards of OECD published on 21 July 2014 entitled 'Standard for Automatic Exchange of Financial Account Information in Tax Matters'; (b) no register of the ultimate beneficial owners of corporations, trusts and equivalent legal structures at least compliant with the minimum standard defined in the Directive (EU) 2015/849 of the European Parliament and of the Council; (c) laws or administrative provisions or practices which grant favourable tax treatment to undertakings irrespective of whether they engage in genuine economic activity or have a significant economic presence in the country in question.
Amendment 225 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point 30 a (new) (30a) 'secrecy or low tax jurisdiction' means any jurisdiction which, from 31 December 2016, meets any of the following criteria: (a) a lack of automatic exchange of information with all signatories of the multilateral competent authority agreement in line with the standards of OECD published on 21 July 2014 entitled 'Standard for Automatic Exchange of Financial Account Information in Tax Matters'; (b) no register of the ultimate beneficial owners of corporations, trusts and equivalent legal structures at least compliant with the minimum standard defined in the Directive (EU) 2015/849 of the European Parliament and of the Council; (c) laws or administrative provisions or practices which grant favourable tax treatment to undertakings irrespective of whether they engage in genuine economic activity or have a significant economic presence in the country in question.
Amendment 226 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point 30 a (new) (30a) ‘Secrecy or low tax jurisdictions’ shall mean any jurisdiction which, from 31 December 2016, meets any of the following criteria: (a) appears on the Council of the European Union’s list of non-cooperative jurisdictions; (b) maintains no register of the ultimate beneficial owners of corporations, trusts and equivalent legal structures at least compliant with the minimum standard defined in Directive (EU) 2015/849 of the European Parliament and of the Council; (c) levies a statutory corporate tax rate of less than 60% of the weighted average corporate tax in the Union;
Amendment 227 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point 30 a (new) (30a) 'economic substance' means factual criteria, including in the context of the digital economy, which can be used to define the taxable presence of an undertaking, such as the existence of human and physical resources specific to the entity, its management autonomy, its legal reality, the revenues it generates and, where appropriate, the nature of its assets;
Amendment 228 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point 30 b (new) (30b) 'letterbox company' means any type of legal entity which has no economic substance and which is setup purely for tax purposes;
Amendment 229 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point 31 – paragraph 1 – introductory part (31) 'hybrid mismatch' means a situation
Amendment 230 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point 31 – paragraph 1 – introductory part (31) 'hybrid mismatch' means a situation between a taxpayer and an
Amendment 231 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point 31 – paragraph 1 – point b (b) a deduction of a payment from the taxable base in the jurisdiction in which the payment has its source without a corresponding inclusion for tax purposes of the same payment in the
Amendment 232 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point 31 – paragraph 1 – point c (c) in case of differences in the treatment of a commercial presence as a permanent establishment, non-taxation of income which has its source in a jurisdiction without a corresponding inclusion for tax purposes of the same income in
Amendment 233 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point 31 – subparagraph 2 Amendment 234 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point 31 – subparagraph 3 Amendment 235 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point 33 a (new) (33a) ‘tax haven’ means a jurisdiction characterized by one or several of the following criteria: (a) no or only nominal taxation for non-residents; (b) laws or administrative practices preventing the effective exchange of tax information with other jurisdictions; (c) legal or administrative provisions preventing tax transparency or the absence of requirement of a substantial economic activity to be carried out; (d) Financial systems with external assets and liabilities out of proportion to domestic financial intermediation; (e) the existence of very specific and restricted tax advantages or certain administrative practices that provide selective advantages for tax planners;
Amendment 236 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point 33 a (new) (33a) ‘virtual permanent establishment’ means an undertaking’s significant digital presence in a Member State, with a minimum turnover of EUR 5 000 000, the objective of which is to provide digital offerings;
Amendment 237 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point 33 b (new) (33b) 'permanent establishment' means a fixed place of business situated in a Member State through which the business of a company of another Member State is wholly or partly carried on; in the case of companies engaging in fully or partly dematerialized digital activities, a virtual permanent establishment means a taxpayer having a significant economic presence in the jurisdiction directed towards consumers or businesses in this country and based on criteria including number of digital contracts concluded with costumers in the jurisdiction, profits coming from those digital activities, volume of digital content and data collected and number of registered users and views or downloads. Attention shall also be put to whether the virtual establishment is conducting its business under the top level domain of the Member State or of the Union or, in relation to mobile application based businesses, is distributing its application via the Member State specific part of a mobile application distribution centre.
Amendment 238 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 The Commission may adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 66 in order to update current definitions or lay down definitions of more concepts.
Amendment 239 #
Proposal for a directive Article 5 – paragraph 1 – introductory part 1. A taxpayer shall be considered to have a permanent establishment or a virtual permanent establishment in a Member State other than the Member State in which it is resident for tax purposes when it has a fixed place or a digital presence in that other Member State through which it carries on its business, wholly or partly, including in particular:
Amendment 240 #
Proposal for a directive Article 5 – paragraph 1 – introductory part 1. A taxpayer shall be considered to have a permanent establishment in a Member State other than the Member State in which it is resident for tax purposes when it has a fixed place or a digital presence in that other Member State through which it carries on
Amendment 241 #
Proposal for a directive Article 5 – paragraph 1 – introductory part 1. A taxpayer shall be considered to have a permanent establishment in a Member State other than the Member State in which it is resident for tax purposes when it has a fixed or virtual place in that other Member State through which it carries on its business, wholly or partly, including in particular:
Amendment 242 #
Proposal for a directive Article 5 – paragraph 1 – introductory part 1. A taxpayer shall be considered to have a permanent establishment in
Amendment 243 #
Proposal for a directive Article 5 – paragraph 1 – introductory part 1. A taxpayer shall be considered to have a permanent establishment in a Member State other than
Amendment 244 #
Proposal for a directive Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point f a (new) (fa) a digital platform or any other digital form remotely accessible to users.
Amendment 245 #
Proposal for a directive Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point f a (new) (fa) a virtual platform.
Amendment 246 #
Proposal for a directive Article 5 – paragraph 2 a (new) Amendment 247 #
Proposal for a directive Article 5 – paragraph 5 – point b (b) For the purposes of this Article, a person is 'closely related' to a taxpayer if one possesses, directly or indirectly, a right to exercise more than 25
Amendment 248 #
Proposal for a directive Article 5 – paragraph 6 a (new) 6a. Member States shall align their bilateral tax treaties to this common definition.
Amendment 249 #
Proposal for a directive Article 5 a (new) Article 5a Virtual permanent establishment Article 5 shall also apply to virtual permanent establishments. A virtual permanent establishment is an undertaking’s significant digital presence in a Member State, with a minimum turnover of EUR 5 000 000, the objective of which is to provide digital offerings.
Amendment 250 #
Proposal for a directive Article 5 b (new) Article 5b By 31 December 2018, taking particular account of ongoing work at OECD level, the Commission shall adopt a delegated act defining ‘virtual permanent establishment’ on the basis of the following criteria: – volume of data collected and used – volume of digital content generated – number of users – number of digital contracts
Amendment 251 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 4 4. The tax base shall be calculated for each tax year
Amendment 252 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point c Amendment 253 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point c (c) proceeds from a disposal of shares, provided that the taxpayer has maintained a minimum holding of 10 % in the capital or 10 % of the voting rights of the company
Amendment 254 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point d Amendment 255 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point d (d) received profit distributions, provided that the taxpayer
Amendment 256 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point d (d) received profit distributions, provided that the taxpayer has maintained a minimum holding of 10 % in the capital or 10 % of the voting rights of the distributing company for 12 consecutive months, with the exception of profit distributions from shares held for trading as referred to in Article 21(4) and profit distributions received by life insurance undertakings in accordance with point (c) of Article 28, as well as national profit distributions;
Amendment 257 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point e Amendment 258 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 Amendment 259 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 1 1. Expenses shall be deductible only to the extent that they
Amendment 260 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 2 2. The expenses referred to in paragraph 1 shall include all costs of sales and all expenses, net of deductible value added tax, that the taxpayer incurred with a view to obtaining or securing income
Amendment 261 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 2 2. The expenses referred to in paragraph 1 shall include all costs of sales and all expenses, net of deductible value added tax, that the taxpayer incurred with a view to obtaining or securing income, including costs for research and development - in accordance with the OECD's Modified Nexus Approach for IP regimes - and costs incurred in raising equity or debt for the purposes of the business.
Amendment 262 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 2 2. The expenses referred to in paragraph 1 shall include all costs of sales and all expenses, net of deductible value added tax, that the taxpayer incurred with a view to obtaining or securing income, including costs for research and development, provided that are strictly limited to the actual costs of inputs for genuine R&D expenditures, and costs incurred in raising equity or debt for the purposes of the business.
Amendment 263 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 2 2. The expenses referred to in paragraph 1 shall include all costs of sales and all expenses, net of deductible value added tax, that the taxpayer incurred with a view to obtaining or securing income, including
Amendment 264 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. The costs for research and development referred to in paragraph 2 shall include only expenses on staff, subcontractors, agency workers and freelancers.
Amendment 265 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. By way of derogation to paragraph 2, expenses for research and development shall not be deductible as far as they concern financial undertakings as defined in Article 3(29).
Amendment 266 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 2 b (new) 2b. Recurring costs relating to environmental protection and reduction of carbon emissions may also be regarded as deductible expenses.
Amendment 267 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 3 Amendment 268 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 3 Amendment 269 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 Amendment 270 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 Amendment 271 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 Amendment 272 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 In addition to the amounts which are deductible as costs for research and development in accordance with paragraph 2, the taxpayer may also deduct, per tax year, an extra
Amendment 273 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 In addition to the amounts which are deductible as costs for research and development in accordance with paragraphs 2 and 2a, the taxpayer may
Amendment 274 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 In addition to the amounts which are deductible as costs for research and development in accordance with paragraph 2, the taxpayer may also deduct, per tax year, an extra 50% of such costs,
Amendment 275 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 Amendment 276 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 Amendment 277 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 Amendment 278 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 – introductory part By way of derogation from the first subparagraph, the taxpayer may deduct an extra
Amendment 279 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 a (new) Member States shall not grant additional R&D tax incentives to taxpayers on the outputs of their R&D processes.
Amendment 280 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Member States shall put in place national innovation action plans with the aim of effectively stimulating research and development investments, including by granting public subsidies or guaranteed state loans. Member States shall transmit every year their action plans to the European Commission which shall review them and make recommendations, in particular with a view to avoid abuses of national R&D incentives.
Amendment 281 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 4 Amendment 282 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Member States may accord favourable treatment to environmentally sound and electric cars by means of specific tax incentives.
Amendment 289 #
Proposal for a directive Article 11 – paragraph 1 1. For the purposes of this Article, 'AGI equity base' means
Amendment 290 #
Proposal for a directive Article 11 – paragraph 2 – point a (a) 'capital and reserves', as described in letter A., under 'Capital, reserves and liabilities' in Annex III to Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council24, with the exception of the revaluation reserves referred to under III.; __________________ 24 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 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).
Amendment 291 #
Proposal for a directive Article 11 – paragraph 2 – point b (b) 'capital and reserves', as described in letter L. in Annex IV to Directive 2013/34/EU, with the exception of the revaluation reserves referred to under III.;
Amendment 292 #
Proposal for a directive Article 11 – paragraph 2 – point c (c) 'equity', as defined in the International Financial Reporting Standards which are adopted and used in the Union pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1606/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council25, with the exception of revaluation reserves. __________________ 25 Regulation (EC) No 1606/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 July 2002 on the application of international accounting standards (OJ L 243, 11.9.2002, p. 1).
Amendment 293 #
Proposal for a directive Article 11 – paragraph 3 3. An amount equal to the defined yield on the AGI equity base increases shall be deductible from the taxable base of a taxpayer according to paragraphs 1 to 6.
Amendment 294 #
Proposal for a directive Article 11 – paragraph 4 4. AGI equity base increases
Amendment 295 #
Proposal for a directive Article 11 a (new) Amendment 296 #
Proposal for a directive Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point b (b) 50 % of
Amendment 297 #
Proposal for a directive Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point c (c) the transfer of retained earnings to a reserve that forms part of the equity of the company, except for the earnings retained to a reserve by cooperative enterprises and cooperative consortia, both during the current activity of the company and after its expiration, in accordance with national tax rules;
Amendment 298 #
Proposal for a directive Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point c (c) the transfer of retained earnings to a reserve that forms part of the equity of the company, except for the earnings retained to a reserve by cooperatives enterprises and consortia both during the current activity of the company and after its expiration;
Amendment 301 #
Proposal for a directive Article 13 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 Exceeding borrowing costs shall be deductible in the tax year in which they are incurred for maximum of
Amendment 302 #
Proposal for a directive Article 13 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 Exceeding borrowing costs shall be deductible in the tax year in which they are incurred for maximum of
Amendment 303 #
Proposal for a directive Article 13 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 Exceeding borrowing costs shall be deductible in the tax year in which they are incurred for maximum of
Amendment 304 #
Proposal for a directive Article 13 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 Exceeding borrowing costs shall be deductible in the tax year in which they are incurred for maximum of
Amendment 305 #
Proposal for a directive Article 13 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 For the purposes of this Article, where a taxpayer is permitted or required to act on behalf of a group, as defined in the rules of a national group taxation system, the entire group shall be treated as a taxpayer. In those circumstances, exceeding borrowing costs and the EBITDA shall be calculated for the entire group. The amount of EUR
Amendment 306 #
Proposal for a directive Article 13 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 For the purposes of this Article, where a taxpayer is permitted or required to act on behalf of a group, as defined in the rules of a national group taxation system, the entire group shall be treated as a taxpayer. In those circumstances, exceeding borrowing costs and the EBITDA shall be calculated for the entire group. The amount of EUR
Amendment 307 #
Proposal for a directive Article 13 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 For the purposes of this Article, where a taxpayer is permitted or required to act on behalf of a group, as defined in the rules of a national group taxation system, the entire group shall be treated as a taxpayer. In those circumstances, exceeding borrowing costs and the EBITDA shall be calculated for the entire group. The amount
Amendment 308 #
Proposal for a directive Article 13 – paragraph 4 Amendment 309 #
Proposal for a directive Article 13 – paragraph 6 6. Exceeding borrowing costs that cannot be deducted in a given tax year shall be carried forward
Amendment 310 #
Proposal for a directive Article 13 – paragraph 6 6. Exceeding borrowing costs that cannot be deducted in a given tax year shall be carried forward
Amendment 311 #
Proposal for a directive Article 13 – paragraph 7 Amendment 312 #
Proposal for a directive Article 13 – paragraph 7 Amendment 313 #
Proposal for a directive Article 13 – paragraph 7 7. Paragraphs 1 to 6 shall not apply to financial undertakings, including those that are part of a consolidated group for financial accounting purposes for a duration of five years starting on the date of entry into force of this directive.
Amendment 314 #
Proposal for a directive Article 13 – paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. Five years after the implementation date of this Directive, Member States shall no longer apply paragraphs 2 to X (currently 2, 3 and 6).
Amendment 315 #
Proposal for a directive Article 13 a (new) Article 13a Royalties limitation rule 1. Royalty costs shall be fully deductible in the tax year in which they are incurred if the corresponding income with the recipient of the royalty or licence fee payments by the taxpayer is subject to an effective tax rate at least as high than the effective tax rate that would have applied for the taxpayer in case of non- deductibility. The deductibility of royalty costs shall be limited in time to three years so as to consider the contribution to the global brand value of the different entities in the group. 2. Royalty costs for which the corresponding income with the recipient of the royalty and licence fee payments is, at its final destination, subject to an effective tax rate lower than the effective tax rate that would apply for the taxpayer in case of non-deductibility shall only be deductible proportionally to the difference in effective tax rates. For the purpose of this paragraph, "proportional" means that for x% difference between the effective tax rates applicable for the taxpayer and the final recipient of the royalty income, a share of x% of the royalty costs are deductible for the taxpayer.
Amendment 316 #
Proposal for a directive Article 14 – paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. By way of an exception, the benefits granted by cooperative enterprises and cooperative consortia to their own members shall be treated as deductible expenses, in accordance with national tax rules.
Amendment 317 #
Proposal for a directive Article 14 – paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. The benefits granted by cooperatives enterprises and consortia to their own members are in any case deductible.
Amendment 318 #
Proposal for a directive Article 14 a (new) Article 14a Specific exemptions The earnings retained to a reserve by cooperatives and consortia, both during the current activity of the company and after its expiration, as well as the benefits granted by cooperatives and consortia to their own members are in any case deductible whenever the deductibility is allowed by fiscal national legislations.
Amendment 319 #
Proposal for a directive Article 19 – paragraph 2 2. The costs of stocks and work-in- progress shall be measured consistently
Amendment 320 #
Proposal for a directive Article 19 – paragraph 3 3. The cost of stocks and work-in- progress involving items that ordinarily are not interchangeable and goods or services which are produced or supplied respectively and segregated for specific
Amendment 321 #
Proposal for a directive Article 20 – paragraph 1 – point b Amendment 322 #
Proposal for a directive Article 22 Amendment 323 #
Proposal for a directive Article 23 – paragraph 2 – point b (b) if the term of the provision is 12 months or longer and there is no agreed discount rate, the provision shall be discounted at
Amendment 324 #
Proposal for a directive Article 23 – paragraph 3 Amendment 325 #
Proposal for a directive Article 25 – paragraph 2 Amendment 326 #
Proposal for a directive Article 29 Amendment 327 #
Proposal for a directive Article 29 Amendment 328 #
Proposal for a directive Article 33 Amendment 329 #
Proposal for a directive Article 41 Amendment 330 #
Proposal for a directive Article 41 – paragraph 1 1. Losses
Amendment 331 #
Proposal for a directive Article 41 – paragraph 1 1. Losses incurred in a tax year by a resident taxpayer or a permanent establishment of a non-resident taxpayer may be carried forward and deducted in subsequent tax years,
Amendment 332 #
Proposal for a directive Article 41 – paragraph 2 2.
Amendment 333 #
Proposal for a directive Article 42 Amendment 334 #
Proposal for a directive Article 42 Amendment 335 #
Proposal for a directive Article 42 Amendment 336 #
Proposal for a directive Article 42 Amendment 337 #
Proposal for a directive Article 42 Amendment 338 #
Proposal for a directive Article 42 Amendment 339 #
Proposal for a directive Article 45 a (new) Article 45a Effective Tax Contribution As long as the threshold laid down in point (c) of Article 2(1) of this directive still is in place, Member States shall monitor and publish the effective tax contribution of SMEs and MNEs across the Member States, as to ensure a level playing field.
Amendment 340 #
Proposal for a directive Article 47 A
Amendment 341 #
Proposal for a directive Article 53 Amendment 342 #
Proposal for a directive Article 53 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 By way of derogation from points (c) and (d) of Article 8, a taxpayer shall not be exempt from tax on foreign income that the taxpayer received as a profit distribution from an entity in a different Member State or a third country or as proceeds from the disposal of shares held in an entity in a third country or another Member State where that entity in its country of tax residence is subject to a
Amendment 343 #
Proposal for a directive Article 53 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 By way of derogation from points (c) and (d) of Article 8, a taxpayer shall not be exempt from tax on foreign income that the taxpayer received as a profit distribution from an entity in a third country or as proceeds from the disposal of shares held in an entity in a third country where that entity in its country of tax residence is subject to a
Amendment 344 #
Proposal for a directive Article 53 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 By way of derogation from points (c) and (d) of Article 8, a taxpayer shall not be exempt from tax on foreign income that the taxpayer received as a profit distribution from an entity in a third country or as proceeds from the disposal of shares held in an entity in a third country where that entity in its country of tax residence is subject to a statutory corporate tax rate
Amendment 345 #
Proposal for a directive Article 53 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 By way of derogation from points (c) and (d) of Article 8, a taxpayer shall not be exempt from tax on foreign income that the taxpayer received as a profit distribution from an entity in a third country or as proceeds from the disposal of shares held in an entity in a third country where that entity in its country of tax residence is subject to a
Amendment 346 #
Proposal for a directive Article 53 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 By way of derogation from points (c) and (d) of Article 8, a taxpayer shall not be exempt from tax on foreign income that the taxpayer received as a profit distribution
Amendment 347 #
Proposal for a directive Article 53 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new) In order to ensure the effectiveness of the measures laid down in the first subparagraph, the Commission shall by no later than 31 December 2018 put forward a legislative proposal for a minimum effective tax rate of 25% across Member States.
Amendment 348 #
Proposal for a directive Article 53 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 Amendment 349 #
Proposal for a directive Article 53 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 Amendment 350 #
Proposal for a directive Article 53 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 Amendment 351 #
Proposal for a directive Article 55 – paragraph 1 1. A deduction from the tax liability (‘tax credit’) of a taxpayer shall be allowed where that taxpayer derives income that has been taxed in another Member State or in a third country
Amendment 352 #
Proposal for a directive Article 57 – paragraph 1 Amendment 353 #
Proposal for a directive Article 58 – paragraph 1 1. For the purposes of calculating the tax base under the rules of this Directive, a Member State shall disregard an arrangement or a series of arrangements
Amendment 354 #
Proposal for a directive Article 58 – paragraph 1 1. For the purposes of calculating the tax base under the rules of this Directive, a Member State shall disregard an arrangement or a series of arrangements which, having been put in place for the
Amendment 355 #
Proposal for a directive Article 58 – paragraph 1 1. For the purposes of calculating the tax base under the rules of this Directive, a Member State shall disregard an arrangement or a series of arrangements which, having been put in place for the
Amendment 356 #
Proposal for a directive Article 58 – paragraph 2 2. For the purposes of paragraph 1, an arrangement or a series thereof shall be regarded as non-genuine to the extent that they are not, in whole or in part, put in place for valid commercial reasons that reflect economic reality and one of their main purpose is the artificial shifting of profits out of the EU.
Amendment 357 #
Proposal for a directive Article 59 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part An entity, a trust, a partnership or a permanent establishment of which the profits are not subject to tax or are exempt from tax in the Member State of its head office’, shall be treated as a controlled foreign company where the following conditions are met:
Amendment 358 #
Proposal for a directive Article 59 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a (a) in the case of an entity, the taxpayer itself, or together with its associated enterprises, holds a direct or indirect participation of more than 50 % of the voting rights, or owns directly or indirectly more than 50 % of capital or is entitled to receive more than 50 % of the profits of that entity or can be considered the ultimate place of effective management of the entity meaning the place where key management and commercial decisions of the entity that are necessary for the conduct of the entity’s business are in substance made; and
Amendment 359 #
Proposal for a directive Article 59 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a (a) in the case of an entity, the taxpayer itself, or together with its associated enterprises, holds a direct or indirect participation of more than 50 % of the voting rights, or owns directly or indirectly more than 50 % of capital or is entitled to receive more than 50 % of the profits of that entity
Amendment 360 #
Proposal for a directive Article 59 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b (b)
Amendment 361 #
Proposal for a directive Article 59 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b (b) the actual corporate tax rate paid by the entity, trust, partnership or permanent establishment on its profits is lower than 95% of the
Amendment 362 #
Proposal for a directive Article 59 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b (b)
Amendment 363 #
Proposal for a directive Article 59 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 Amendment 364 #
Proposal for a directive Article 59 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part Where an entity or permanent establishment is treated as a controlled foreign company under paragraph 1,
Amendment 365 #
Proposal for a directive Article 59 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a Amendment 366 #
Proposal for a directive Article 59 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b Amendment 367 #
Proposal for a directive Article 59 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point c Amendment 368 #
Proposal for a directive Article 59 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point d Amendment 369 #
Proposal for a directive Article 59 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point d a (new) (da) income from immovable property, unless the Member State of the taxpayer would not have been entitled to tax the income under an agreement concluded with a third country;
Amendment 370 #
Proposal for a directive Article 59 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point e Amendment 371 #
Proposal for a directive Article 59 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point f Amendment 372 #
Proposal for a directive Article 59 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point f (f) income from
Amendment 373 #
Proposal for a directive Article 59 – paragraph 3 Amendment 374 #
Proposal for a directive Article 59 – paragraph 3 Amendment 375 #
Proposal for a directive Article 59 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 An entity or permanent establishment shall not be treated as a controlled foreign company as referred to in paragraph 1 where not more than
Amendment 377 #
Proposal for a directive Article 61 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 To the extent that a hybrid mismatch between Member States results in a double deduction of the same payment, expenses or losses, the deduction shall be
Amendment 378 #
Proposal for a directive Article 61 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 To the extent that a hybrid mismatch involving a third country results in a double deduction of the same payment, expenses or losses, the Member State concerned shall deny the deduction of such payment, expenses or losses, unless the third country has already done so. The burden of proof to demonstrate that a third country has denied the deduction lies on the taxpayer.
Amendment 379 #
Proposal for a directive Article 61 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 To the extent that a hybrid mismatch involving a third country results in a double deduction of the same payment, expenses or losses, the Member State concerned shall deny the deduction of such payment, expenses or losses, unless the third country has already done so. The burden of proof of this denial shall be on the taxpayer.
Amendment 380 #
Proposal for a directive Article 61 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 To the extent that a hybrid mismatch between Member States results in a deduction without inclusion, the Member State
Amendment 381 #
Proposal for a directive Article 61 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – introductory part To the extent that a hybrid mismatch that involves a third country results in a deduction without inclusion
Amendment 382 #
Proposal for a directive Article 61 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – point a Amendment 383 #
Proposal for a directive Article 61 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – point b Amendment 384 #
Proposal for a directive Article 61 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – point b (b) if the payment has its source in a third country, the Member State concerned shall require the taxpayer to include such payment in the taxable base, unless the third country has already denied the deduction or has required that payment to be included. The burden of proof of this denial of deduction or requirement of inclusion shall be on the taxpayer.
Amendment 385 #
Proposal for a directive Article 61 – paragraph 4 4. To the extent that a payment by a taxpayer to an associated enterprise in a third country is set off directly or indirectly against a payment, expenses or losses which due to a hybrid mismatch are deductible in two different jurisdictions outside the Union, the Member State of the taxpayer shall deny the deduction of the payment by the taxpayer to an associated enterprise in a third country from the taxable base, unless one of the third countries involved has already denied the deduction of the payment, expenses or losses that would be deductible in two different jurisdictions. The burden of proof of this denial shall be on the taxpayer.
Amendment 386 #
Proposal for a directive Article 61 – paragraph 5 5. To the extent that the corresponding inclusion of a deductible payment by a taxpayer to an associated enterprise in a third country is set off directly or indirectly
Amendment 387 #
Proposal for a directive Article 61a Amendment 388 #
Proposal for a directive Article 61a – paragraph 1 To the extent that a payment, expenses or losses of a taxpayer who is resident for tax purposes in both a Member State and a third country, in accordance with the laws of that Member State and that third country, are deductible from the taxable base in both jurisdictions and that payment, those expenses or losses can be set-off in the Member State of the taxpayer against taxable income that is not included in the third country, the Member State of the taxpayer shall deny the deduction of the payment, expenses or losses, unless the third country has already done so. The burden of proof of this denial shall be on the taxpayer.
Amendment 389 #
Proposal for a directive Article 66 – paragraph 2 2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Articles 2(5), 4(5),
Amendment 390 #
Proposal for a directive Article 66 – paragraph 3 3. The delegation of power referred to in Articles 2(5), 4(5),
Amendment 391 #
Proposal for a directive Article 66 – paragraph 5 5. A delegated act adopted pursuant to Articles 2(5), 4(5),
Amendment 392 #
Proposal for a directive Article 66 a (new) Article 66a Mandatory exchange of information on tax matters In order for tax authorities to assess tax due properly and to ensure the proper implementation of this Directive, the exchange of information on tax matters shall be automatic and mandatory, as laid down by Council directive 2011/16/EU. Member States shall allocate adequate staff, expertise and budget resources to their national tax administrations as well as resources for the training of tax administration staff focusing on cross- border tax cooperation and on the automatic exchange of information in order to ensure full implementation of this Directive.
Amendment 393 #
Proposal for a directive Article 66 a (new) Article 66a Minimum effective tax rate 1. Two years after the date of implementation of this Directive, Member States shall not be allowed to set an effective corporate tax rate below 20%, whilst no upper limit is set by this Directive. 2. By way of derogation of paragraph 1, Member States may request an extended deadline to the European Commission, so as to keep an effective corporate tax rate below 20% for longer than two years after the implementation of this Directive, but for no longer than seven years after its implementation. The derogation request shall be motivated and authorised by the European Commission. When deciding on a possible extension of the phasing-in period for a particular Member State, due account shall be taken of the specific situation of that Member State, the objective reasons for the request, and the impact of such a derogation on other Member States.
Amendment 394 #
Proposal for a directive Article 66 b (new) Article 66b Measures against tax treaty abuses Member States shall amend their bilateral tax treaties according to this Directive to ensure such treaties contain: (a) a clause ensuring that both parties to the treaty commit that tax will be paid where economic activities are taking place and where value is created; (b) an addendum to clarify that the objective of bilateral treaties, beyond avoiding double taxation is also to fight tax evasion and aggressive tax planning; (c) a clause for a principal purpose test based general anti-avoidance rule.
Amendment 395 #
Proposal for a directive Article 67 a (new) Article 67a Monitoring The Commission shall put in place a specific monitoring mechanism to ensure the proper implementation of this Directive and the homogeneous interpretation of its measures by Member States.
Amendment 396 #
Proposal for a directive Article 69 – paragraph 1 The Commission shall, five years after the entry into force of this Directive, review its application and report to the Council and to the European Parliament on the operation of this Directive.
Amendment 397 #
Proposal for a directive Article 69 – paragraph 1 The Commission shall, five years after the entry into force of this Directive, review its application and report to the Council and the European Parliament on the operation of this Directive.
Amendment 398 #
Proposal for a directive Article 69 – paragraph 1 The Commission shall, five years after the entry into force of this Directive, review its application and report to the European Parliament and the Council on the operation of this Directive.
Amendment 399 #
Proposal for a directive Article 69 – paragraph 1 a (new) The review shall include an impact assessment of an extension of the scope of this Directive to all companies.
Amendment 400 #
Proposal for a directive Article 69 – paragraph 2 Amendment 401 #
Proposal for a directive Article 69 – paragraph 2 Amendment 402 #
Proposal for a directive Article 69 – paragraph 2 Amendment 403 #
Proposal for a directive Article 69 – paragraph 2 a (new) The Commission shall monitor and publish its findings on the uniform implementation of this directive so as to avoid situations in which 28 competent authorities enforce 28 different regimes, and on the potential problems produced by differences in accounting regimes.
Amendment 404 #
Proposal for a directive Article 69 – paragraph 3 Amendment 405 #
Proposal for a directive Article 69 – paragraph 3 The Commission shall communicate its findings in a report to Member States and the European Parliament with the aim to take those findings into account for the design and implementation of national corporate tax systems. The report shall include an analysis of the following elements : The impact of this system on Member States tax revenues, the practicability and advantages and disadvantages of making the system mandatory for SMEs, the impact on a fair tax collection between member States and the impact on the internal market as a whole, with particular regard to possible distortion of competition between companies subject to the new rules laid down in this directive;
Amendment 406 #
Proposal for a directive Article 69 a (new) Article 69a Sanctions Member States shall provide for sanctions for infringements of the national provisions adopted in accordance with this Directive and shall take all the measures necessary to ensure that those sanctions are enforced. The sanctions provided for shall be effective, proportionate and dissuasive.
Amendment 407 #
Proposal for a directive Article 70 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 Member States shall adopt and publish, by 31st December 20
Amendment 408 #
Proposal for a directive Article 70 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 Member States shall adopt and publish, by 31st December 201
Amendment 409 #
Proposal for a directive Article 70 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 Member States shall adopt and publish, by 31st December 201
Amendment 410 #
Proposal for a directive Article 70 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 Member States shall adopt and publish, by 31st January 201
Amendment 411 #
Proposal for a directive Article 70 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 They shall apply those provisions from 1st January 20
Amendment 412 #
Proposal for a directive Article 70 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 They shall apply those provisions from 1st January 20
Amendment 413 #
Proposal for a directive Article 70 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 They shall apply those provisions from 1st January 20
Amendment 414 #
Proposal for a directive Article 70 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 They shall apply those provisions from 1st January 20
Amendment 74 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 1 (1) Companies which seek to do business across frontiers within the Union encounter serious obstacles and market distortions owing to the existence and interaction of 28 disparate corporate tax systems. Furthermore, tax planning structures have become ever-more sophisticated over time, as they develop across various jurisdictions and effectively take advantage of the technicalities of a tax system or of mismatches between two or more tax systems for the purpose of reducing the tax liability of companies. Although those situations highlight shortcomings that are completely different in nature, they both create obstacles which
Amendment 75 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 1 (1) Companies which seek to do business across frontiers within the Union encounter serious obstacles and market distortions owing to the existence and interaction of 28 disparate corporate tax systems. Furthermore, tax planning structures have become ever-more sophisticated over time, as they develop across various jurisdictions and effectively take advantage of the technicalities of a tax system or of mismatches between two or more tax systems for the purpose of reducing the tax liability of companies. Although those situations highlight shortcomings that are completely different in nature, they both create obstacles which impede the proper functioning of the internal market. Action to rectify those problems should therefore address both
Amendment 76 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 1 (1)
Amendment 77 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 1 (1) Companies which seek to do business across frontiers within the Union encounter serious obstacles and market distortions owing to the existence and interaction of 28 disparate corporate tax systems. Furthermore, tax planning structures have become ever-more sophisticated over time, as they develop across various jurisdictions and effectively take advantage of the technicalities of a tax system or of mismatches between two or more tax systems for the purpose of reducing the tax liability of companies. Although those situations highlight shortcomings that are completely different in nature, they both create obstacles which impede the proper functioning of the internal market. Action to rectify those problems should therefore address both types of market deficiencies while respecting the principle of tax neutrality but also the free movement of services in the European single market.
Amendment 78 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 1 (1)
Amendment 79 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 1 (1) Companies which seek to do business across frontiers within the Union encounter serious obstacles and market distortions owing to the existence and interaction of 28 disparate corporate tax systems. Furthermore, tax planning structures have become ever-more aggressive, complex and sophisticated over time, as they develop across various jurisdictions and effectively take advantage of the technicalities of a tax system or of mismatches between two or more tax systems for the purpose of reducing the tax liability of companies. Although those situations highlight shortcomings that are completely different in nature, they both create obstacles and distortions which impede the proper functioning of the internal market and grant multinational companies an unfair competitive advantage over small and medium-sized enterprises. Action to rectify those problems should therefore address both types of market deficiencies.
Amendment 80 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 1 (1) Companies which seek to do business across frontiers within the Union encounter serious obstacles and market distortions owing to the existence and interaction of 28 disparate corporate tax systems. Furthermore, tax
Amendment 81 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 1 (1) Companies which seek to do business across frontiers within the Union encounter serious obstacles and market distortions owing to the existence and interaction of 28 disparate corporate tax systems. Furthermore, tax planning structures have become ever-more sophisticated over time, as they develop across various jurisdictions and effectively take advantage of the technicalities of a tax system or of mismatches between two or more tax systems for the purpose of reducing the tax liability of companies. Although those situations highlight shortcomings that are completely different in nature, they both create obstacles which impede the proper functioning of the internal market. Action to rectify those problems should therefore address both types of
Amendment 82 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 1 a (new) (1a) Companies, both big and small, which seek to do business irrespective of their location in the Union need first and foremost long-term legal clarity and certainty in order to stimulate (long-term) investments. Member States who are able to provide sound, long-term legal clarity and certainty will always be an attractive location for companies to operate from.
Amendment 83 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 1 a (new) (1a) Tax policy and the ability to set corporate tax rates remains a national competence. While administrative simplification of corporate taxation systems may lead to greater efficiencies, the likely impact of a common consolidated tax base is an intrusion into Member States' tax policy and their ability to set corporate tax rates into the future.
Amendment 84 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 1 a (new) (1a) Taxation is a national competence, dependent on the political view and actions of governments and parliaments, based upon fiscal policies and political aspirations regarding public spending.
Amendment 85 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 1 b (new) (1b) Corporate tax rates within the Union paint a very diffuse picture of the different levels of tax burdens on companies. Effective tax rates, however, show different and in same cases even opposite results.
Amendment 86 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 1 b (new) (1b) It is the responsibility of the tax authority in every nation in cooperation with each other to secure that taxes are paid and to define where taxes shall be paid dependent on the character of the business.
Amendment 87 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 2 (2) To support the proper functioning of the internal market, the corporate tax environment in the Union should be shaped in accordance with the principle that companies pay their fair share of tax in the jurisdiction(s) where their profits are generated.
Amendment 88 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 2 (2) To support the proper functioning of the internal market, the corporate tax environment in the Union should be shaped in accordance with the principle that companies pay their fair share of tax in the jurisdiction(s) where their profits are generated. It is therefore necessary to
Amendment 89 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 2 (2) To support the proper functioning of the internal market, the corporate tax environment in the Union should be shaped in accordance with the principle that companies pay their fair share of tax in the jurisdiction(s) where their profits are generated and where they have economic substance. It is therefore necessary to provide for mechanisms that
Amendment 90 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 2 (2) To support the proper functioning of the internal market, the corporate tax environment in the Union should be shaped in accordance with the principle that companies pay their fair share of tax in the jurisdiction(s) where their profits are generated. It is therefore necessary to provide for mechanisms that discourage companies from taking advantage of mismatches amongst national tax systems in order to lower their tax liability. It is equally important to also stimulate growth and economic development in the internal market by facilitating cross-border trade and corporate investment. To this end, it is necessary to eliminate
Amendment 91 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 2 (2) To support the proper functioning of the internal market, the corporate tax environment in the Union should be shaped in accordance with the principle that companies pay their fair share of tax in the jurisdiction(s) where their profits are generated. It is therefore necessary to provide for mechanisms that discourage companies from taking advantage of mismatches amongst national tax systems in order to lower their tax liability. It is equally important to also stimulate growth and economic development in the internal market by facilitating cross-border trade and corporate investment. To this end, it is necessary to eliminate both double taxation and double non-taxation risks in the Union through eradicating disparities in the interaction of national corporate tax systems. At the same time, companies need an easily workable tax and legal framework for developing their commercial activity and expanding it across borders in the Union. In that context, remaining cases of discrimination should also be removed.
Amendment 92 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 2 (2) To support the proper functioning of the internal market, the corporate tax environment in the Union should be shaped in accordance with the principle that companies pay their fair share of tax in the jurisdiction(s) where their profits are generated, providing for effective taxation mechanisms based on tangible data that is hard to transfer or conceal, such as revenue from sales and the number of employees. It is therefore necessary to provide for mechanisms that discourage companies from taking advantage of mismatches amongst national tax systems in order to lower their tax liability. It is equally important to also stimulate growth and economic development in the internal market by facilitating cross-border trade and corporate investment. To this end, it is necessary to eliminate both double taxation and double non-taxation risks in the Union through eradicating disparities in the interaction of national corporate tax systems. At the same time, companies need an easily workable tax and legal framework for developing their commercial activity and expanding it across borders in the Union. In that context, remaining cases of discrimination should also be removed.
Amendment 93 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 2 (2) To support the proper functioning of the internal market, the corporate tax environment in the Union should be shaped in accordance with the principle that companies pay their fair share of tax in the jurisdiction(s) where their profits are generated. It is therefore necessary to provide for mechanisms that discourage companies from taking advantage of mismatches amongst national tax systems in order to lower their tax liability. It is equally important to also stimulate growth and economic development in the internal market by facilitating cross-border trade and corporate investment. To this end, it is necessary to eliminate
Amendment 94 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 2 a (new) (2a) The new proposals promise to prevent profit-shifting by ending transfer pricing tax avoidance schemes; however, for unitary taxation to work as a means to end profit-shifting it needs to be global. Implementing the CCCTB at an EU level runs the risk that current losses from EU members to the rest of world could be locked in, and so could the exploitation of the rest of the world by some Member States. An EU-only approach could eliminate the incentives to profit-shift within the EU, but exacerbate the incentives and opportunity to profit-shift out of the EU.
Amendment 95 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 2 a (new) (2a) Moreover, diversity of tax regimes may attract foreign investors to invest their funds in peripheral countries, regions and islands. Thus, diversity of tax regimes allows these regions to draw cross border investments that would otherwise locate elsewhere. As such, diversity of tax regimes is accepted as reasonable, useful and sustainable for peripheral regions, in order to stimulate job creation and new economic activities.
Amendment 96 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 3 (3) As pointed out in the proposal of 16 March 2011 for a Council Directive on a Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base (CCCTB)7
Amendment 97 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 3 (3) As pointed out in the proposal of 16 March 2011 for a Council Directive on a Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base (CCCTB)7
Amendment 98 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 3 (3) As pointed out in the proposal of 16 March 2011 for a Council Directive on a Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base (CCCTB)7, a corporate tax system which treats the Union as a single market for the purpose of computing the corporate tax base of companies would facilitate cross-border activity for companies resident in the Union and promote the objective of making it a more competitive location for investment internationally. The proposal of 2011 for a CCCTB focussed on the objective of facilitating the expansion of commercial activity for businesses which are subject to corporate tax within the Union. In addition to that objective, it should also be taken into account that a CCCTB can be
Amendment 99 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 3 a (new) (3a) While strong cooperation among Member States in setting EU-wide rules for tackling cross-border tax avoidance and tax evasion by multinationals corporations operating within the EU is to be welcomed, the provision of further economic and fiscal decision-making powers from Member States to the Commission results in transferring power from democratically elected governments in very diverse economies across the EU, reducing accountability and control over economic decision-making by citizens in these Member States.
source: 609.574
|
History
(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
council/0 |
|
council/0 |
|
council/0/url |
Old
http://register.consilium.europa.eu/content/out?lang=EN&typ=SET&i=SMPL&ROWSPP=25&RESULTSET=1&NRROWS=500&DOC_LANCD=EN&ORDERBY=DOC_DATE+DESC&CONTENTS=3506*&MEET_DATE=06/12/2016New
https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/meetings/calendar/?Category=meeting&Page=1&daterange=&dateFrom=2016-12-06&dateTo=2016-12-06 |
council/1 |
|
council/1 |
|
council/1/url |
Old
http://register.consilium.europa.eu/content/out?lang=EN&typ=SET&i=SMPL&ROWSPP=25&RESULTSET=1&NRROWS=500&DOC_LANCD=EN&ORDERBY=DOC_DATE+DESC&CONTENTS=3543*&MEET_DATE=23/05/2017New
https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/meetings/calendar/?Category=meeting&Page=1&daterange=&dateFrom=2017-05-23&dateTo=2017-05-23 |
docs/0 |
|
docs/0 |
|
docs/1 |
|
docs/1 |
|
docs/1/body |
Old
EPNew
European Parliament |
docs/2 |
|
docs/2 |
|
docs/2/body |
Old
EPNew
European Parliament |
docs/3 |
|
docs/3 |
|
docs/3/body |
Old
EPNew
European Parliament |
docs/4 |
|
docs/4 |
|
docs/4/body |
Old
EPNew
European Parliament |
docs/5 |
|
docs/5 |
|
docs/6 |
|
docs/6 |
|
docs/7 |
|
docs/8 |
|
docs/8/body |
Old
ECNew
European Commission |
docs/9 |
Old
New
|
docs/10 |
Old
New
|
docs/12 |
|
docs/13 |
|
docs/14 |
|
docs/15 |
Old
New
|
docs/16 |
|
docs/17 |
Old
New
|
docs/18 |
|
docs/19 |
|
docs/20 |
|
docs/21 |
|
docs/22 |
Old
New
|
docs/23 |
Old
New
|
docs/24 |
Old
New
|
events/0 |
|
events/0 |
|
events/2/docs |
|
events/3/docs |
|
events/5/summary/17 |
Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading
|
events/6/docs/0/title |
Old
Debate in ParliamentNew
Go to the page |
events/7 |
|
events/7 |
|
events/7/summary/19 |
Text adopted by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
|
events/8 |
|
events/8 |
|
events/8/docs/0/url |
Old
https://oeil.secure.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/sda.do?id=30813&l=enNew
https://oeil.secure.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/en/sda-vote-result?sdaId=30813 |
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee |
Old
New
ECON/8/08276 |
procedure/instrument |
Old
New
Directive |
procedure/legal_basis |
Old
New
Treaty on the Functioning of the EU TFEU 115 |
docs/6/docs/0/url |
Old
/oeil/spdoc.do?i=30813&j=0&l=enNew
https://data.europarl.europa.eu/distribution/doc/SP-2018-242-TA-8-2018-0088_en.docx |
docs/6/docs/0/url |
Old
/oeil/spdoc.do?i=30813&j=0&l=enNew
https://data.europarl.europa.eu/distribution/doc/SP-2018-242-TA-8-2018-0088_en.docx |
docs/6/docs/0/url |
Old
/oeil/spdoc.do?i=30813&j=0&l=enNew
https://data.europarl.europa.eu/distribution/doc/SP-2018-242-TA-8-2018-0088_en.docx |
docs/6/docs/0/url |
Old
/oeil/spdoc.do?i=30813&j=0&l=enNew
https://data.europarl.europa.eu/distribution/doc/SP-2018-242-TA-8-2018-0088_en.docx |
docs/6/docs/0/url |
Old
/oeil/spdoc.do?i=30813&j=0&l=enNew
https://data.europarl.europa.eu/distribution/doc/SP-2018-242-TA-8-2018-0088_en.docx |
docs/6/docs/0/url |
Old
/oeil/spdoc.do?i=30813&j=0&l=enNew
https://data.europarl.europa.eu/distribution/doc/SP-2018-242-TA-8-2018-0088_en.docx |
docs/6/docs/0/url |
Old
/oeil/spdoc.do?i=30813&j=0&l=enNew
https://data.europarl.europa.eu/distribution/doc/SP-2018-242-TA-8-2018-0088_en.docx |
docs/6/docs/0/url |
Old
/oeil/spdoc.do?i=30813&j=0&l=enNew
https://data.europarl.europa.eu/distribution/doc/SP-2018-242-TA-8-2018-0088_en.docx |
docs/6/docs/0/url |
Old
/oeil/spdoc.do?i=30813&j=0&l=enNew
https://data.europarl.europa.eu/distribution/doc/SP-2018-242-TA-8-2018-0088_en.docx |
docs/6/docs/0/url |
Old
/oeil/spdoc.do?i=30813&j=0&l=enNew
https://data.europarl.europa.eu/distribution/doc/SP-2018-242-TA-8-2018-0088_en.docx |
docs/6/docs/0/url |
Old
/oeil/spdoc.do?i=30813&j=0&l=enNew
https://data.europarl.europa.eu/distribution/doc/SP-2018-242-TA-8-2018-0088_en.docx |
docs/6/docs/0/url |
Old
/oeil/spdoc.do?i=30813&j=0&l=enNew
https://data.europarl.europa.eu/distribution/doc/SP-2018-242-TA-8-2018-0088_en.docx |
docs/6/docs/0/url |
Old
/oeil/spdoc.do?i=30813&j=0&l=enNew
https://data.europarl.europa.eu/distribution/doc/SP-2018-242-TA-8-2018-0088_en.docx |
docs/6/docs/0/url |
Old
/oeil/spdoc.do?i=30813&j=0&l=enNew
nulldistribution/doc/SP-2018-242-TA-8-2018-0088_en.docx |
docs/7/date |
Old
2016-12-21T00:00:00New
2016-12-22T00:00:00 |
docs/8/date |
Old
2016-12-20T00:00:00New
2016-12-21T00:00:00 |
docs/9/date |
Old
2016-12-21T00:00:00New
2016-12-22T00:00:00 |
docs/10/date |
Old
2017-01-23T00:00:00New
2017-01-24T00:00:00 |
docs/11/date |
Old
2017-04-03T00:00:00New
2017-04-04T00:00:00 |
docs/12/date |
Old
2017-05-30T00:00:00New
2017-05-31T00:00:00 |
docs/13/date |
Old
2017-03-13T00:00:00New
2017-03-14T00:00:00 |
docs/14/date |
Old
2017-01-16T00:00:00New
2017-01-17T00:00:00 |
docs/15/date |
Old
2019-01-10T00:00:00New
2019-01-11T00:00:00 |
docs/7/date |
Old
2016-12-22T00:00:00New
2016-12-21T00:00:00 |
docs/8/date |
Old
2016-12-21T00:00:00New
2016-12-20T00:00:00 |
docs/9/date |
Old
2016-12-22T00:00:00New
2016-12-21T00:00:00 |
docs/10/date |
Old
2017-01-24T00:00:00New
2017-01-23T00:00:00 |
docs/11/date |
Old
2017-04-04T00:00:00New
2017-04-03T00:00:00 |
docs/12/date |
Old
2017-05-31T00:00:00New
2017-05-30T00:00:00 |
docs/13/date |
Old
2017-03-14T00:00:00New
2017-03-13T00:00:00 |
docs/14/date |
Old
2017-01-17T00:00:00New
2017-01-16T00:00:00 |
docs/15/date |
Old
2019-01-11T00:00:00New
2019-01-10T00:00:00 |
docs/2 |
|
docs/3 |
|
docs/4 |
|
docs/5 |
|
docs/6 |
|
docs/7 |
|
docs/7 |
|
docs/7/date |
Old
2016-12-21T00:00:00New
2016-12-22T00:00:00 |
docs/8 |
|
docs/8 |
|
docs/8/date |
Old
2016-12-20T00:00:00New
2016-12-21T00:00:00 |
docs/9 |
|
docs/9 |
|
docs/9/date |
Old
2016-12-21T00:00:00New
2016-12-22T00:00:00 |
docs/10 |
|
docs/10/date |
Old
2017-01-23T00:00:00New
2017-01-24T00:00:00 |
docs/11 |
|
docs/11/date |
Old
2017-04-03T00:00:00New
2017-04-04T00:00:00 |
docs/12 |
|
docs/12/date |
Old
2017-05-30T00:00:00New
2017-05-31T00:00:00 |
docs/13 |
|
docs/13/date |
Old
2017-03-13T00:00:00New
2017-03-14T00:00:00 |
docs/14 |
|
docs/14/date |
Old
2017-01-16T00:00:00New
2017-01-17T00:00:00 |
docs/15 |
|
docs/15 |
|
docs/15/date |
Old
2019-01-10T00:00:00New
2019-01-11T00:00:00 |
docs/16 |
|
docs/17 |
|
docs/18 |
|
docs/19 |
|
docs/20 |
|
docs/21 |
|
docs/22 |
|
docs/23 |
|
docs/15/date |
Old
2016-12-22T00:00:00New
2016-12-21T00:00:00 |
docs/16/date |
Old
2016-12-21T00:00:00New
2016-12-20T00:00:00 |
docs/17/date |
Old
2016-12-22T00:00:00New
2016-12-21T00:00:00 |
docs/18/date |
Old
2017-01-24T00:00:00New
2017-01-23T00:00:00 |
docs/19/date |
Old
2017-04-04T00:00:00New
2017-04-03T00:00:00 |
docs/20/date |
Old
2017-05-31T00:00:00New
2017-05-30T00:00:00 |
docs/21/date |
Old
2017-03-14T00:00:00New
2017-03-13T00:00:00 |
docs/22/date |
Old
2017-01-17T00:00:00New
2017-01-16T00:00:00 |
docs/23/date |
Old
2019-01-11T00:00:00New
2019-01-10T00:00:00 |
docs/15 |
|
docs/15 |
|
docs/16 |
|
docs/16 |
|
docs/17 |
|
docs/17 |
|
docs/18 |
|
docs/18 |
|
docs/19 |
|
docs/19 |
|
docs/20 |
|
docs/20 |
|
docs/21 |
|
docs/21 |
|
docs/22 |
|
docs/22 |
|
docs/23 |
|
docs/23 |
|
links/Research document/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank/en/document.html?reference=EPRS_BRI(2017)595907New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank/en/document/EPRS_BRI(2017)595907 |
procedure/instrument |
Old
DirectiveNew
|
docs/15/date |
Old
2016-12-22T00:00:00New
2016-12-21T00:00:00 |
docs/16/date |
Old
2016-12-21T00:00:00New
2016-12-20T00:00:00 |
docs/17/date |
Old
2016-12-22T00:00:00New
2016-12-21T00:00:00 |
docs/18/date |
Old
2017-01-24T00:00:00New
2017-01-23T00:00:00 |
docs/19/date |
Old
2017-04-04T00:00:00New
2017-04-03T00:00:00 |
docs/20/date |
Old
2017-05-31T00:00:00New
2017-05-30T00:00:00 |
docs/21/date |
Old
2017-03-14T00:00:00New
2017-03-13T00:00:00 |
docs/22/date |
Old
2017-01-17T00:00:00New
2017-01-16T00:00:00 |
docs/23/date |
Old
2019-01-11T00:00:00New
2019-01-10T00:00:00 |
events/6/docs |
|
docs/10/docs/0/url |
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/ECON-PR-608050_EN.html
|
docs/11/docs/0/url |
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/JURI-AD-602948_EN.html
|
docs/12/docs/0/url |
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/ECON-AM-609574_EN.html
|
docs/13/docs/0/url |
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/ECON-AM-610813_EN.html
|
events/1/body |
EP
|
events/4/body |
EP
|
events/8/body |
EP
|
docs/10/docs/0/url |
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE608.050
|
docs/11/docs/0/url |
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE602.948&secondRef=03
|
docs/12/docs/0/url |
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE609.574
|
docs/13/docs/0/url |
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE610.813
|
events/1 |
|
events/1 |
|
events/4 |
|
events/4 |
|
events/6/docs |
|
events/8 |
|
events/8 |
|
procedure/instrument |
Old
New
Directive |
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/2 |
|
docs/10/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE608.050New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE608.050 |
docs/11/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE602.948&secondRef=03New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE602.948&secondRef=03 |
docs/12/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE609.574New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE609.574 |
docs/13/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE610.813New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE610.813 |
events/5/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-8-2018-0050_EN.htmlNew
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-8-2018-0050_EN.html |
events/6/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20180314&type=CRENew
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20180314&type=CRE |
events/8/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-8-2018-0088_EN.htmlNew
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-8-2018-0088_EN.html |
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/2/rapporteur/0/mepref |
96998
|
docs/14/body |
EC
|
events/5/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A8-2018-0050&language=ENNew
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-8-2018-0050_EN.html |
events/8/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P8-TA-2018-0088New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-8-2018-0088_EN.html |
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
activities |
|
commission |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/2 |
|
council |
|
docs |
|
events |
|
other |
|
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee |
Old
ECON/8/08276New
|
procedure/instrument |
Old
DirectiveNew
|
procedure/subject |
Old
New
|
procedure/summary |
|
activities/4/committees |
|
activities/4/type |
Old
Vote scheduled in committee, 1st reading/single readingNew
Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading |
activities/5 |
|
activities/6/date |
Old
2018-03-13T00:00:00New
2018-03-14T00:00:00 |
activities/6/docs |
|
activities/6/type |
Old
Indicative plenary sitting date, 1st reading/single readingNew
Debate in Parliament |
activities/7 |
|
procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Awaiting committee decisionNew
Awaiting final decision |
activities/1/committees/0/shadows/4/mepref |
Old
53b2d8e0b819f205b000004aNew
5a0cf707d1d1c556ab000002 |
activities/1/committees/0/shadows/4/name |
Old
DE MASI FabioNew
SCHIRDEWAN Martin |
committees/0/shadows/4/mepref |
Old
53b2d8e0b819f205b000004aNew
5a0cf707d1d1c556ab000002 |
committees/0/shadows/4/name |
Old
DE MASI FabioNew
SCHIRDEWAN Martin |
activities/5/date |
Old
2018-01-16T00:00:00New
2018-03-13T00:00:00 |
activities/5/date |
Old
2017-12-04T00:00:00New
2018-02-21T00:00:00 |
activities/5/date |
Old
2017-12-11T00:00:00New
2018-01-16T00:00:00 |
links/Research document |
|
activities/0/commission/0 |
|
other/1 |
|
activities/3 |
|
other/0 |
|
activities/3/date |
Old
2017-11-20T00:00:00New
2017-12-04T00:00:00 |
activities/4 |
|
activities/0/docs/0/celexid |
CELEX:52016PC0685:EN
|
activities/0/docs/0/celexid |
CELEX:52016PC0685:EN
|
activities/1/committees/0/shadows/5 |
|
activities/3 |
|
committees/0/shadows/5 |
|
activities/1/committees/0/shadows/6 |
|
committees/0/shadows/6 |
|
activities/1/committees/0/shadows/3 |
|
activities/1/committees/0/shadows/4 |
|
committees/0/shadows/3 |
|
committees/0/shadows/4 |
|
activities/1/committees/0/shadows/3 |
|
committees/0/shadows/3 |
|
activities/1/committees/0/date |
2016-11-24T00:00:00
|
activities/1/committees/0/rapporteur |
|
activities/1/committees/0/shadows/2 |
|
committees/0/date |
2016-11-24T00:00:00
|
committees/0/rapporteur |
|
committees/0/shadows/2 |
|
activities/1/committees/0/shadows/0 |
|
committees/0/shadows/0 |
|
activities/1/committees/0/shadows |
|
committees/0/shadows |
|
activities/2 |
|
activities/1/committees/2/date |
2016-11-28T00:00:00
|
activities/1/committees/2/rapporteur |
|
committees/2/date |
2016-11-28T00:00:00
|
committees/2/rapporteur |
|
activities/1 |
|
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee |
ECON/8/08276
|
procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Preparatory phase in ParliamentNew
Awaiting committee decision |
activities/0/docs/0/text |
|
procedure/Mandatory consultation of other institutions |
Economic and Social Committee
|
procedure/Mandatory consultation of other institutions |
Economic and Social Committee
|
committees/2 |
|
activities/0/docs/0/celexid |
CELEX:52016PC0685:EN
|
activities |
|
committees |
|
links |
|
other |
|
procedure |
|