Awaiting committee decision
2018/2121(INI) Financial crimes, tax evasion and tax avoidance
Lead committee dossier: TAX3/8/13409
Legal Basis RoP 197
| Role | Committee | Rapporteur | Shadows |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lead | TAX3 Special committee on financial crimes, tax evasion and tax avoidance |
Legal Basis RoP 197
Activites
-
2018/06/14
Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
Documents
| Amendments | Dossier |
| 1284 |
2018/2121(INI)
2018/12/20
TAX3
1284 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 2 — having regard to Articles 107, 108, 113
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 8 a (new) - having regard to P8_TA- PROV(2018)0475, European Parliament resolution of 29 November 2018 on the cum-ex scandal: financial crime and loopholes in the current legal framework (2018/2900(RSP))
Amendment 100 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Recalls that
Amendment 1000 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 154 c (new) 154 c. Notes that developing countries might not possess the resources to implement newly agreed international or European tax standards and /or might have more urgent tax gap issues to tackle to ensure they generate sufficient revenues to provide for essential public services; subsequently calls on the Council to exclude counter measures such as cuts in development aid;
Amendment 1001 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 154 d (new) 154 d. Notes that, according to data of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) on foreign direct investment, Luxembourg and the Netherlands combined have more inward investment than the US, the vast majority of which is in special-purpose entities with no substantial economic activity, and Ireland has more inward investment than either Germany or France; points out that, according to its National Statistics Office, foreign investment in Malta amounts to 1 474 %of the size of its economy; notes that, according to research carried out by the University of Amsterdam, 23 % of all corporate investments that ended up in tax havens passed through the Netherlands; believes that these data are a clear indication that some Member States are facilitating excessive profit-shifting activities at the expense of other Member States;
Amendment 1002 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 154 e (new) 154 e. Recalls that the European Commission has criticised seven member states - Belgium, Cyprus, Hungary, Ireland, Luxembourg, Malta and The Netherlands, for their "aggressive" tax policies, arguing that they have tax policies that undermine the integrity of the European single market;
Amendment 1003 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 154 d (new) 154 d. Points out that for the EU to hold a leading role in the global fight against tax evasion, aggressive tax planning and money laundering, it would be important for the European Commission to get its own house in order by ensuring that those with a commercial or vested interest in promoting tax avoidance and tax evasion should not have a role in guiding or advising the EU’s policy-making on tax avoidance and tax evasion;
Amendment 1004 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 154 f (new) 154 f. Calls, therefore, on the Commission to regard explicitly at least Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Ireland and Malta as EU tax havens;
Amendment 1005 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 154 g (new) 154 g. Notes the current negotiations between the EU and Switzerland towards a Framework Agreement; stresses its view that the EU should renegotiate its trade, economic and other relevant bilateral agreements with Switzerland to bring them into line with EU anti-tax fraud policy and anti-money laundering legislation, so as to eliminate serious flaws in the Swiss supervisory system which enable a policy of internal banking secrecy to continue, as well as the creation of offshore structures worldwide, tax fraud and tax evasion not constituting a criminal offence, weak supervision, the inadequate self-regulation of obliged entities, and aggressive prosecution and harassment of whistle-blowers;
Amendment 1006 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 155 155. Renews its call for
Amendment 1007 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 155 155. Renews its call for effective countermeasures aimed at incentivising compliance by the countries listed in Annex I of the EU list;
Amendment 1008 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 155 155. Renews its call for countermeasures aimed at incentivising compliance by the third countries listed in Annex I of the EU list; takes note that most countermeasures proposed by the Council are left to national discretion;
Amendment 1009 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 155 a (new) 155 a. Calls for the setting up of dissuasive and EU-wide harmonised sanctions for the blacklisted countries; recommends that the coordinated denunciation by Member States of bilateral tax treaties with those countries be considered as one of the last resort sanctions;
Amendment 101 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Recalls that the fight against tax evasion and fraud tackles illegal acts, whereas the fight against tax avoidance addresses situations that are a priori within the limits of the law but
Amendment 1010 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 156 156. Calls on the Member States to adopt a single set of strong countermeasures, including
Amendment 1011 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 156 156. Calls on the Member States to adopt a single set of strong countermeasures, including, inter alia, automatic CFC rules, withholding taxes on payments to low-tax jurisdictions, penalties, or the suspension/termination of double taxation agreements, for blacklisted jurisdictions, unless the taxpayers convey genuine economic activities there; invites both tax administrations and taxpayers to cooperate to gather the relevant facts in case the controlled foreign company carries out substantive real economic activity and has substantial economic presence supported by staff, equipment, assets and premises, as evidenced by relevant facts and circumstances;
Amendment 1012 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 156 a (new) 156 a. Stresses the urgent need to stop EU funds from being channelled via tax havens, while ensuring that targeted aid is still provided to the people in need; welcomes in this regard the general provision on tax good governance, inserted in the revised Financial Regulation of 18 July 2018, prohibiting implementing partners managing EU funds to support projects or actions that contribute to tax avoidance, tax fraud and tax evasion;
Amendment 1013 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 156 a (new) 156 a. Recalls the position of the European Parliament in the interim report on MFF, urging for a genuine fight against tax evasion and avoidance, with the introduction of dissuasive sanctions, for offshore territories and for the enablers or promoters of such activities, particularly and as a first step those operating on the European mainland; believes that Member States should cooperate by establishing a coordinated system for monitoring capital movements in order to fight taxevasion, tax avoidance and money laundering; 1a _________________ 1a Par. 48 of the Interim report on the Multiannual Financial Framework 2021- 2027 adopted in Plenary
Amendment 1014 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 156 a (new) 156 a. Notes that sanctions and countermeasures are essential to fight against money laundering, tax evasion and tax avoidance; notes in this regard that the economic weight of the European Union is a strength and can be a deterrent for tax havens and non-cooperative jurisdictions that would politically and economically suffer from such sanctions;
Amendment 1015 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 157 a (new) 157 a. Reiterates its call on competent authorities to impose the suspension or withdrawal of licenses on financial institutions and intermediaries who are proven to be involved in assisting or enabling tax fraud, aggressive tax planning and money laundering;
Amendment 1016 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 157 b (new) 157 b. Renews its call to introduce a ban on EU-based financial institutions and intermediaries from operating in jurisdictions included in the EU list of non cooperative tax jurisdictions and the EU list of countries with strategic deficiencies in their AML/CFT regimes;
Amendment 1017 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 158 158. Reiterates its call for the EU and the Member States to have a leading role in the global fight against tax evasion, aggressive tax planning and money laundering, in particular through Commission initiatives in all related international forums;
Amendment 1018 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 158 158. Reiterates its call for the EU to have a leading role in the global fight against tax evasion, aggressive tax planning and money laundering, in particular through Commission initiatives in all related international forums; considers that the EU should also lead by example, and calls on the Commission to ensure that those with a commercial or vested interest in promoting tax avoidance and tax evasion should not have a role in guiding or advising the EU's policy- making on these matters;
Amendment 1019 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 158 158. Reiterates its call for the EU to have a leading role in the global fight against tax evasion, aggressive tax planning and money laundering, in particular through Commission initiatives in all related international forums; regrets, however, that while the EU adopts OECD BEPS proposals, some proposals going beyond the OECD recommendations but could serve as a basis for further fruitful work on the international level are stalled in the Council;
Amendment 102 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 a (new) 9 a. Notes that the growing role of intangible assets in the MNE's value chain and harmful R&D tax incentives are conducive to aggressive tax planning;
Amendment 1020 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 158 158. Reiterates its call for the EU to have a leading role in the global fight against tax evasion, aggressive tax planning and money laundering, in particular through Commission initiatives in all related international forums; reiterates the importance of urging reciprocity in international and bilateral negotiations between the EU and its partners in the field of taxation to enable greater convergence on practices;
Amendment 1021 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 158 158. Reiterates its call for the EU to have a leading role in the global fight against tax evasion, aggressive tax planning and money laundering, in particular through Commission initiatives in all related international forums; calls on the EU as a member of the G20 to aim for that forum to undertake a strong action against tax competition;
Amendment 1022 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 158 158. Reiterates its call for the EU to have a leading role in the global fight against tax evasion, aggressive tax planning and money laundering, in particular through Commission initiatives in all related international forums; regrets that in fight against money laundering, the EU has so far not set the best example;
Amendment 1023 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 158 158. Reiterates its call for the EU to have a leading role in the global fight against tax evasion, aggressive tax planning and money laundering, in particular through Commission initiatives in all related international forums; calls on the EU and Member States to prepare themselves ex ante in order to express a concerted position in those fora;
Amendment 1024 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 158 a (new) 158 a. Regrets that the current OECD tax committee cannot be nor is sufficiently inclusive, as it is not the United Nations; the OECD is integrated only by 34 countries that tend to be industrialized ones, is not democratically governed and its decisions on recommendations are not guided by democratic rules
Amendment 1025 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 158 a (new) 158a. Stresses the need to step up international cooperation on taxation; reiterates that to bring about a suitable response in a world where capital flows know no border a global approach has to be taken to the issue; recognises that the OECD has played a major role in the field of taxation since the financial crisis; reiterates that multilateralism and cooperation between states continues to be the best way to achieve tangible results; calls on all the OECD states to transpose these rules to produce a race to the top in taxation practices worldwide;
Amendment 1026 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 158 b (new) 158 b. Regrets that the G20/OECDBEPS Action Plan did not intend nor did it resulted in addressing the problem of source and residence taxation which is at the core of the base erosion problem;
Amendment 1027 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 158 c (new) 158 c. Underlines that given its lack of representation and of democratic governance, the OECD is not the place to discuss the allocation of taxing rights among industrialized and developing countries;
Amendment 1028 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 158 d (new) 158 d. Calls on Member States to support the creation of a global body within the UN framework, well-equipped and with sufficient additional resources to ensure that all countries can participate on an equal footing in the formulation and reform of global tax policies1a, and for such body to address unsolved tax questions such as the allocation of taxing rights among countries; _________________ 1a European Parliament resolution of 6 July 2016 on tax rulings and other measures similar in nature or effect (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0310); and European Parliament recommendation of 13 December 2017 to the Council and the Commission following the inquiry into money laundering, tax avoidance and tax evasion (Texts adopted,P8_TA- (2017)0491).
Amendment 1029 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 159 159.
Amendment 103 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Recalls that ATP describes the setting of a tax design aimed at reducing tax liability by using the technicalities of a tax system or of mismatches between two or more tax systems that go against the
Amendment 1030 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 159 159. Recalls its position regarding the creation of a
Amendment 1031 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 159 a (new) 159 a. Acknowledges that the G77and China have also called in 2017 for the UN Committee of Experts on International Cooperation in Tax Matters to be upgraded to an intergovernmental UN Global Tax Body;
Amendment 1032 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 159 a (new) 159 a. Calls on the Commission to take a leading role in the global debate and to urgently explore the ways for the pricing of digital assets; encourages the EU institutions to take the lead in the taxing of Tech Giants to speed up the work at OECD and UN levels; recalls, however, that the EU shall not wait for a global solution and shall immediately act;
Amendment 1033 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 159 b (new) 159 b. Asks Member States to delegate to the Commission the power to renegotiate on their behalf the tax treaties with third countries, so as to integrate the new definition of a significant digital presence in a harmonised way once it is adopted at EU level; strongly believes it is essential in order to avoid creating any loopholes in the international tax environment;
Amendment 1034 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 159 b (new) 159 b. Calls for Member States to revise their positions regarding the creation of a global tax body within the UN in order to incorporate this global call to their agendas
Amendment 1035 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 159 c (new) 159 c. Regrets that the G20/OECD’s inclusive framework is stopping a discussion on international taxation that should take place in the context of the United Nations; calls on Member States to support a reform of the United Nations tax committee to turn it into a UN tax body; and ensure that the such body has sufficient resources to ensure all countries can participate on an equal footing;
Amendment 1036 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 160 160. Calls for a global summit on
Amendment 1037 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 160 160. Calls for a global summit on
Amendment 1038 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 160 160. Calls for a
Amendment 1039 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 160 160. Calls for a global summit on remaining necessary global tax reforms in order to enhance international cooperation and put pressure on all countries, in particular their offshore financial centres, to comply with transparency and fair taxation standards; calls for the Commission to take the initiative for such a summit and for the summit to allow for the establishment of the abovementioned global tax body;
Amendment 104 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Recalls that ATP describes the setting of a tax design aimed at reducing tax liability by using the technicalities of a tax system or of mismatches between two or more tax systems that go against the spirit of the law; but realizes that the concept has also been used too broadly in ways that make it less than meaningful to localise convincingly illegal forms of tax evasion and potentially illegitimate tax avoidance;
Amendment 1040 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 160 a (new) 160 a. Takes note of the Commission action and contributions in the OECD, Global Forum on transparency and exchange of information, Inclusive Framework on BEPS,– to promote higher levels of tax good governance globally, while ensuring that the international tax good governance standards continue to be fully respected within the EU;
Amendment 1041 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 160 a (new) 160 a. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to push for a second set of international tax reform gathering all countries interested on an equal footing and aiming at tackling the growing corporate tax race to the bottom and the allocation of taxing rights;
Amendment 1042 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 160 a (new) 160 a. Calls on the EU to promote a global corporate tax reform based on the unitary taxation with formulary apportionment of MNEs, in order to effectively eliminate profit-shifting to low- tax jurisdictions and stop tax avoidance;
Amendment 1043 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 161 161. Believes that supporting developing countries in combating tax evasion and aggressive tax planning, as well as corruption and secrecy that facilitate illicit financial flows, is of the utmost importance for strengthening policy coherence for development in the EU and improving developing countries’ tax capacities and domestic resource mobilisation; believes that the EU should encourage and insist with European companies having a mining, manufacturing, touristic, construction, farming or processing facility in Africa that they should subscribe to a code of good behaviour that among others, bans participation in schemes that involve corruption, money laundering, tax avoidance, tax evasion and ATP;
Amendment 1044 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 161 161. Believes that supporting developing countries in combating tax evasion and aggressive tax planning, as well as corruption and secrecy that facilitate illicit financial flows, is of the utmost importance for strengthening policy coherence for development in the EU and improving developing countries’ tax capacities and
Amendment 1045 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 161 161. Believes that supporting developing countries in combating tax evasion and aggressive tax planning, as well as corruption and secrecy that facilitate illicit financial flows, is of the utmost importance for strengthening policy coherence for development in the EU and improving developing countries’ tax capacities and domestic resource mobilisation; stresses the need to increase the share, in terms of aid and development, of financial and technical assistance to the national tax administrations of developing countries;
Amendment 1046 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 161 161. Believes that supporting developing countries in combating tax avoidance, tax evasion and aggressive tax planning, as well as corruption and secrecy that facilitate illicit financial flows, is of the utmost importance for strengthening policy coherence for development in the EU and improving developing countries’ tax capacities and domestic resource mobilisation; notes that each year tax avoidance accounts for more than the total figure for aid to developing countries; stresses that the least developed countries (LDCs) are not equipped with a suitable legal and fiscal framework, nor sufficient resources to be effective in combating illicit financial flows; notes that the latter are not, under these conditions, in a position to benefit fully from developments set up by the OECD;
Amendment 1047 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 161 a (new) 161a. States that harmful trade activities by multinationals, criminal activities (drug trafficking, people trafficking, illegal trade in arms, smuggling, corruption, misappropriation by officials), embezzlement, manipulation of transfer pricing, offshore banking services, use of tax havens, and natural resources are the primary sources of illicit financial flows; considers that only an alliance at global level supported by the United Nations, the World Bank, the IMF and the OECD will be able to fight these practices;
Amendment 1048 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 161 a (new) 161 a. Believes that such support can take different forms, but that care should be taken not to impose models thought for tackling the problems of the North, which are convenient for the economic circumstances of the North, into the South; believes that the best cooperation for the South can most generally come from the South, from developing countries that have similar problems and similar economic circumstances; calls for the EU institutions to respect South-South cooperation;
Amendment 1049 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 161 a (new) 161 a. Recalls the need for Member States for regular spill over analyses of the material impact of the tax policies on other Member States and developing countries, while acknowledging that some work has taken place in this regard in the framework of the Platform on Tax Good Governance; calls on all Member States to conduct such spill over analysis under the supervision of the Commission;
Amendment 105 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Recalls that ATP describes the setting of a tax design aimed at reducing tax liability by using the technicalities of a tax system or of mismatches between two or more tax systems that go against the spirit of the law; points out that some Member States make it particularly easy to set up schemes for ATP in order to attract business;
Amendment 1050 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 161 a (new) 161 a. Notes that the intensity of losses due to tax avoidance is substantially greater in low and middle-income countries, especially in sub-Saharan Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean, and in South Asia compared to other regions1; notes furthermore that bilateral tax treaties signed by developing countries with developed countries negatively impact their tax revenues2; ____________________ [1] Cobham, A and Petr Janský (2017) Global Distribution of Revenue Loss from Tax Avoidance https://www.wider.unu.edu/sites/default/fil es/wp2017-55.pdf [2] http://www.actionaid.org/publications/imp act-tax-treaties-revenue-collection-case- study-developing-and-least-developed
Amendment 1051 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 161 b (new) 161b. Calls on the Union to support fully the fight against use of natural resources to finance conflicts; asks States party to abide by their commitments under the Kimberley Process Certification Scheme and the EU Regulation on Conflict Minerals, particularly regarding the establishment of efficient domestic controls over the production of, and trade in, natural resources and the measures accompanying the EU Regulation on responsible sourcing of minerals; calls for the adoption of mandatory worldwide rules;
Amendment 1052 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 161 c (new) 161c. Calls for support for the developing countries, and in particular the African countries within sub-regional economic unions or the African Union (AU), in standardising transfer pricing documentation across the African continent as the Joint Transfer Pricing Forum is doing;
Amendment 1053 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 162 162. Recalls the need to take into account the specific legal features and vulnerabilities of developing countries, in particular in the context of automatic exchange of information, namely in terms of the transition period and their need for support in their
Amendment 1054 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 162 a (new) 162 a. Acknowledges that tax havens also exist in developing countries and that their political leadership actively pursues such policies;
Amendment 1055 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 163 163. Notes that closer work with sub- regional and regional organisations is needed, in particular with the African Union (AU) in order to combat illegal financial flows and corruption in the private and public sectors; highlights the importance of developing countries participating at global level in work being carried out in, for example, the G8, the G20 and the OECD; reiterates the need for a coherent and comprehensive framework summarising initiatives launched and carried out in the various international fora;
Amendment 1056 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 163 a (new) 163a. Welcomes the Commission's proposal to improve the traceability of all works of art more than 250 years old by equipping them with an identity card and creating a licencing system for imports to the EU; calls with reference to the fight against terrorism financing for these measures to come into force as soon as possible;
Amendment 1057 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 163 a (new) 163 a. Welcomes the cooperation with the African Union (AU) within the Addis Tax Initiative (ATI) and the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) and the Kimberley process;
Amendment 1058 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 164 Amendment 1059 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 164 164. Welcomes the participation on an equal footing of all countries involved in the Inclusive Framework, which brings together over 115 countries and jurisdictions to collaborate on the implementation of the OECD/G20 BEPS Package; states that the BEPS plan was designed to accommodate the interests of OECD countries and not the developing countries, that BEPS constitutes a real risk for developing countries given that the budget revenue of these countries is based primarily on corporate tax and the global presence of international companies, and that the developing countries do not have sufficient capacity to implement the BEPS plan rules; calls for capacity building in the developing countries to address this problem; calls on the Member States to support a reform of both the mandate and functioning of the Inclusive Framework to ensure that developing countries’ interests are taken into consideration;
Amendment 106 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Recalls that ATP describes the setting of a tax design aimed at reducing tax liability by using the technicalities of a tax system or
Amendment 1060 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 164 164. Welcomes the participation on an equal footing of all countries involved in the Inclusive Framework, which brings together over 115 countries and jurisdictions to collaborate on the implementation of the OECD/G20 BEPS Package; calls on the Member States to support a reform of both the mandate and functioning of the Inclusive Framework to ensure that developing countries’ interests are taken into consideration; recalls the exclusion of over 100 developing countries in negotiating the BEPS actions; recalls calls from the Group of 77 (G77) and developing countries for global reform and decision-making to take place within a global tax body under the auspices of the UN;
Amendment 1061 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 165 165. Recalls that public development aid should be directed to a greater extent towards the
Amendment 1062 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 165 165. Recalls that public development aid should be directed to a greater extent towards the implementation of an appropriate regulatory framework and the bolstering of tax administrations and institutions responsible for fighting illicit financial flows;
Amendment 1063 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 165 165. Recalls that public development aid targeting poverty reduction should be directed to a greater extent towards the implementation of an appropriate regulatory framework and the bolstering of tax administrations and institutions responsible for fighting illicit financial flows; calls for this aid to be provided in the form of technical expertise in relation to resource management, financial information and anti-corruption rules; calls for this aid to also favour regional and sub- regional cooperation against tax fraud, tax evasion, aggressive tax planning and money laundering; stresses that this aid should include support to civil society and media in developing countries to ensure public scrutiny over domestic tax policies;
Amendment 1064 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 166 166. Expects the Commission to come up with adequate resources to implement the ‘Collect More – Spend Better’ approach, notably through its flagships programmes81
Amendment 1065 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 166 a (new) 166a. Stresses, with regard to improvements in the business climate, investment certainty, better tax governance and transparency, that a programme for improving online access to legal information about business laws in the OHADA area needs to be set up and a study on the legal interoperability of civil and common law launched in order to establish common rules in continental Africa with a view to forming a large free trade area;
Amendment 1066 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 166 a (new) 166 a. Calls for a concerted external action of the EU and Member States at all levels of the policy to provide third countries and in particular developing ones to bolsters a balanced economic development and avoid dependence on one single sector, in particular the financial one;
Amendment 1067 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 167 167. Recalls the need for fair treatment of developing countries when negotiating tax treaties, taking into account their particular situation
Amendment 1068 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 167 167. Recalls the need for fair treatment of developing countries when negotiating tax treaties, taking into account their particular situation and ensuring a fair allocation of tax rights according to genuine economic activity and value creation; calls, in this regard, for
Amendment 1069 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 167 167. Recalls the need for fair treatment of developing countries when negotiating tax treaties, taking into account their particular situation and ensuring a fair allocation of tax rights according to genuine economic activity and value creation; calls, in this regard, for
Amendment 107 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Recalls that ATP describes the setting of a tax design aimed at reducing tax liability by using the technicalities of a tax system or of mismatches between two or more tax systems that go against the spirit of the law and could be considered illegal;
Amendment 1070 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 167 a (new) 167 a. Calls on Member States to undertake spillover analyses when negotiating tax treaties with developing countries and when adopting its tax policies; urges the Commission to consider spillover effects of EU tax regulations, in line with the Policy Coherence for Development and produce an impact assessments of European tax policies on developing countries, in order to take better into account negative spillovers on developing countries and the special needs of those countries;
Amendment 1071 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 167 a (new) 167a. Points to the role of the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly in the promotion of political dialogue, in particular as regards the exchange of best practices, good governance, including tax governance, and the fight against terrorism, money laundering, human trafficking and any other kind of trafficking;
Amendment 1072 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 167 a (new) 167 a. Notes the particular importance of transparency, including through public CBCR and public registers of BO, given the limited capacity of developing countries to meet requirements through existing exchange of information procedures.
Amendment 1073 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 167 b (new) 167 b. Notes the particular importance of transparency, including through public CBCR and public registers of beneficial owners, given the limited capacity of developing countries to meet requirements through existing exchange of information procedures; calls on the EU and its Member States to enforce the principle that listed or unlisted multinational companies of all countries and sectors, and especially those companies extracting natural resources, must adopt CBCR as a standard, requiring them to publish, as part of their annual reporting and on a country-by-country basis for each territory in which they operate, the names of all subsidiaries and their respective financial performance, relevant tax information, assets and number of employees, and to ensure that this information is made publicly available, while minimising administrative burdens by excluding micro-enterprises; calls on the European Union and its Member States to ensure that, when negotiating tax and investment treaties with developing countries, income or profits resulting from cross-border activities should be taxed in the source country where value is extracted or created;
Amendment 1074 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 167 b (new) 167 b. Calls on the EIB and the EBRD, and on Member States’ development finance institutions, to monitor and ensure that companies or other legal entities that receive support do not participate in tax evasion and avoidance by interacting with financial intermediaries established in offshore centres and tax havens, or by facilitating illicit capital flows, and to increase their transparency policies by, for example, making all of their reports and investigations publicly available; calls on the EIB to apply ‘due diligence’, requiring annual public country-by- country reporting, tracing beneficial ownership and controlling the value of intragroup transactions in order to ensure the transparency of investments and prevent tax evasion and tax avoidance1a; _________________ 1a Paragraph 16 from Report on tax avoidance and tax evasion as challenges for governance, social protection and development in developing countries (2015/2058(INI)),European Parliament Committee on Development. Report adopted on 09/06/2015;
Amendment 1075 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 167 b (new) 167b. Calls on the Commission to include provisions on the fight against tax avoidance, tax evasion and money laundering in the future agreement on the ACP-EU Partnership after the Cotonou Agreement expires in February 2020;
Amendment 1076 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 167 c (new) 167c. Calls for a study to be carried out into the cost-benefit analysis of tax incentives, in an effort to make it possible to attract investors without encouraging illegal financial flows;
Amendment 1077 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 168 168. Recalls that tax good governance is a global challenge which requires, above all, global solutions;
Amendment 1078 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 168 168. Recalls that tax good governance is a global challenge which requires, above all, global solutions; recalls its position therefore that a ‘tax good governance’ clause should systematically be included in new relevant EU agreements with third countries in order to ensure that these agreements cannot be misused by companies or intermediaries to avoid or evade taxes or launder illicit proceeds, without hampering the EU’s exclusive competences; takes the view that this clause should include specific rules on State aid under the form of a tax advantage, transparency requirements and anti-money laundering provisions;
Amendment 1079 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 168 a (new) Amendment 108 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Recalls that ATP describes the setting of a tax design aimed at reducing tax liability by using the technicalities or deficiencies of a tax system
Amendment 1080 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 168 b (new) 168 b. Calls for the Commission to strive for a greater degree of specification of the AML/CFT and tax-related requirements in its free trade and association agreements;1a _________________ 1a Ioannides, I., Douma, W. T., Güven, O., Jancic, D., Pantaleo, L., van der Velde, S., de Vries, F. (2016). The inclusion of financial services in EU free trade and association agreements: Effects on money laundering, tax evasion and avoidance; EPRS.
Amendment 1081 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 168 c (new) 168 c. Calls for the Commission to ensure that all free trade and association agreements contain provisions on tax cooperation and that such provisions guarantee cooperation at the bilateral level in addition to any regional or international instruments or arrangements; 1a _________________ 1a Ioannides, I., Douma, W. T., Güven, O., Jancic, D., Pantaleo, L., van der Velde, S., de Vries, F. (2016). The inclusion of financial services in EU free trade and association agreements: Effects on money laundering, tax evasion and avoidance; EPRS.
Amendment 1082 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 168 d (new) 168 d. Calls on the Commission to include in its free trade and association agreements provisions aimed at combating mispricing and misinvoicing of internationally traded goods and services;1a _________________ 1a Ioannides, I., Douma, W. T., Güven, O., Jancic, D., Pantaleo, L., van der Velde, S., de Vries, F. (2016). The inclusion of financial services in EU free trade and association agreements: Effects on money laundering, tax evasion and avoidance; EPRS.
Amendment 1083 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 168 e (new) 168 e. Calls on the Commission to include in its free trade and association agreements provisions on public country by country reporting of corporate tax, the establishment of public registers of beneficial owners, and the establishment of public commercial registers; 1a _________________ 1a Ioannides, I., Douma, W. T., Güven, O., Jancic, D., Pantaleo, L., van der Velde, S., de Vries, F. (2016). The inclusion of financial services in EU free trade and association agreements: Effects on money laundering, tax evasion and avoidance; EPRS.
Amendment 1084 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 168 f (new) Amendment 1085 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 168 g (new) 168 g. Calls on the Commission to pursue a strategy of imposing a measure of conditionality during trade negotiations, where structural weaknesses in rule of law enforcement – mainly due to corruption, organised crime and shadow economy – undermine the EU’s trade goals and the trading partner’s legislative and administrative endeavours in combating money laundering and tax evasion; 1a _________________ 1a [1][1] Ioannides, I., Douma, W. T., Güven, O., Jancic, D., Pantaleo, L., van der Velde, S., de Vries, F. (2016). The inclusion of financial services in EU free trade and association agreements: Effects on money laundering, tax evasion and avoidance; EPRS.
Amendment 1086 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 169 a (new) 169a. Points out that State aid may be used in a direct and offensive manner for an aggressive industrial policy; asks the Commission to bear this in mind when negotiating trade agreements, so as not to put EU businesses at a trading disadvantage; stresses that the European Union should more systematically urge reciprocity in its trade negotiations;
Amendment 1087 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 169 b (new) 169b. Calls on the Commission to give the taxation clause much greater prominence in trade agreements; stresses here too the importance of reciprocity, which is a level playing field tool and should enable a race to the top;
Amendment 1088 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 170 a (new) 170 a. Recalls the article 79 of the Political Declaration Setting Out The Framework For The Future Relationship Between the European Union and The United Kingdom and insists that the future relationship must ensure open and fair competition and that provisions to ensure this should cover State Aid, competition, social and employment standards, environmental standards, climate change, and relevant tax matters, building on the level playing field arrangements provided for in Withdrawal Agreement and commensurate with the overall economic relations;
Amendment 1089 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 170 a (new) 170 a. Recalls that good tax governance clauses should be included in all new relevant EU agreements with third countries, and negotiated in the existing ones at the time of revision, with a view to the fact that these are core instruments of the EU external policy yet, depending on the specific policy field involve different levels of competence;
Amendment 109 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 a (new) 10 a. (new) Welcomes the Commission’s reply to its calls made in its the TAXE, TAX2 and PANA resolutions to better identify aggressive tax planning and harmful tax practices and provide a clear distinction between what is illegal and what is legal in order to ensure certainty;
Amendment 1090 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 170 a (new) 170a. Stresses that the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the EU on 29 March 2019 will enable it to regain its tax sovereignty; hopes that this freedom will not encourage fiscal dumping, particularly in regard to corporate tax;
Amendment 1091 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 170 a (new) 170 a. Calls for the Union negotiators to include the issues of, inter alia, financial crimes, tax evasion, tax avoidance, aggressive tax planning and corporate taxation rates when negotiating the details of the future relationship between the EU and the United Kingdom;
Amendment 1092 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 170 a (new) 170 a. Notes that financial flows are mainly ending up in the United Kingdom and the United States; underlines, in this regard, the importance of close cooperation between the European Union and the United Kingdom on combatting illicit financial flows from Russia and reducing cross-border barriers to sharing information, following the United Kingdom’s withdrawal from the European Union;
Amendment 1093 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 170 a (new) 170a. Is particularly concerned at the announcement by the British Prime Minister Theresa May that 'the lowest level of corporation tax in the G20' would be introduced in Great Britain;
Amendment 1094 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 170 b (new) 170 b. Notes with concerns the fact the United Kingdom was ranked 2nd biggest conduit for tax havens after The Netherlands1, and ranked 23rd on the 2018 Financial Secrecy Index, accounting for 17% of the global market in off shorefinancial services; deplores the fact the UK remains in the centre of a largenetwork of British secrecy jurisdictions, notably the Crown Dependencies Jersey, Guernsey and the Isle of Man and to Overseas Territories including tax havens such as Cayman Islands, British Virgin Islands or Bermuda; underlines that the Cayman Islands ranked on the 3rd place, Guernsey on the 10th place, British Virgin Islands on 16th and Jersey on 18th place of the respective index; ________________ [1] Offshore Financial Centers and the five largest value conduits in the world, July 2017, University of Amsterdam. http://corpnet.uva.nl/ofcs/
Amendment 1095 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 170 c (new) 170 c. Notes that 90 % of the biggest global companies have a presence in a UK tax haven; states that the very light regulation in the past in the area of tax and money laundering encouraged criminal around the globe to use the UK and the City of London for their illegal activities; underlined that according to the National Crime Agency GBP 90 billion – about 4% of UK’s GDP – is laundered into the UK annually, large number coming from Russia;
Amendment 1096 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 170 d (new) 170 d. Demands that the future deal must include a tax good governance clause and that the UK abides by exiting and ongoing EU tax legislation in return to any access to Single Market for those offering financial, legal or accountancy services;
Amendment 1097 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 170 b (new) 170 b. Notes that some tax treaties allow the development of potential harmful tax schemes, such as the ‘SingleMalt’ 1awhich directs profits to countries with which Ireland has a double taxation agreement but that do not have any corporation tax; asks the European Commission to investigate such schemes and assess if they constitute an abuse of tax treaties; _________________ 1a Christian Aid, ‘Impossible’ structures: tax outcomes overlooked by the 2015 tax Spillover analysis, Part Two, 2017 https://www.christianaid.ie/sites/default/fil es/2018-02/impossible-structures-tax- report.pdf
Amendment 1098 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 170 e (new) 170 e. Notes that Brexit will create a divergence of policies against financial crimes, tax evasion and tax avoidance between the EU and the United Kingdom, which will constitute new economic, fiscal and security risks; stresses the urgency to approve the necessary reforms in these areas and the need to reassess the financial agreements with the UK that will become a third country vis-à-vis the EU in the event of Brexit, both regarding London as a global financial center as well as its Overseas territories;
Amendment 1099 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 170 f (new) 170 f. Calls on the Council to promptly assess the situation of Gibraltar once the Brexit is effective to include the territory in the EU list of non-cooperative jurisdictions as it is obviously non- compliant with the Council’s criteria;
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 8 a (new) - having regard to investigative journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia who was murdered in Malta and Ján Kuciak who was murdered in Slovakia together with his partner Martina Kušnírová,
Amendment 110 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 a (new) 10 a. Understands then that there is no practical difference between tax avoidance, tax planning and aggressive tax planning; and that tax planning can also be considered systemic tax avoidance3a _________________ 3a Jarass, L. and Obermair, G.M. (2015) What an Individual EU Country Can Do Unilaterally to Counteract BEPS. Reprinted from Tax Notes Int’l, August 24, 2015, p. 697
Amendment 1100 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 171 171. Notes that some experts consider that many tax treaties concluded by EU Member States currently in force restrict the tax rights of low and lower-middle income countries82 ; underlines that it is the prerogative of Member States to conclude tax treaties; _________________ 82 Action Aid, Mistreated Tax Treaties Report, February 2016:
Amendment 1101 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 171 a (new) 171 a. Notes that developing countries need tax revenue, not least from the profits of multinational companies, to achieve their development goals; yet the taxation of most of those profits is regulated by a global network of bilateral tax treaties; notes that more than half of these treaties, and 40 percent of those with developing countries, have an EU Member State as signatory;1a _________________ 1a Martin Hearson(2018) ‘The European Union’s tax treaties with developing countries. Leading by example?’; GUE/NGL; September 2018.
Amendment 1102 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 171 a (new) 171 a. Asks Member States to renegotiate their bilateral tax treaties with third countries with the aim of introducing anti-abuse clauses, preventing ‘treaty shopping’ and a race to the bottom among developing countries;
Amendment 1103 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 171 b (new) 171 b. Reiterates its call on the European Union and its Member States to ensure that, when negotiating tax and investment treaties with developing countries, income or profits resulting from cross-border activities be taxed in the source country, where value is extracted or created; stresses, in this regard, that the UN Model Tax Convention ensures a fairer distribution of taxing rights between source and residence countries; stresses than when negotiating tax treaties, the European Union and its Member States should comply with the principle of policy coherence for development established in Article 208 TFEU;
Amendment 1104 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 171 b (new) 171 b. Recalls that the European Parliament has resolved that the “global network of tax treaties…often impedes developing countries from taxing profits generated in their territory”1aand that “when negotiating tax treaties, the European Union and its Member States should comply with the principle of policy coherence for development;2a _________________ 1a Tax rulings and other measures similar in nature or effect (TAXE 2) 2a European Parliament resolution of 8 July 2015 on tax avoidance and tax evasion as challenges forgovernance, social protection and development in developing countries(2015/2058(INI)). URL:http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides /getDoc.do?type=TA&reference=P8-TA- 2015-0265 uage=EN˚=A8-2015-0184
Amendment 1105 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 171 c (new) 171 c. Notes that the European Economic and Social Committee has recommended that “when negotiating double tax agreements with developing countries, EU Member States take more account of the needs of developing countries”1a _________________ 1a European Economic and Social Committee. EU development partnerships and the challenge posed by international tax agreements. REX/487.https://www.eesc.europa.eu/en/o ur-work/opinions-information- reports/opinions/eu-development- partnerships-and-challenge-posed- international-tax-agreements
Amendment 1106 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 171 d (new) 171 d. Notes that tax treaties place too much emphasis on the taxing rights of the countries of residence of multinational companies, imposing too many restrictions on the countries that are the source of those companies’ income, often developing countries; 1a _________________ 1a Martin Hearson (2018) ‘The European Union’s tax treaties with developing countries. Leading by example?’; GUE/NGL; September 2018.
Amendment 1107 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 171 e (new) 171 e. Regrets that on average, the treaties developing countries have concluded with EU Member States impose more restrictions on their source taxing rights than their treaties with other countries, even other OECD members; notes that EU Member States’ treaties with developing countries more closely resemble the OECD model convention, which is not designed with developing countries in mind, than the UN model, which is; notes that a study of 172 treaties signed between EU Member States and developing countries noted that the average EU treaty leaves intact 40% of its developing country signatories’ taxing rights;1a _________________ 1a Martin Hearson(2018) ‘The European Union’s tax treaties with developing countries. Leading by example?’; GUE/NGL; September 2018.
Amendment 1108 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 171 f (new) 171 f. Calls on EU Member States and the European Commission to conduct spillover analyses incorporating reviews of EU Member States’ double taxation treaties, based on the principle of policy coherence for development and taking into account the recommendations of the European Parliament and the EESC;1a _________________ 1a Martin Hearson(2018) ‘The European Union’s tax treaties with developing countries. Leading by example?’; GUE/NGL; September 2018.
Amendment 1109 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 171 g (new) 171 g. Calls on EU Member States to undertake a rolling plan of renegotiations with a focus on progressively increasing the source taxation rights permitted by EU Member States’ treaties; calls on such renegotiations to introduce development- friendly measures such as anti-treaty shopping.1a _________________ 1a Martin Hearson (2018) ‘The European Union’s tax treaties with developing countries. Leading by example?’; GUE/NGL; September 2018.
Amendment 111 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 a (new) 10 a. Notes that the growing role of intangible assets in the MNE value chain and harmful R&D tax incentives are conducive to aggressive tax planning.;
Amendment 1110 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 171 h (new) 171 h. Calls on EU Member States and the European Commission to formulate and publish an EU Model Tax Convention for Development Policy Coherence, setting out source-based provisions that EU Member States are willing to offer to developing countries as a starting point for negotiations, not in return for sacrifices on their part; 1a _________________ 1a Martin Hearson(2018) ‘The European Union’s tax treaties with developing countries. Leading by example?’; GUE/NGL; September 2018.
Amendment 1111 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 172 172. Calls on the Commission to review all tax treaties in force and signed by Member States with third countries through impact assessment in order to identify potential negative impacts of such treaties on low and lower-middle income countries and to ensure that the
Amendment 1112 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 172 172. Calls on the Commission to review all tax treaties in force and signed by Member States with third countries to ensure that they are all compliant with new global standards such as the Multilateral Convention to Implement Tax Treaty Related Measures to Prevent Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (‘MLI’); asks the Commission to release recommendations to Member States regarding their existing bilateral tax treaties to ensure that they include general anti-abuse rules, looking at genuine economic activity and value creation; stresses nevertheless that such issues should remain within the remit of national tax sovereignty exercised in compatibility with OECD rules;
Amendment 1113 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 172 a (new) 172a. Calls, against a background of global tax competition, for uniform rules at EU level to be drawn up, this being far more effective than the voluntary use of BEPS measures; calls for conventions preventing double taxation to be implemented multilaterally instead of adapting each treaty individually as this takes too long and is inefficient;
Amendment 1114 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 172 a (new) 172 a. Notes that double taxation treaties between Member States and developing countries do not usually promote source taxation, therefore benefiting multinational corporations at the expense of mobilisation of domestic resources by developing countries; notes that the lack of domestic resource mobilisation prevents fully financed public services such as healthcare or education in these countries, which disproportionately impacts women and girls; urges the Member States to mandate the Commission to review existing double taxation treaties so as to examine and address these problems, and to ensure that future double taxation treaties include gender equality provisions in addition to general anti-abuse provisions;
Amendment 1115 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 172 a (new) 172 a. Calls on Member States to mandate the Commission to propose a European tax treaty template, containing a clause on significant digital presence, an anti-abuse rule and an anti-tax dumping clause including a minimum level of effective taxation set at 18% of profits;
Amendment 1116 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 172 a (new) 172 a. Is aware that bilateral tax treaties do not reflect the current reality of digitalized economies; calls on Member States to update their bilateral tax treaties based on the Commission recommendation on taxation of digitalized economy1f; _________________ 1f C (2018)-1650 final
Amendment 1117 #
Motion for a resolution Subheading 6.7 a (new) Welcomes the strengthened framework avoiding double non-taxation; emphasizes that elimination of double taxation is of great importance in order to ensure that honest taxpayers are treated fairly and their trust is not undermined; calls on Member States to abide by their double- taxation treaties and cooperate sincerely and swiftly in cases of reported double taxation;
Amendment 1118 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 174 174. Calls on the
Amendment 1119 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 174 174. Calls on the Commission to collect and release information on the number of tax disputes submitted and resolved, sorted by type of dispute per year and by countries involved, so as to monitor the mechanism and ensure that it is efficient and effective;
Amendment 112 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 Amendment 1120 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 175 a (new) 175 a. Recalls relevant Member States to make use of the opportunity afforded by their direct relations with the countries concerned to take the necessary steps in order to put pressure on their overseas countries and territories (OCTs) and outermost regions that do not respect international standards pertaining to tax cooperation, transparency and anti- money laundering; takes the view that the EU transparency and due diligence requirements should be effectively enforced in these territories;1a _________________ 1a PANA recommendations adopted on December 13, 2018.
Amendment 1121 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 175 a (new) 175a. Takes the view that a transparency and due diligence requirement should apply to these territories;
Amendment 1122 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 176 Amendment 1123 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 176 176. Notes that the Commission has opened an in-depth investigation of the application of the Madeira Free Zone regional aid scheme by Portugal1a; _________________ 1a An in-depth Commission investigation to examine whether Portugal has applied the Madeira Free Zone regional aid scheme in conformity with its 2007 and 2013 decisions approving it, namely by verifying whether tax exemptions granted by Portugal to companies established in the Madeira Free Zone are in line with the Commission decisions and EU State aid rules; highlights that the Commission is verifying whether Portugal complied with the requirements of the schemes, i.e. whether the company profits benefiting from the income tax reductions originated exclusively from activities carried out in Madeira and whether the beneficiary companies actually created and maintained jobs in Madeira;
Amendment 1124 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 176 176. Notes that the Commission has opened an in-depth investigation to examine whether Portugal has applied the Madeira Free Zone regional aid scheme in conformity with its 2007 and 2013 decisions approving it
Amendment 1125 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 176 176.
Amendment 1127 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 177 177. Welcomes the broad definition of both ‘intermediary’ and regrets the incompleteness of the ‘reportable cross- border arrangement’ in the recently adopted DAC683 ; _________________ 83 OJ L 139, 5.6.2018, p. 1. OJ L 139, 5.6.2018, p. 1.
Amendment 1128 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 177 a (new) 177 a. Reiterates the need for enhanced cooperation between tax administrations and financial supervisors for a joint and effective surveillance of the role of financial intermediaries and in the light that some tax-driven financial instruments may pose a risk to financial market stability and market integrity;
Amendment 1129 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 177 177. Welcomes the broad definition of both ‘intermediary’ and ‘reportable cross- border arrangement’ in the recently adopted DAC683 ;
Amendment 113 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 Amendment 1130 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 177 177. Welcomes the broad definition of both ‘intermediary’ and ‘reportable cross- border arrangement’ in the recently adopted DAC683 ; calls to update the reportable transactions under DAC6 in order to also require the mandatory disclosure of dividend arbitrage schemes, including the granting of dividend and capital gains tax refunds; _________________ 83 OJ L 139, 5.6.2018, p. 1.
Amendment 1131 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 177 177. Welcomes the broad definition of both ‘intermediary’ and ‘reportable cross- border arrangement’ in the recently adopted DAC683 ; calls on all Member States to deliberately apply the EU reporting obligation also to purely domestic cases; _________________ 83 OJ L 139, 5.6.2018, p. 1.
Amendment 1132 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 177 177. Welcomes the broad definition of both ‘intermediary’ and ‘reportable cross- border arrangement’ in the recently adopted DAC683 ;
Amendment 1133 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 177 177. Welcomes the broad definition of both ‘intermediary’ and ‘reportable cross- border arrangement’ in the recently adopted DAC683;
Amendment 1134 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 177 177. Welcomes the broad definition of both ‘intermediary’ and ‘reportable cross- border arrangement’ in the recently adopted DAC683 ; recalls the obligation of intermediaries under DAC6 to report structural loopholes in tax legislation to tax authorities, without having to reveal the identities of any potential clients taking advantage of these loopholes at the time; requests that intermediaries that are convicted for participation in and knowledge of fraudulent behaviour of clients are to have their licenses revoked and be banned from practising their occupation henceforth; _________________ 83 OJ L 139, 5.6.2018, p. 1.
Amendment 1135 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 177 a (new) 177 a. Urges the Commission, Member States and all EU bodies to refer to “enablers” or “promoters” as opposed to "intermediaries", which disguises the agency of the facilitators and promoters of tax avoidance schemes; notes that Ireland has already classified them as “promoters” in legislation (eg, Mandatory Disclosure of Certain Transactions Regulation 2011);
Amendment 1136 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 177 b (new) 177 b. Recalls that the EU’s existing definition of control required to create a group of companies should be applied to accountancy firms that are members of a network of firms associated by legally enforceable contractual arrangements that provide for the sharing of a name or marketing, professional standards, clients, support services, finance or professional indemnity insurance arrangements, as anticipated by Directive2013/34/EU on annual financial statements1a; and calls for the European Commission to present a proposal for professional networks subject to these arrangements to be required to file full country-by-country reports, adapted to meet the particular needs of the sector, on public record;2a _________________ 2a Murphy, R.; Stausholm, S.N. (2017) ‘The Big Four, a study of opacity’; GUE/NGL, July 2017. 1a European Parliament recommendation of 13 December 2017 to the Council and the Commission following the inquiry into money laundering, tax avoidance and tax evasion (Texts adopted, P8_TA- (2017)0491).
Amendment 1137 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 177 c (new) 177 c. Calls for the Commission to present a proposal whereby the networks of professional service firms (e.g. accountancy firms, tax and legal advisors) to be required to apply for a single license to provide audit, taxation services or legal advice of any sort in the Member States, and that all abusive tax schemes promoted by the firm that have an impact on the tax revenue of a Member State be reported, whether sold in or outside the EU by a network member; 1a _________________ 1a Murphy, R.; Stausholm, S.N. (2017) ‘The Big Four, a study of opacity’; GUE/NGL, July 2017.
Amendment 1138 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 177 d (new) 177 d. Calls on the Commission to present a proposal for all audit firms to be required to be entirely separate from those selling any other service;
Amendment 1139 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 177 e (new) 177 e. Calls on the European Commission and member states to recognise that there is an inherent conflict of interest between the commercial interests of the tax avoidance industry and the public mandate of the EU to minimise tax avoidance;
Amendment 114 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 Amendment 1140 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 177 f (new) 177 f. Stresses that this conflict of interest can come in several forms, including via public procurement contracts that require the provision of paid advice on these issues; the provision of informal or unpaid advice via official advisory and expert groups; and via the revolving door;
Amendment 1141 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 177 g (new) 177 g. Notes that in the same way as has been done by the World Health Organisation (WHO) to reduce the effects of the lobbying powers of the Tabaco industry in health policies, measures can be implemented in national, EU and international institutions to protect fiscal policies from commercial and other vested interests of the accountancy industry;
Amendment 1142 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 177 h (new) 177 h. Calls on the European Commission and member states to put in place a firewall to ensure that those with a commercial or vested interest in promoting tax avoidance and tax evasion should not have arole in advising the EU and member states on action to tackle tax avoidance and tax evasion. Elements of this firewall should include restrictions on the membership of advisory and expert groups, and on the awarding of public contracts for tax-related studies and impact assessments; restrictions on lobbying on tax avoidance and tax evasion; revolving door regulations; and full lobby transparency;
Amendment 1143 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 178 178. Draws attention to the risks of conflicts of interest stemming from the provision of legal advice, tax advice and auditing services within the same accountancy firm; stresses, therefore, the importance of transparent indication of what services are provided to a particular client and clear separation between these services; stresses too the importance of lawyer-client confidentiality and legal professional privilege as a mainstay of the rule of law;
Amendment 1144 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 178 178. Draws attention to the risks of conflicts of interest stemming from the provision of legal advice, tax advice and auditing services within the same accountancy firm;
Amendment 1145 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 178 a (new) 178 a. (new) Welcomes the monitoring of the enforcement of Directive 2014/56/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 April 2014 amending Directive 2006/43/EC on statutory audits of annual accounts and consolidated accounts1g and of Regulation (EU) 537/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 April 2014 on specific requirements regarding statutory audit of public-interest entities and repealing Commission Decision 2005/909/EC1h, in particular the provision on statutory auditors or audit firms carrying out statutory audits of public- interest entities; points out the need to ensure that the rules are properly applied; _________________ 1g OJ L 158, 27.5.2014, p. 196 1h OJ L 158, 27.5.2014, p. 77
Amendment 1146 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 178 a (new) 178 a. Recognizes that the divergent interests between the commercial interests of the tax avoidance industry and the public mandate of the EU to minimise tax avoidance can clash in situations where conflicts of interest arise, such as public procurement contracts that require the provision of paid advice, the provision of informal or unpaid advice via official advisory and expert groups, and via revolving doors;
Amendment 1147 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 178 a (new) 178a. Calls on Member States to consider the introduction of mandatory tax reporting for all tax and financial intermediaries referred to in Action 12 of the BEPS plan who, in the course of their professional activities, become aware of the existence of abusive or aggressive transactions, devices or structures;
Amendment 1148 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 178 a (new) 178 a. Stresses that this conflict of interest can come in several forms, including via public procurement contracts that require the provision of paid advice on these issues, the provision of informal or unpaid advice via official advisory and expert groups and via the revolving door;
Amendment 1149 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 178 a (new) 178 a. Calls for a rotation of auditors every 7 years to prevent conflicts of interests and the limitation of the provision of non-audit services to a minimum;
Amendment 115 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Calls on the Commission and the Council to propose and adopt a comprehensive definition of aggressive tax planning indicators
Amendment 1150 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 178 b (new) 178 b. Calls on the European Commission and member states to put in place a firewall to ensure that those with a commercial or vested interest in promoting tax avoidance and tax evasion do not have a role in advising the EU and Member States on action to tackle tax avoidance and tax evasion; considers that elements of this firewall should include restrictions on the membership of advisory and expert groups, and on the awarding of public contracts for tax- related studies and impact assessments, restrictions on lobbying on tax avoidance and tax evasion, revolving door regulations and full lobby transparency;
Amendment 1151 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 178 b (new) 178 b. Calls on the Commission and Member States to ensure that those with a commercial or vested interests in promoting tax avoidance and tax evasion, such as big accountancy firms like Deloitte, PWC, EY and KPMG, do not have an advising role in policies to fight tax avoidance and evasion; for instance, restricting their membership in advisory and expert groups, not commissioning tax-related studies and impact assessments to these actors, regulating revolving doors, and implementing full lobby transparency rules;
Amendment 1152 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 178 b (new) 178 b. Reiterates that intermediaries play a crucial role in facilitating money laundering and the financing of terrorism and should beheld accountable for these actions;
Amendment 1153 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 178 c (new) 178 c. Reiterates its call on the Commission to come forward with a legislative proposal on the separation of accounting firms and financial or tax service providers as well as on all advisory services, including a Union incompatibility regime for tax advisers, in order to prevent them from advising both public revenue authorities and taxpayers and to prevent other conflicts of interest;
Amendment 1154 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 178 c (new) 178 c. Stresses the role played by intermediaries as facilitators and beneficiaries of ATP schemes and deplores that such intermediaries develop bespoke schemes for customers in a way that undermines the cohesion of society and operate with a business model that runs counter to the social contract;
Amendment 1155 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 179 Amendment 1156 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 179 179. Reiterates that financial institutions, advisors and other intermediaries that knowingly, systematically and repeatedly facilitate, engage or participate in money laundering or tax evasion activities should face effective, proportional and dissuasive penalties, their licences to operate should undergo serious revision and, where applicable, be pre
Amendment 1157 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 179 179. Reiterates that financial institutions, advisors and other intermediaries that knowingly, systematically and repeatedly facilitate, engage or participate in money laundering or tax evasion activities should face clear, effective, proportional and dissuasive penalties at EU and Member State level, and, where applicable, be restricted from operating in the single market;
Amendment 1158 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 179 a (new) 179 a. Points out that professional secrecy cannot be used for the purposes of protection, the covering up of illegal practices or violating the spirit of the law; urges that the client/attorney privilege principle should not impede adequate STRs or the reporting of other potentially illegal activities without prejudice to the rights guaranteed by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and the general principles of criminal law; calls on the Commission to issue guidance on the interpretation and application of the legal privilege principle for professionals and to introduce a clear demarcation line between traditional judicial advice and lawyers acting as financial operators, in line with case-law of European courts;
Amendment 1159 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 179 b (new) 179 b. Calls on the Commission to assess the possibilities of blacklisting financial and non-financial intermediaries based in the EU which operate branches in countries blacklisted as non-cooperative jurisdictions or which are listed as high risk third countries by the Commission; Suggests further that intermediaries should be restricted from operating in the single market if convicted of financial crimes or of facilitating tax evasion;
Amendment 116 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Calls therefore on the Commission and the Council to propose and adopt a comprehensive definition of aggressive tax planning indicators, building on both the hallmarks identified in the fifth review of the Directive on administrative cooperation (DAC6)26 and the Commission’s relevant studies and recommendations27 ; recommends that all such indicators clearly delineate what is legitimate or not, as well as what could be illegal or not, in the natural efforts by corporation decision makers to minimise the tax liability of their corporation in its worldwide exposure, so as to maximise the returns of its shareholders; stresses equally that the chosen indicators should not be rigidly cast so that they end up as one-size-fits-all measures and check lists, but take into account industry-specific, country-specific and region-specific parameters that define how national taxation laws are framed; calls on Member States to use those indicators transparently as a
Amendment 1160 #
Motion for a resolution Subheading 179 b (new) Recalls the revelations of investigative journalists, which have become known as the LuxLeaks, Panama papers, Paradise papers and CumEx scandals;
Amendment 1161 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 179 c (new) 179 c. Pays tribute to the brave actions of whistle-blowers and recognizes their fundamental role in a democratic and accountable society;
Amendment 1162 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 180 180. Believes that the protection of whistle-blowers and the provision of adequate incentives for them is of major importance to ensure that unlawful activities and abuse of law are prevented or do not prosper; stresses that whistle- blowers are often a crucial source for investigative journalism and should therefore be protected against any form of harassment and retaliation and should be guaranteed anonymity; considers that whistle-blowers must be provided with sufficient incentives, taking account of the possible long-term effects of disclosure and subsequent retaliation; believes that it is necessary to protect the confidentiality and anonymity of investigative journalism’s sources, including whistle-
Amendment 1163 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 180 180. Believes that the protection of whistle-blowers is of major importance to ensure that unlawful activities and abuse of law are prevented or do not prosper; according to fundamental right to freedom of expression and information; Recognises that whistle-blowers play a crucial role in the fight against corruption and other serious crimes or illegal activities and in the protection of the EU's financial interests; stresses that whistle- blowers are often a crucial source for investigative journalism and should therefore be protected against any form of harassment and retaliation; believes that it is necessary to protect the confidentiality of investigative journalism’s sources, including whistle-
Amendment 1164 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 180 180. Believes that the protection of whistle-blowers is of major importance for both the private and the public sector to ensure that unlawful activities and abuse of law are prevented or do not prosper; stresses that whistle-blowers are often a crucial source for investigative journalism and should therefore be protected against any form of harassment and retaliation; believes that it is necessary to protect the confidentiality of investigative journalism’s sources, including whistle- blowers, if the role of investigative journalism as a watchdog in democratic society is to be safeguarded;
Amendment 1165 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 180 180. Believes that the protection of whistle-blowers is of major importance to ensure that unlawful activities and abuse of law are prevented or do not prosper; stresses that whistle-blowers are often a crucial source for investigative journalism and should therefore be protected against any form of harassment and retaliation; notes the importance of internal reporting channels; believes that it is necessary to protect the confidentiality of investigative journalism’s sources, including whistle- blowers, if the role of investigative journalism as a watchdog in democratic society is to be safeguarded;
Amendment 1166 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 180 a (new) 180 a. (new) Notes that the US False Claims Act provides a solid framework for rewarding of whistle-blowers in cases where the government recovers funds lost to fraud as presented during the 21 November TAX3 hearing; underlines that according to the US Justice Department report, whistle-blowers were directly responsible for detection and reporting of 3.4 out of 3.7 billion USD recovered; calls on Member States to establish safe confidential communication channels for whistle-blowers’ reporting within relevant authorities and in private entities;
Amendment 1167 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 180 a (new) 180 a. Calls for a general EU fund to be set up to give appropriate financial support to whistle-blowers whose livelihood is put at risk as a result of disclosures of criminal activity or facts with clear public interest;
Amendment 1168 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 180 a (new) 180 a. Welcomes the proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the protection of persons reporting on breaches of Union law.
Amendment 1169 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 180 b (new) 180 b. (new) Calls for the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on protection of persons reporting on breaches of Union law1x to be swiftly adopted; _________________ 1x 2018/0106(COD)
Amendment 117 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Calls on the Commission and the Council to propose and adopt a
Amendment 1170 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 181 181. Worries that whistle-blowers are often discouraged from reporting their concerns for fear of retaliation and that if there is retaliation and it is not discouraged or punished, this only serves to dissuade potential whistle-blowers; considers that the recognition in AMLD5 of the right of whistle-blowers to present a complaint in a safe manner to the respective competent authorities when exposed to a threat or retaliation and of their right to an effective remedy constitutes a significant improvement of the situation of individuals reporting suspicions of money laundering or terrorist financing internally within the company or to a FIU;
Amendment 1171 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 181 181. Worries that whistle-blowers are often discouraged from reporting their concerns for fear of retaliation; considers that the recognition in AMLD5 of the right of whistle-blowers to present a complaint in a safe manner to the respective competent authorities when exposed to a threat or retaliation and of their right to an effective remedy constitutes a significant improvement of the situation of individuals reporting suspicions of money laundering or terrorist financing internally within the company or to a FIU; calls on Member States to implement fully-fledged whistleblower protection when transposing the AMLD5 into national law;
Amendment 1172 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 181 a (new) 181a. Welcomes the Commission proposal of 23 April 2018 on the protection of whistle-blowers; regrets, however, that EU staff were not included among the target groups covered by the proposal for a directive; recognises that EU staff are currently not offered the same level of protection as in the proposal; calls on all EU agencies and institutions to tackle this shortcoming immediately by adapting their internal rules in order to reflect best international whistle-blower protection practices;
Amendment 1173 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 181 a (new) 181 a. Welcomes the European Commission’s April 2018 publication of a horizontal proposal on whistleblower protection; regrets that EU staff members were not incorporated in the scope; recognises that EU staff members are not currently afforded the same level of protections as in the proposal; urges all EU institutions, agencies, and bodies to immediately address this situation by adapting their internal rules in line with international best practices for the protection of whistleblowers and enduring compliance with OECD standards in this matter;
Amendment 1174 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 181 a (new) 181 a. Is concerned by the impact of non- disclosure agreements in employment contracts and dismissal agreements, particularly in the financial sector; calls on the Commission to assess the possibility of proposing legislation banning abusive non-disclosure agreements and declared void agreements which limit the employee’s ability and right to report unlawful activity;
Amendment 1175 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 181 a (new) 181 a. (new) Takes note of the proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the protection of persons reporting on breaches of Union law, which is currently under discussion in Parliament1i; _________________ 1i COM(2018) 218 final, 23.4.2018
Amendment 1176 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 181 a (new) 181 a. Highlights that the safeguarding of confidentiality and anonymity contributes to the creation of more effective channels for reporting fraud, corruption or other serious infringements.
Amendment 1177 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 182 a (new) 182 a. Deplores that even when in the area of financial services, the added value of sectorial whistleblower protection was already acknowledged by the Union legislator, and measures for the protection of whistleblowers were introduced in a significant number of legislative instruments in this area1a,a number of high profile cases involving European financial institutions have proven that protection of whistleblowers within such financial institutionsstill remains unsatisfactory and that fears of reprisals from both employers and authorities still prevents whistleblowers from coming forward within formation on breaches of law;2a _________________ 1a Communication of 8.12.2010 "Reinforcing sanctioning regimes in the financial services sector".[ 2a A8-0398/2018. Report on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliamentand of the Council on the protection of persons reporting on breaches of Union law (COM(2018)0218 – C8 0159/2018 – 2018/0106(COD))
Amendment 1178 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 182 a (new) 182 a. Welcomes the European Commission’s April 2018 publication of a horizontal proposal on whistleblower protection; regrets that EU staff members were not incorporated in the scope; recognizes that EU staff members are not currently afforded the same level of protections as in the proposal; urges all EU institutions, agencies, and bodies to immediately address this situation by adapting their internal rules in line with international best practices for the protection of whistleblowers;
Amendment 1179 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 182 a (new) 182 a. Insists on making illegal all internal corporate rules on confidentiality that would restrict employees in reporting suspect cases of unlawful transactions to responsible public authorities;
Amendment 118 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Calls on the Commission and the Council to propose and adopt a comprehensive and specific definition of aggressive tax planning indicators, building on both the hallmarks identified in the fifth review of the Directive on administrative cooperation (DAC6)26 and the Commission’s relevant studies and recommendations27; stresses that these clear indicators may be based, where necessary, on internationally agreed standards; calls on Member States to use those indicators as a basis to repeal all harmful tax practices deriving from existing tax loopholes; _________________ 26 Council Directive (EU) 2018/822 of 25 May 2018 amending Directive 2011/16/EU as regards mandatory automatic exchange of information in the field of taxation in relation to reportable cross-border arrangements, OJ L 139, 5.6.2018, p. 1. 27
Amendment 1180 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 183 183. Notes that the TAX3 Committee invited the whistle-blowers in the cases of Julius Bär and Danske Bank to testify at public parliamentary hearings84 ; Deeply regrets the fact, that the Danske Bank whistle-blower, Mr Howard Wilkinson, was unable to share his insights into the Danske Bank case freely and fully, due to legal restraints; _________________ 84 Mr Rudolf Elmer, hearing on 1.10.2018; Mr Howard Wilkinson, hearing on 21.11.2018.
Amendment 1181 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 183 a (new) 183 a. Notes that it has been proven that keeping a reporting person’s identity confidential is an essential element in avoiding backsliding and self-censorship. The duty of confidentiality should, therefore, only be waived in exceptional circumstances in which disclosure of information relating to the reporting person’s personal data is a necessary and proportionate obligation required under Union or national law in the context of subsequent investigations or judicial proceedings or to safeguard the freedoms of others including the right of defence of the concerned person, and in each case subject to appropriate safeguards under such laws. Appropriate sanctions should be provided for in the event of breaches of the duty of confidentiality concerning the reporting person’s identity; 1a _________________ 1a A8-0398/2018. Report on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the protection of persons reporting on breaches of Union law (COM(2018)0218 – C8 0159/2018 – 2018/0106(COD))
Amendment 1182 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 183 a (new) 183 a. (new) Calls on the Member States to closely work within the Council of Europe in the promotion and implementation in their domestic law by all States belonging to the Council of Europe of the Recommendation CM/Rec(2014)7 of the Committee of Ministers to Member States on the protection of whistle-blowers; calls on the Commission and Member States to take the lead in other international fora to promote the adoption of international binding standards for the protection of whistle-blowers;
Amendment 1183 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 183 b (new) 183 b. Notes that even when appropriate channels should be allowed for internal reporting, experts have noted that internal reporting should not be mandatory and that ultimately a whistleblower must have the right to be able to report externally1a _________________ 1a TAX3 Public hearing “Combatting money laundering in the EU banking sector”, Panel I: Danske Bank and money laundering allegations.
Amendment 1184 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 183 c (new) 183 c. Notes that in addition to guarding the confidentiality of the identity of whistleblowers as it is essential for the protection of the reporting person, anonymous reporting should be further protected against the generalised threats and the attacks that aim to discredit the anonymously reporting person, by those offended;
Amendment 1185 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 184 184. Acknowledges the difficulties faced by journalists when investigating or reporting on cases of money laundering, tax fraud, tax evasion and aggressive tax planning; worries that investigative journalists are often subject to physical threats and intimidation; calls for adapted protection to be given at national levels to journalists involved in the investigation of activities with a money laundering component;
Amendment 1186 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 184 184. Acknowledges the difficulties faced by journalists when investigating or reporting on cases of money laundering, tax fraud, tax evasion and aggressive tax planning; worries that investigative journalists are often subject to
Amendment 1187 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 185 185. Strongly condemns acts of violence against journalists; recalls with dismay that in recent years journalists involved in the investigation of dubious activities with a money laundering component have been murdered in Malta and Slovakia85 though there is no evidence as yet that there is any connection between the murder that took place in Malta and revelations about alleged money laundering offences; _________________ 85 Daphne Caruana Galizia, killed in Malta on 16.10.2017; Ján Kuciak, killed together with his partner Martina Kušnírová, in Slovakia on 21.2.2018.
Amendment 1188 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 185 185. Strongly condemns acts of violence against journalists; recalls with dismay that in recent years journalists involved in the investigation of dubious activities with a money laundering component have been murdered in Malta and Slovakia85 ; underlines that according to the Council of Europe, abuses and crimes committed against journalists have a deeply chilling effect on freedom of expression and amplify the phenomenon of self- censorship; _________________ 85 Daphne Caruana Galizia, killed in Malta on 16.10.2017; Ján Kuciak, killed together with his partner Martina Kušnírová, in Slovakia on 21.2.2018.
Amendment 1189 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 185 185. Strongly condemns acts of violence against journalists; recalls with dismay that in recent years journalists involved in the investigation of dubious activities with a corruption and money laundering component have been murdered in Malta
Amendment 119 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Calls on the Commission and the Council to propose and adopt a comprehensive definition of aggressive tax planning indicators, building on both the hallmarks identified in the fifth review of the Directive on administrative cooperation (DAC6)26 and the Commission’s relevant
Amendment 1190 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 186 186. Urges the Maltese authorities to make progress in identifying the instigator of the murder of Daphne Caruana Galizia, even while acknowledging that the pace, tempo and outcome of criminal investigations can hardly be determined by political urgings, no matter where they come from; notes as well that the Maltese Government has engaged with international institutions such as Europol, FBI, and also the Dutch Forensic Institute, to strengthen its expertise;
Amendment 1191 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 186 186. Urges the Maltese authorities to
Amendment 1192 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 186 186. Urges the Maltese authorities to make progress in identifying the instigators and backers of the murder of Daphne Caruana Galizia;
Amendment 1193 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 186 186.
Amendment 1194 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 186 a (new) 186 a. Notes that at the time that investigative journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia was assassinated she was working on the largest leak of information she had ever received that originated from the servers of ElectroGas, the company operating Malta's power station. Further notes that the ownership of the UAE- based company that was to transfer large amounts of money to Maltese PEPs responsible for this power station is the director and shareholder of ElectroGas.
Amendment 1195 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 186 b (new) 186 b. Demands a full independent public inquiry into the role of the Maltese State in the assassination of investigative journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia;
Amendment 1196 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 187 187. Encourages the Slovak authorities to continue their investigation into the murders of Ján Kuciak and Martina Kušnírová, identifying the perpetrators and real instigators of the murder;
Amendment 1197 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 187 a (new) 187 a. Calls on Slovak authorities to fully investigate cases of large-scale tax evasion schemes, VAT frauds and money laundering cases brought to light by Jan Kuciak´s investigations;
Amendment 1198 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 187 a (new) 187a. Notes that the Bulgarian authorities have initially denied that there was any connection between the murder of Viktoria Marinova and her work as a journalist; is concerned about the doubts expressed by some journalists that the murder also had a political dimension; calls, therefore, on the Bulgarian authorities to continue the investigation into the murder of Viktoria Marinova;
Amendment 1199 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 187 b (new) 187 b. Calls on the Commission and Bulgaria to ensure the protection of Bulgarian investigative journalists in the context of the scandal revealed by Bivol, related to the use of shell companies to misuse EU funds in the country;
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 8 a (new) - having regard to its resolution of 29 November 2018 on The Cum Ex Scandal: financial crime and the loopholes in the current legal framework;
Amendment 120 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 Amendment 1200 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 188 188. Deplores the fact that investigative journalists are often victims of abusive lawsuits intended to censor, intimidate and silence them by burdening them with the costs of legal defence until they are forced to abandon their criticism or opposition; recalls that these abusive lawsuits constitute a threat to fundamental democratic rights, such as to freedom of expression, freedom of the press and freedom to disseminate and receive information; calls on the Member States to put in place mechanisms to prevent strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPP); considers that these mechanisms should take duly into consideration the right to a good name and reputation; understands that wideranging allegations backed by no proof except the say-so of unidentified sources can have devastating and unwarranted political, economic and social effects on the individuals or companies that they target, especially when publicised on social media; accepts that those who indulge in wilfully irresponsible or malicious attacks of this sort should be held to be accountable for the damage they inflict; calls on the Commission to assess the possibility of taking legislative action in this area;
Amendment 1201 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 188 188. Deplores the fact that investigative journalists are often victims of abusive lawsuits intended to censor, intimidate and silence them by burdening them with the costs of legal defence until they are forced to abandon their criticism or opposition; recalls that these abusive lawsuits constitute a threat to fundamental democratic rights, such as to freedom of expression, freedom of the press and freedom to disseminate and receive information; calls on the Commission and Member States to
Amendment 1202 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 188 188. Deplores the fact that investigative journalists are often victims of abusive lawsuits intended to censor, intimidate and silence them by burdening them with the costs of legal defence until they are forced to abandon their criticism or opposition; recalls that these abusive lawsuits constitute a threat to fundamental democratic rights, such as to freedom of expression, freedom of the press and freedom to disseminate and receive information; calls on the Member States to put in place mechanisms to prevent strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPP); considers that these mechanisms should take duly into consideration the right to a good name and reputation;
Amendment 1203 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 188 188. Deplores the fact that investigative journalists are often victims of abusive lawsuits intended to censor, intimidate and silence them by burdening them with the costs of legal defence until they are forced to abandon their
Amendment 1204 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 188 188. Deplores the fact that investigative journalists, such as Daphne Caruana Galizia, are often victims of abusive lawsuits intended to censor, intimidate and silence them by burdening them with the costs of legal defence until they are forced to abandon their criticism or opposition; recalls that these abusive lawsuits constitute a threat to fundamental democratic rights, such as to freedom of expression, freedom of the press and freedom to disseminate and receive information; calls on the Member States to put in place mechanisms to prevent strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPP); considers that these mechanisms should take duly into consideration the right to a good name and reputation; calls on the Commission to
Amendment 1205 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 188 a (new) 188 a. Deplores that Swiss libel laws are used to silence critics in Switzerland and worldwide because the burden of proof lays on the defendant not the plaintiff; that this not only affects journalists and whistle-blowers, but also reporting entities in the European Union and obliged persons under the beneficial owner register; as in case of having the obligation of reporting a beneficial owner which is Swiss, then the reporting person may end up being sued in Switzerland for libel and slander, being such criminal offences;1a _________________ 1a TAX3 Public hearing “Relations with Switzerland in tax matters and the fight against money laundering”, October 1, 2018.
Amendment 1206 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 188 a (new) 188 a. Welcomes the Commission’s proposal for a Directive on the protection of persons reporting on breaches of Union law; urges to reach a balanced text that will protect whistle-blowers while ensuring that companies or administrations are not subject to excessive charges or slanderous accusations, and to secure exceptions for SMEs to avoid an excessive administrative burden;
Amendment 1207 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 188 a (new) 188 a. Highlights that trade unions should have a greater role in the negotiation of whistleblowing policies and channels in the workplace; calls on Member States to allow, in national law, for whistle-blowers to report wrongdoing to a union representative if they feel they cannot report it internally;
Amendment 1208 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 188 a (new) 188 a. Calls on the European Commission to set up a financial support scheme for investigative journalism as soon as possible, including a permanent and dedicated budget line for the support of independent, quality media and investigative journalism in the post-2020 MFF;
Amendment 1209 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 188 b (new) 188 b. Calls on EU Member States and the Commission not to recognise the Swiss and British libel laws because they are used for libel tourism if in an EU Member States it were not possible to sue a journalist or a whistleblower;1a _________________ 1a TAX3 Public hearing “Relations with Switzerland in tax matters and the fight against money laundering”, October 1, 2018.
Amendment 121 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Stresses the similarity between corporate tax payers and high-net-worth individuals in the use of corporate structures and similar structures such as trusts and offshore locations for the purpose of ATP; recalls the role of intermediaries in setting up such schemes; recalls the obligation of intermediaries under DAC6 to report structural loopholes in tax legislation to tax authorities, without having to reveal the identities of any potential clients taking advantage of these loopholes at the time; requests that intermediaries that are convicted for participation in and knowledge of fraudulent behaviour of clients are to have their licenses revoked and be banned from practising their occupation henceforth;
Amendment 1210 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 188 b (new) 188 b. Regrets that the Bulgarian Presidency of the Council of the EU refused to participate in a TAX3 committee hearing, failing to comply with the principle of sincere cooperation enshrined in the artcilec 4 of the TEU;
Amendment 1211 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 188 c (new) 188 c. Notes that money laundering, tax evasion and avoidance often involve highly complex international corporate and financial arrangements, which are likely to be within the remit of differing jurisdictions; and recalls the need for provisions to be taken for a unified point of contact for whistleblowers1a _________________ 1a A8-0398/2018. Report on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the protection of persons reporting on breaches of Union law (COM(2018)0218 – C8 0159/2018 – 2018/0106(COD))
Amendment 1212 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 189 189. Welcomes the work done by the Platform for Tax Good Governance; notes that the mandate of the Platform applies until 16 June 2019; calls for it to be extended or renewed to ensure that civil society concerns and expertise are heard by Member States and the Commission; but considers that intermediaries with a commercial interest in tax avoidance should no longer be members; encourages the Commission to broaden the scope of the experts invited to the Expert Group on Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing (EGMLTF) to include experts from the private sector (business and NGOs) so long as they do not have a commercial interest in these issues;;
Amendment 1213 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 189 189. Welcomes the work done by the Platform for Tax Good Governance; notes that the mandate of the Platform applies until 16 June 2019; calls for it to be extended or renewed to ensure that civil society concerns and expertise are heard by Member States and the Commission, but considers that intermediaries with a commercial interest in tax avoidance should no longer be members; encourages the Commission to broaden the scope of the experts invited to the Expert Group on Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing (EGMLTF) to include experts from the private sector (business and NGOs) so long as they do not have a commercial interest in these issues;
Amendment 1214 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 189 189. Welcomes the work done by the Platform for Tax Good Governance; notes that the mandate of the Platform applies until 16 June 2019; calls for it to be extended or renewed to ensure that civil society concerns and expertise are heard by Member States and the Commission; considers that intermediaries with a commercial interest in tax avoidance should no longer be members; encourages the Commission to broaden the scope of the experts invited to the Expert Group on Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing (EGMLTF) to include experts from the private sector (business and NGOs) so long as they do not have a commercial interest in these issues;
Amendment 1215 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 189 189. Welcomes the work done by the Platform for Tax Good Governance; notes that the mandate of the Platform applies until 16 June 2019; calls for it to be extended or renewed to ensure that genuine and transparent civil society concerns and expertise are heard by Member States and the Commission; encourages the Commission to broaden the scope of the experts invited to the Expert Group on Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing (EGMLTF) to include experts from the private sector (business and NGOs);
Amendment 1216 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 192 192.
Amendment 1217 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 192 192.
Amendment 1218 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 192 192. Notes that, despite requests to the Council, no relevant documents have been made available to the TAX3 Committee; calls
Amendment 1219 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 192 a (new) 192 a. (new) Regrets that the current rules for accessing classified and other confidential information made available by Council, Commission or Member States to the European Parliament do not provide full legal clarity but are generally interpreted as excluding accredited parliamentary assistants (APAs) from consulting and analysing non-classified ‘other confidential information’ in a secure reading room; calls therefore for the introduction of a clearly worded provision guaranteeing the right of access to documents for APAs on the basis of the ‘need to know’ principle, in their support role for Members, in are negotiated inter- institutional agreement;
Amendment 122 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Stresses the similarity between corporate tax payers and high-net-worth individuals in the use of corporate structures and similar structures such as trusts and offshore locations for the purpose of ATP; recalls the role of intermediaries in setting up such schemes; understands however that motivations for these two kinds of players in the taxation matrix can be totally disparate, so that while corporate aims will be guided by the urge to increase retained earnings within the corporate entity, high net worth individuals will be targeting a consolidation of wealth accumulation by self, family and personal dependents;
Amendment 1220 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 192 a (new) 192 a. Regrets that despite repeated invitations the representatives of Council Presidency refused to appear before the TAX3 Committee to report on progress in implementing the recommendations of TAXE, TAX3 and PANA committees; emphasises that working contacts between the Council Presidency and special and inquiry committees of the European Parliament should be a standard practice;
Amendment 1221 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 192 a (new) 192 a. Recalls that taxation is a national competence and that the European Parliament has very limited powers in these matters; points out that issues of tax fraud, tax evasion and aggressive tax planning cannot be effectively tackled without political will by Member States and the Council
Amendment 1222 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 192 a (new) 192 a. Deplores that the Council failed to cooperate with the TAX3 Committee by not allowing the access to its documents or by doing so with a significant delay, and thus failed to comply with principle of sincere cooperation and breach of article 4 of TEU; deplores that the Bulgarian Presidency repeatedly refused to come to speak to the Committee about matters concerning the tax agenda;
Amendment 1223 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 193 193. Notes the increased communication from the CoC Group and welcomes in particular the biannual publication of its report to the Council, as well as the letters sent to jurisdictions and commitments received in the context of the EU listing process of the EU tax blacklist;
Amendment 1224 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 194 a (new) 194 a. Notes that no EU Member States were included on the EU list of non- cooperative jurisdictions as EU Member States were not assessed; welcomes the declaration from the Chair of the Code of Conduct Group indicating that Member States could be assessed in the future1a; demands that such assessment is conducted without any further delay; _________________ 1a “The fact of screening the EU Member States with the same criteria is exactly what is under discussion in the context of the revision of the mandate of the Code Group that currently the Austrian Presidency of the Council is taking forward.” Exchange of views with Fabrizia Lapecorella, Chair of the Code of Conduct Group on Business Taxation, European Parliament, http://www.europarl.europa.eu/cmsdata/1 55396/TAX3%20Verbatim%2010%20Oct ober%202018_OR.pdfOct 2018
Amendment 1225 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 195 195.
Amendment 1226 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 196 196. Stresses that the above-mentioned Ombudsman recommendations also apply to the CoC Group, which should provide the necessary information, relating in particular to harmful tax practices of Member States and the EU listing process;
Amendment 1227 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 196 a (new) 196 a. Calls on the CoC Group to take further measures to ensure transparency of its meetings particularly recording and publishing minutes of meetings including the positions of the different Member States on the discussed agenda;
Amendment 1228 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 197 197. Believes that the mandate of the CoC Group needs to be updated, since it addresses matters beyond the assessment of harmful EU tax practices, which is more than simply providing technical input to the decisions made by the Council; calls, based on the nature of the work undertaken by the Group which is also of a political nature, for such tasks to be brought back under a framework which enables democratic control or supervision, starting by applying transparency; invites Member States to update the mandate of the CoC Group to include a minimum level of effective taxation set at 18% of profits as well as an increased and improved work on harmful tax practices and on the EU listing process;
Amendment 1229 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 197 197. Believes that the mandate of the CoC Group needs to be updated, since it addresses matters beyond the assessment of harmful EU tax practices, which is more than simply providing technical input to the decisions made by the Council; calls on the extension of the scope of the CoC Group, to enable it to deal with personal taxation issues, including CBI/RBI schemes, special schemes provided by Member States, and amnesties; calls, based on the nature of the work undertaken by the Group which is also of a political nature, for such tasks to be brought back under a framework which enables democratic control or supervision, starting by applying transparency; urges the CoC Group to apply transparency principles to its decision-making process, publishing not only the final position of the Group but also the positions of its members;
Amendment 123 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Stresses the similarity between corporate tax payers and high-net-worth individuals in the use of corporate structures and similar structures such as trusts and offshore locations for the purpose of ATP; recalls
Amendment 1230 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 198 a (new) 198 a. Calls on the Commission to report on the implementation of the Code and on the application of fiscal State aid, as laid down in Article N. of the Code of conduct for business taxation1j; _________________ 1j The Code is in annex 1 to the (p.2-5) Council conclusions 1 December 1997 establishing the group (OJ C2/1,6.1.1998), point N being review and monitoring provision.
Amendment 1231 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 199 199. Calls for the newly elected Parliament to initiate an overall assessment on progress as regards access to documents requested by the TAXE, TAXE2, PANA and TAX3 committees, comparing the requests made with those granted by the Council and other EU institutions, and to initiate, if needed, the necessary procedural and/or legal measures;
Amendment 1232 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 199 a (new) 199 a. Calls for the creation of a new Union Tax Policy Coherence and Coordination Centre (TPCCC)within the structure of the Commission that can assess and monitor Member States’ tax policies at Union level and ensure that no new harmful tax measures are implemented by Member States; such a TPCCC should be able to monitor Member States’ compliance with the common Union list of uncooperative jurisdictions in addition to ensuring and fostering cooperation between national tax administrations 1a; _________________ 1a According to recommendations made by the TAXE2 and PANA Committees.
Amendment 1233 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 199 a (new) 199 a. Reiterates its call for the creation of an EU Tax Policy Coherence and Coordination Centre (EUTPCCC) within the structure of the Commission1a,which would ensure effective and expeditious cooperation between Member States’ and facilitate early warning in cases like the Cum Ex scandal; urges Member States to support this call and for the Commission to present a legislative proposal for such a mechanism; _________________ 1a European Parliament resolution of 6 July 2016 on tax rulings and other measures similar in nature or effect (2016/2038(INI))
Amendment 1234 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 200 200. Welcomes the participation and input of stakeholders as referred to in Annex XX on TAX3 committee hearings and notes those individuals who declined to participate in such hearings in accordance with Annex XX;
Amendment 1235 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 200 200.
Amendment 1236 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 201 Amendment 1237 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 201 201.
Amendment 1238 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 201 201. Takes note of the persons who refused to participate in TAX3 committee hearings as referred to in Annex XX; requests to deny non-cooperative parties the access to the European Parliament and calls on the Council and the Commission to do the same;
Amendment 1239 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 201 201.
Amendment 124 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Stresses the similarity between corporate tax payers and high-net-worth individuals in the use of corporate structures and similar structures such as trusts and offshore locations for the purpose of
Amendment 1240 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 202 Amendment 1241 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 202 202. Calls on the Council and the Commission to agree on the establishment of a publicly accessible and regularly updated list of non-cooperative non- institutional parties in the interinstitutional agreement on a mandatory transparency register for lobbyists; considers, in the meantime, that a record should be kept of those
Amendment 1242 #
Motion for a resolution Subheading 9.5 a (new) Regrets that even when TAXE, TAX2 and PANA committees have managed to make valuable contributions to the legislative discussions, they have not gone in-depth enough to reveal anything new that had not already been said by the media or by the civil society, partly due to the limitations of the powers granted to European Parliament’s special and inquiry committees.
Amendment 1243 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 203 Amendment 1244 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 203 203. Considers that it is vital for the exercise of democratic control over the executive that Parliament be empowered with investigative and inquiry powers that match those of Member States’ national parliaments
Amendment 1245 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 203 a (new) 203a. Regrets that the hearings with business representatives were not long enough to be able to go into the details of the tax plans and arrangements set up by these multinationals ; deplores the often insipid and general nature of the answers and presentations, which were often just public relations exercises; recommends supplementing the hearings by Members of the European Parliament with widespread use of the formula whereby a panel of specialist journalists or whistle- blowers confront business representatives, in order to give greater depth and substance to the exchanges;
Amendment 1246 #
Motion for a resolution Subheading 9.6 Amendment 1247 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 204 Amendment 1248 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 204 Amendment 1249 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 204 Amendment 125 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Stresses th
Amendment 1250 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 204 Amendment 1251 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 204 Amendment 1252 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 204 Amendment 1253 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 204 Amendment 1254 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 204 204. Reiterates its call on the Commission to use, wherever possible, the procedure laid down in Article 116 TFEU which makes it possible to change the unanimity requirement in cases where the Commission finds that a difference between the provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States is distorting the conditions of competition in the internal market;
Amendment 1255 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 204 204. Reiterates its call on the Commission to use, if appropriate, the procedure laid down in Article 116 TFEU which makes it possible to change the unanimity requirement in cases where the Commission finds that a difference between the provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States is distorting the conditions of competition in the internal market;
Amendment 1256 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 205 Amendment 1257 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 205 Amendment 1258 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 205 Amendment 1259 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 205 Amendment 126 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Stresses the similarity between corporate tax payers and high-net-worth individuals in the use of corporate structures and similar structures such as trusts and offshore locations for the purpose of ATP;
Amendment 1260 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 205 Amendment 1261 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 205 Amendment 1262 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 205 205. Welcomes the Commission’s
Amendment 1263 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 205 205.
Amendment 1264 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 205 205. Welcomes the Commission’s intention to propose qualified majority voting for specific and pressing tax policy issues where vital legislative files and initiatives aimed at combating tax fraud, tax evasion, aggressive tax planning or financial crimes have been blocked in the Council to the detriment of Member States, such as the Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base (CCCTB), the common system of a digital services tax on revenues resulting from the provision of certain digital services or the Corporate taxation of a significant digital presence;
Amendment 1265 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 205 205.
Amendment 1266 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 205 205.
Amendment 1267 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 205 205. Welcomes the Commission’s intention to propose qualified majority voting for specific and pressing tax policy issues where vital legislative files and initiatives aimed at combating tax fraud, tax evasion
Amendment 1268 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 206 Amendment 1269 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 206 Amendment 127 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Welcomes the Commission’s assessment and inclusion of ATP indicators in its 2018 European Semester country reports; calls for such assessment to become a regular feature in order to ensure a level playing field in the EU internal market
Amendment 1270 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 206 Amendment 1271 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 206 Amendment 1272 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 206 Amendment 1273 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 206 Amendment 1274 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 206 Amendment 1275 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 206 206. Stresses that all scenarios should be envisaged and not only shifting from unanimity to qualified majority voting through a passerelle clause, since the latter clause also requires unanimity in the Council to be triggered; calls on the Commission to issue its proposal before the end of its current mandate, early 2019;
Amendment 1276 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 206 206. Stresses that
Amendment 1277 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 206 206. Stresses that all scenarios should be envisaged and not only the necessary shift
Amendment 1278 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 207 Amendment 1279 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 207 207. Takes the view that the work of the TAXE, TAX2, PANA and TAX3 committees should be continued, in the forthcoming parliamentary term
Amendment 128 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Welcomes the Commission’s assessment and inclusion of ATP indicators in its 2018 European Semester country reports; calls for such assessment to become a regular feature in order to ensure a level playing field in the EU internal market with a clear follow-up, as well as the greater stability of public revenue in the long run; regrets that so far no recommendations to end harmful tax practices have been put forward by the Commission in the course of the European Semester country reports, calls on the Commission to ensure full transparency of this exercise, including the follow-up, and to give countries concrete recommendations regarding the fight against aggressive tax planning strategies;
Amendment 1280 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 207 207. Takes the view that the work of the TAXE, TAX2, PANA and TAX3 committees should be continued, in the forthcoming parliamentary term, in a permanent structure within Parliament
Amendment 1281 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 207 207. Takes the view that the enforcement of the work of the TAXE, TAX2, PANA and TAX3 committees should be
Amendment 1282 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 207 207. Takes the view that the work of the TAXE, TAXE2, PANA and TAX3 committees should be continued, in the forthcoming parliamentary term, in a permanent structure within Parliament such as a subcommittee to the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (ECON);
Amendment 1283 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 208 208. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the European Council, the Council, the Commission, the ESAs, EPPO, the ECB, Moneyval, the Member States, the national parliaments, the UN, the G20, the FATF and the OECD.
Amendment 1284 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 208 208. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the European Council, the Council of Finance Ministers, the Commission, the Member States, the national parliaments, the UN, the G20 and the OECD.
Amendment 129 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Welcomes the Commission’s assessment and inclusion of ATP indicators in its 2018 European Semester country reports; calls for such assessment to become a regular feature in order to ensure a level playing field in the EU internal market, as well as the greater stability of public revenue in the long run; requests that every year, the Commission includes in its European Semester country reports a short evaluation of how the assessment procedure including ATP indicators is shaping up and how it can be improved;
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 8 a (new) - having regard to its resolution of 29 November 2018 on the cum-ex scandal: financial crime and loopholes in the current legal framework1a; _________________ 1a 2018/2900(RSP)
Amendment 130 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Welcomes the Commission’s assessment and inclusion of ATP indicators in its 2018 European Semester country reports; calls for
Amendment 131 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 a (new) 13 a. Calls on the Commission and the Council to propose and adopt a comprehensive definition of aggressive tax planning indicators, building on both the hallmarks identified in the fifth review of the Directive on administrative cooperation (DAC6)1a and the Commission’s relevant studies and recommendations2a; calls on Member States to use those indicators as a basis to repeal all harmful tax practices deriving from existing tax loopholes; _________________ 1a Council Directive (EU) 2018/822 of 25 May 2018 amending Directive 2011/16/EU as regards mandatory automatic exchange of information in the field of taxation in relation to reportable cross-border arrangements, OJ L 139, 5.6.2018, p. 1. 2a https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/site s/taxation/files/resources/documents/taxat ion/gen_info/economic_analysis/tax_pape rs/taxation_paper_61.pdf and https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/site s/taxation/files/tax_policies_survey_2017. pdf
Amendment 132 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 a (new) 13 a. Regrets that 7 EU Member States have been identified for their tax avoidance by the European Commission in the European Semester, namely, Ireland, The Netherlands, Cyprus, Malta, Belgium, Hungary and Luxembourg, and that little measures have been taken by such Member States to modify their legislation in order to make it less attractive for tax evasion and avoidance;
Amendment 133 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 a (new) 13 a. Recalls that the payment of taxes is both an essential corporate contribution to society and a tool for good governance and is therefore a requirement for responsible business practices; stresses the need to include harmful tax practices in the scope of mandatory reporting on corporate social responsibility (CSR);
Amendment 134 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 b (new) 13 b. Notes that company restructures can be observed in the macro-economic data of Ireland from 2014-2017, particularly in the first quarter of 2015; notes that major changes occurred in Ireland’s GNP, GDP, exports, imports, investment, external debt and more; regrets that despite the relocation of sales income and intellectual property to Ireland, there was no observable corresponding increase in corporation tax received by Irish Revenue1a _________________ 1a Brehm Christensen, M.; Clancy, E. (2018) ‘Exposed: Apple’s delicious tax deals, Is Ireland Helping Apple Pay less than 1% in the EU?’; GUE/NGL; June 2018.
Amendment 135 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 b (new) 13 b. Regrets that even when in Ireland, the capital allowance for depreciation of intangible assets has been lowered from a rate of 100% to 80% from 2017, this reduction was not applied to the intangible assets brought onshore from 2015-2016, which could still benefit from the 100% rate1a _________________ 1a Brehm Christensen, M.; Clancy, E. (2018) ‘Exposed: Apple’s delicious tax deals, Is Ireland Helping Apple Pay less than 1% in the EU?’; GUE/NGL; June 2018.
Amendment 136 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 b (new) 13 b. Calls on the Commission to list the EU jurisdictions identified for providing opportunities for aggressive tax planning as tax havens and prepare a proposal on deterrent actions to be applied against such Member States;
Amendment 137 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 c (new) 13 c. Deplores that the Irish government introduced the 100% rate on capital allowances for intellectual property (IP) following a recommendation made by the American Chamber of Commerce in Ireland in 20141a _________________ 1a Brehm Christensen, M.; Clancy, E. (2018) ‘Exposed: Apple’s delicious tax deals, Is Ireland Helping Apple Pay less than 1% in the EU?’; GUE/NGL; June 2018.
Amendment 138 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 c (new) 13 c. Regrets that the Irish government introduced the 100% rate on capital allowances for intellectual property (IP) following a recommendation made by the American Chamber of Commerce in Ireland in 20141a _________________ 1a Brehm Christensen, M.; Clancy, E. (2018) ‘Exposed: Apple’s delicious tax deals, Is Ireland Helping Apple Pay less than 1% in the EU?’; GUE/NGL; June 2018.
Amendment 139 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Reiterates its call on companies, as taxpayers, to fully comply with their tax obligations and refrain from aggressive tax planning leading to BEPS
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 14 — having regard to the Commission proposals pending for adoption,
Amendment 140 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Reiterates its call on
Amendment 141 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Reiterates its call on companies, as taxpayers, to fully comply with their tax obligations and refrain from aggressive tax planning leading to BEPS, and to consider fair taxation strategy as an important part of their corporate social responsibility in order also to prevent a negative impact on general taxpayer morale;
Amendment 142 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Reiterates its call on companies, as taxpayers, to fully comply with their tax obligations and refrain from aggressive tax planning leading to BEPS, and to consider fair taxation strategy as an important part of their corporate social responsibility and of their implementation of the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights and the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises;
Amendment 143 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Reiterates its call on companies, as taxpayers, to fully comply with their tax obligations and
Amendment 144 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Reiterates its call on companies, as taxpayers, to fully comply with their tax obligations and refrain from aggressive tax planning leading to BEPS, and to consider fair taxation strategy as an important part of their corporate social responsibility; points out that Member States in the spirit of loyal cooperation must not facilitate the creation of aggressive tax planning schemes;
Amendment 145 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Reiterates its call on companies, as taxpayers, to fully comply with their tax obligations and refrain from aggressive tax planning leading to BEPS, to recognise their business is enabled by tax-funded infrastructure and services, and to consider fair taxation strategy as an important part of their corporate social responsibility;
Amendment 146 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 a (new) 14 a. Notes however, that self-regulation cannot be the answer to tackling tax fraud, tax evasion and avoidance; which can only be fought with adequate legislation, transparency, intra and inter institutional cooperation, inter- jurisdictional cooperation,and sufficient personnel and technical equipment employed by tax administrations
Amendment 147 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 a (new) 14 a. Stresses that the initiatives of the Commission and the member states should be aimed at making tax collection more efficient and cost-effective, and not to maximize revenue from the taxpayers to the state;
Amendment 148 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 a (new) 14 a. Urges furthermore the Member States taking part in the enhanced cooperation procedure to agree as quickly as possible on the adoption of a Financial Transaction Tax (FTT);
Amendment 149 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 a (new) 14 a. Urges Member States to review and update bilateral taxation agreements between Member States and with third countries to close loopholes that incentivise tax-driven trading practices with the purpose of tax avoidance;
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 14 — having regard to the Commission proposals pending for adoption, in particular on
Amendment 150 #
Motion for a resolution Subheading 2 a (new) (new para before para 15) Recalls that opportunities for choosing a business or residence location on the basis of the regulatory framework have boomed with globalisation and digitalisation;
Amendment 151 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 Amendment 152 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 Amendment 153 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Recalls that it
Amendment 154 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Recalls that taxes must be paid in the jurisdictions where the actual economic activity and value creation takes place or, in case of indirect taxation, where consumption takes place; recognizes however that in a continually evolving digital economy where marketable output becomes the sum of a jigsaw of cross- border inputs for which current accounting models to measure how and where value is being added are hugely complex or inoperative, rigid, one-size- fits-all methods to measure value creation can become counter-productive; understands that the same consideration applies to digital cross-border consumption;
Amendment 155 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Recalls that taxes must be paid in the jurisdictions where the actual substantive and genuine economic activity and value creation takes place or, in case of indirect taxation, where consumption takes place; highlights that this can only be achieved by adopting the common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base (CCCTB); advocates for the inclusion of fair allocation of taxing rights on the agenda of current international tax negotiations, notably at OECD and UN levels;
Amendment 156 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Recalls that taxes must be paid in the jurisdictions where the actual economic activity and value creation takes place or, in case of indirect taxation, where consumption takes place; especially since it is required to fund the public services that the corporations themselves depend on;
Amendment 157 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 a (new) 15 a. Deplores the drop in nominal corporate tax rates all over Europe in recent years and the proliferation of incentives to lower the effective tax rate (ETR) compared to the statutory corporate tax rate; notes with concern that, regarding effective tax rates in the EU, in addition to Luxembourg (2.2%), the lowest ETRs are to be found in Hungary (7.5%), Bulgaria (9.5%), Cyprus (9.6%) as well as in the Netherlands (10.4%) and Latvia (10.6%) and that most countries appear to tax MNEs regressively: the larger the MNE, the lower the ETR;
Amendment 158 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 a (new) 15 a. Calls on the European Commission and Member States to harmonise procedures for a digital system of filing tax returns in order to facilitate cross-border activities and reduce red tape;
Amendment 159 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 b (new) 15 b. Acknowledges the harmful consequences that tax competition between jurisdictions and the resulting "race to the bottom" have on public revenues and the progressivity of taxation; underlines that the further lowering of corporate taxes will eventually put the sustainability of the Union's public finances at stake; calls on the European Commission to propose a Directive that ensures minimum effective corporate tax rates of at least 20% in the European Union;
Amendment 16 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 14 — having regard to the Commission proposals pending for adoption, in particular on the CC(C)TB14 , the digital taxation package15 and public country-by- country reporting (CBCR)16 , as well as the Parliament's position on these documents, _________________ 14 Proposal of 25 October 2016 for a Council Directive on a Common Corporate Tax Base (CCTB), COM(2016)0685 (2016/0337(CNS)) and on a Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base (CCCTB), COM(2016)0683 (2016/0336(CNS)). 15 The package consists of the ‘Time to establish a modern, fair and efficient taxation standard for the digital economy’ communication (COM(2018)0146), the proposal for a Council directive laying down rules relating to the corporate taxation of a significant digital presence (COM(2018)0147, 2018/0072(CNS)), the proposal for a Council directive on the common system of a digital services tax on revenues resulting from the provision of certain digital services (COM(2018)0148, 2018/0073 (CNS)) and the recommendation relating to the corporate taxation of a significant digital presence (C(2018) 1650). 16 Proposal of 12 April 2016 for a directive amending Directive 2013/34/EU as regards disclosure of income tax information by certain undertakings and branches, COM(2016)0198 (2016/0107(COD)).
Amendment 160 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 Amendment 161 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 Amendment 162 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 Amendment 163 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 Amendment 164 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 Amendment 165 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 Amendment 166 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16.
Amendment 167 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Takes note of the statement made by the French Finance Minister at the TAX3 meeting of 23 October 2018 regarding the need to discuss the concept of minimum taxation;
Amendment 168 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Takes note of the statement made by the French Finance Minister at the TAX3 meeting of 23 October 2018 regarding the need to discuss the concept of minimum taxation; welcomes the readiness by France to include the debate on minimum taxation as one of the priorities of its G7 Presidency in 2019; points out however that the concept of minimum taxation could lead to a race to “the top” as contrasted to a race to “the bottom”, which would force Member States running lean tax systems to load up their tax schedules, to the benefit of Member States, such as France, which by running high taxation, high public expenditure administrative systems render their economies less competitive in the Single market compared to those Member States that run leaner tax systems and have leaner and more efficient public expenditure commitments;
Amendment 169 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Takes note of the statement made by the French Finance Minister at the TAX3 meeting of 23 October 2018 regarding the need to discuss the concept of minimum taxation;
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 18 — having regard to the ongoing modernisation of the VAT framework,
Amendment 170 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 a (new) 16 a. Stresses that between 1985 and 2018, the global average statutory corporate tax rate has fallen from 49% to 24%1a ; notes that nominal corporate tax rates have decreased by 46% since 2000 at EU level –from an average of 32% in 2000 to 21,9% in 20181b; is concerned about a growing race to the bottom on nominal corporate tax rates at both international and EU levels; regrets that international tax reform such as G20/OECD led BEPS project did not touch upon this unfair tax competition; calls for a second set of international tax reforms aiming at tackling tax competition among countries and ensuring a fair allocation of taxing rights; underlines it is necessary to give a greater role to the UN Committee of Experts on International Cooperation in Tax Matters in the next reform of international tax rules; _________________ 1a Tørsløv, Wier and Zucman ‘Themissing profits of nations’, National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper 24701, 2018. 1b Taxation trend in the EU, Table 3:Top statutory corporate income tax rates (including surcharges), 1995- 2018,European Commission 2018
Amendment 171 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 a (new) 16 a. Notes moreover that within the Eurozone as well as under Maastricht budgetary rules, Member States are obligated to follow deficit and national debt operational criteria sufficiently rigorous such that the imposition of any new “minimum” rules on taxation levels within government budgets could appear to be, and quite likely will be, vexatious, over intrusive, not fit for purpose and in the end helpful only to states that give low priority to increasing the tax burden on their polities;
Amendment 172 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 a (new) 16 a. Notes however, that any debate concerning minimum taxation should make reference to minimum effective taxation, measured by the total income taxes paid by a corporation over its total profits, including in this measurement tax breaks to the base (that is, the income on which taxes are charged), as effective rates can often be much lower, and in many cases half, of the statutory rate;
Amendment 173 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 a (new) 16 a. Acknowledges that special tax and deduction regimes, including those in non-EU countries like Switzerland, bear substantial responsibility for the global downward spiral of corporate taxes rates; notes that the effective tax rate is much lower than nominal rates in most EU countries, and important disparities and pressure on lower tax rates lead to a race to the bottom;
Amendment 174 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 b (new) 16 b. Deplores the imbalance between taxes paid on corporate and capital income and on labour; points out that such distribution of tax burden is unsustainable in view of the expected massive changes in the labour market due to increased robotisation and digitalisation and poses a serious risk to social cohesion;
Amendment 175 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 b (new) 16 b. Regrets that profit shifting is often used by companies to put pressure on governments and employees, demanding weaker regulation and labour standards with the excuse of low profit margins, even though the company is operating successfully;
Amendment 176 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 b (new) 16 b. Notes that the Independent Commission for the Reform of International Tax (ICRICT), observed that setting a minimum effective taxation would put a floor under tax competition1a _________________ 1a ICRICT (2016) FOURWAYS TO TACKLE INTERNATIONAL TAX COMPETITION, November 2016
Amendment 177 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 c (new) 16 c. Affirms that a fair and effective solution to tax dumping and aggressive tax competition would reside in the setting of a minimum corporate tax rate; calls for the adoption of a coordinated level of minimum effective taxation at European level through a combination of anti-abuse measures and limitation to tax deductions; asks the European Commission to consider proposing a legislative package aiming at ensuring a minimum effective level of taxation;
Amendment 178 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 c (new) 16 c. Notes that a debate that does not consider effective taxation risks ending in lowering statutory rates even more and increasing tax competition;
Amendment 179 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 d (new) 16 d. Takes note that traditional sectors pay in average an effective corporate tax rate of 23% while the digital sector pays about 9,5%1a; asks the European Commission to carry out and release an in depth study on effective level of corporate taxation within the EU and develop a proposal fora coordinated level of minimum taxation within the EU; _________________ 1a COM(2018) 146 final COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEANPARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL Time to establish a modern, fair and efficient taxation standard for the digital economy
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 18 a (new) - having regard to P8_TA(2016)0453 European Parliament resolution of 24 November 2016 on towards a definitive VAT system and fighting VAT fraud(2016/2033(INI))
Amendment 180 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 17.
Amendment 181 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 17. Notes that an exit tax was adopted by the EU in ATAD I, allowing Member States to tax the economic value of capital gain created in its territory even when that gain has not yet been realised at the time of exit; considers that the principle of taxing profits made in Member States before they leave the Union should be strengthened, for example through coordinated withholding taxes on interests and royalties; calls on the Council to resume negotiations on the interest and royalties proposal28 ; insists however that such measures should not apply on a one size fits all basis, that they should be proportional to the tasks at hand and that the manner by which they are established and implemented are totally transparent as well as subject to quick recall when it is found that they are not fulfilling the aims that led to their establishment; _________________ 28 Proposal for a Council directive of 11 November 2011 on a common system of taxation applicable to interest and royalty payments made between associated companies of different Member States, COM(2011)0714 - 2011/0314(CNS).
Amendment 182 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 17. Notes that an exit tax was adopted by the EU in ATAD I, allowing Member States to tax the economic value of capital gain created in its territory even when that gain has not yet been realised at the time of exit; considers that the principle of taxing profits made in Member States before they leave the Union should be strengthened, for example through coordinated withholding taxes on
Amendment 183 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 a (new) 17 a. (new) Reaffirms that the adaptation of international tax rules needs to answer to avoidance deriving from the possible use of the interplay between national tax provisions, and networks of treaties, resulting in an erosion of the tax base and double non- taxation while ensuring that there is no double-taxation;
Amendment 184 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 a (new) 17 a. Notes that taxing all earnings without deduction for interest and license fee payments in and by the source country could and should be at the center of any measures against tax avoidance1a _________________ 1a Jarass, L. and Obermair, G.M. (2015) What an Individual EU Country Can Do Unilaterally to Counteract BEPS. Reprinted from Tax Notes Int’l, August 24, 2015, p. 697
Amendment 185 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 b (new) 17 b. Notes that any individual EU country can unilaterally enforce both withholding taxes and conditioned limitations on deductions, as comprehensive taxation at the source, including earnings paid for interest, license fees, and the like, is by no means ruled out by the relevant EU directive1a _________________ 1a Jarass, L. and Obermair, G.M. (2015) What an Individual EU Country Can Do Unilaterally to Counteract BEPS. Reprinted from Tax Notes Int’l, August 24, 2015, p. 697
Amendment 186 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 c (new) 17 c. Notes that many countries have introduced withholding taxes, in particular for interest and license fee payments to related parties outside the EU. However, existing tax treaties considerably reduce the withholding tax rate1a _________________ 1a Jarass, L. and Obermair, G.M. (2015) ‘What an Individual EU Country Can Do Unilaterally to Counteract BEPS’, Reprinted from Tax Notes Int’l, August 24, 2015, p. 697; and Hearson M. (2018) ‘The European Union’s Tax Treaties with Developing Countries– Leading By Example?’, September 2018.
Amendment 187 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 d (new) 17 d. Regrets, that within the EU, no withholding taxes are levied on payments between related parties even when the other party is not effectively subject to tax on the income deriving from those payments in that other Member State. Notes however, that recital 3 of the interest and royalty directive1a clearly states that “It is necessary to ensure that interest and royalty payments are subject to tax once in a Member State”. Therefore, the EU directive on interest and royalty payments does not forbid source taxation of all earnings produced by an enterprise, whether declared as profit or transferred to another enterprise domestic or abroad as payment for interest or license fees2a _________________ 1a COUNCIL DIRECTIVE2003/49/EC of 3 June 2003 on a common system of taxation applicable to interest and royalty payments made between associated companies of different Member States 2a Jarass, L. and Obermair, G.M. (2015) What an Individual EU Country Can Do Unilaterally to Counteract BEPS. Reprinted from Tax Notes Int’l, August 24, 2015, p. 697
Amendment 188 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 e (new) 17 e. Encourages EU Member States to apply withholding taxes to payments within and outside the EU in order to ensure that interests and royalty payments are subject to tax once in a Member State; and to make the necessary re-negotiations of their tax treaties in order to allow for withholding taxes to be applied at source1a _________________ 1a Jarass, L. and Obermair, G.M. (2015) What an Individual EU Country Can Do Unilaterally to Counteract BEPS. Reprinted from Tax Notes Int’l, August 24, 2015, p. 697
Amendment 189 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 19 a (new) - having regard to the infringement procedures against 21 Member States for having not or only partially transposed AMLD4 into national law of which three are currently at the stage of court referrals (Romania, Ireland and now Luxembourg), with one on hold (Greece), nine at the stage of Reasoned Opinions, and eight at the stage of Letters of Formal Notice,
Amendment 190 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 18. Acknowledges that the G20/OECD- led BEPS project was meant to tackle in a coordinated manner the causes and circumstances creating BEPS practices, by improving the coherence of tax rules across borders, reinforcing substance requirements and enhancing transparency and certainty; again clarifies that coherence of tax rules across borders need not and should not imply one size fits all remedies applied across the board, that in the end benefit high taxation economies which arguably maintain excessive levels of uneconomic and non- social public expenditure;
Amendment 191 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 18. Acknowledges that the G20/OECD- led BEPS project was meant to tackle in a coordinated manner the causes and circumstances creating BEPS practices, by improving the coherence of tax rules across borders, reinforcing substance requirements and enhancing transparency and certainty; states, however, that the willingness and commitment to cooperate on the OECD BEPS Action Plan varies amongst countries and between particular actions;
Amendment 192 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 18. Acknowledges that the G20/OECD- led BEPS project was meant to tackle in a coordinated manner the causes and circumstances creating BEPS practices, by improving the coherence of tax rules across borders, reinforcing substance requirements and enhancing transparency and certainty; regrets that OECD BEPS Action Plan concerns only tax base competition and does not address tax rate competition;
Amendment 193 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 18. Acknowledges that the
Amendment 194 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19. Notes that the G20/OECD 15-point BEPS action plan is being implemented and monitored and further discussions are taking place, in a broader context than just the initial participating countries, through the Inclusive Framework;
Amendment 195 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19. Notes that the G20/OECD 15-point BEPS action plan is being implemented and monitored and further discussions are taking place, in a broader context than just the initial participating countries, through the Inclusive Framework; calls on Member States to support a reform of both the mandate and the functioning of the Inclusive Framework to ensure that remaining tax loopholes and unsolved tax questions such as the allocation of taxing rights among countries are covered by the current international framework to combat BEPS practices; expresses the hope that efforts to achieve the desired elimination of tax loopholes and unsolved tax questions does not degenerate into a political practice by which tax malpractices in the larger European economies get offloaded onto the smaller peripheral economies of the EU;
Amendment 196 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19. Notes that the G20/OECD 15-point BEPS action plan is being implemented and monitored and further discussions are taking place, in a broader context than just the initial participating countries, through the Inclusive Framework; notes with regret however that BEPS so far failed to deliver on the most effective solution against the base erosion and profit shifting, deplores the fact that OECD still remain rather an exclusive club of countries rather that an open global platform that could keep up with the pace and deliver the solutions to minimise the negative impacts and risks of globalisation; calls on Member States to support a reform of both the mandate and the functioning of the Inclusive Framework to ensure that remaining tax loopholes and unsolved tax questions such as the allocation of taxing rights among countries are covered by the current international framework to combat BEPS practices;
Amendment 197 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19. Notes that the G20/OECD 15-point BEPS action plan, intended to tackle in a coordinated manner the causes and circumstances creating BEPS practices, is being implemented and monitored and further discussions are taking place, in a broader context than just the initial participating countries, through the Inclusive Framework; calls on Member States to support a reform of both the mandate and the functioning of the Inclusive Framework to ensure that remaining tax loopholes and unsolved tax questions such as the allocation of taxing rights among countries are covered by the current international framework to combat BEPS practices;
Amendment 198 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19. Notes that the G20/OECD 15-point BEPS action plan is being implemented and monitored and further discussions are taking place, in a broader context than just the initial participating countries, through the Inclusive Framework; calls on Member States to support a reform of both the mandate and the functioning of the Inclusive Framework to ensure that remaining tax loopholes and unsolved tax questions such as the allocation of taxing rights among countries are covered by the current international framework to combat BEPS practices; highlights the need to ensure that all countries participate on an equal footing;
Amendment 199 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19. Notes that the G20/OECD 15-point BEPS action plan is being too slowly implemented and monitored and further discussions are taking place, in a broader context than just the initial participating countries, through the Inclusive Framework; calls on Member States to support a reform of both the mandate and the functioning of the Inclusive Framework to ensure that remaining tax loopholes and unsolved tax questions such as the allocation of taxing rights among countries are
Amendment 2 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 4 — having regard to its TAXE committee resolution of 25 November 20152 and its TAX2 committee resolution of 6 July 20163 on tax rulings and other measures similar in nature or effect, _________________ 2 Resolution of 25 November 2015 on tax rulings and other measures similar in nature or effect, OJ C 366, 27.10.2017, p. 51. 3 Resolution of 6 July 2016 on tax rulings and other measures similar in nature or effect, OJ C 101, 16.3.2018, p. 79.
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 20 a (new) - having regard to the Commission Communication on strengthening the Union framework for prudential and anti- money laundering supervision,
Amendment 200 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 a (new) 19 a. calls on the EU to work on reforming the OECD in order to equip it with enforcement powers so as to avoid a situation where OECD standards are only implemented by very few members, usually the EU; considers that contributing to work at the OECD level does not exclude or prevent work also being undertaken at the European level;
Amendment 201 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 a (new) 19 a. (new) Takes note that the actions require implementation and that some of them require follow-up work to draw possible solutions to the identified challenges, as for instance action 1‘Address the tax challenges of the digital economy’;
Amendment 202 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20. Points out that some countries have recently adopted unilateral countermeasures against harmful tax practices (such as the UK’s Diverted Profits Tax and the Global Intangible Low- Taxed Income (GILTI) provisions of the US tax reform) to ensure that the foreign income of MNEs is duly taxed at a minimum effective tax rate in the parent’s country of residence; calls for an EU assessment of these measures; calls for the establishment of a minimum rate of corporation tax in order to limit tax competition between Member States;
Amendment 203 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20. Points out that some countries have recently adopted unilateral countermeasures against harmful tax practices (such as the UK’s Diverted Profits Tax and the Global Intangible Low- Taxed Income (GILTI) provisions of the US tax reform) to ensure that the foreign income of MNEs is duly taxed at a minimum effective tax rate in the parent’s country of residence;
Amendment 204 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20. Points out that some countries have recently adopted unilateral countermeasures against harmful tax practices (such as the UK’s Diverted Profits Tax and the Global Intangible Low- Taxed Income (GILTI) provisions of the US tax reform) to ensure that the foreign income of MNEs is duly taxed at a minimum effective tax rate in the parent’s country of residence; calls for an EU assessment of these measures and a legislative proposal, if appropriate, considering the negative potential tax base and strategic spillovers the US reform can have on the EU;
Amendment 205 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20. Points out that some countries have recently adopted unilateral countermeasures against harmful tax practices (such as the UK’s Diverted Profits Tax and the Global Intangible Low- Taxed Income (GILTI) provisions of the US tax reform) to ensure that the foreign income of MNEs is duly taxed at a minimum effective tax rate in the parent’s country of residence;
Amendment 206 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 a (new) 20 a. (new) Recalls that the 2016 EU 'anti-tax-avoidance package' supplements existing provisions so as to implement the 15 BEPS actions in an EU coordinated manner in the Single Market;
Amendment 207 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 21. Welcomes the adoption by the EU of ATAD I and ATAD II
Amendment 208 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 21. Welcomes the adoption by the EU of ATAD I and ATAD II; takes note that they provide a minimum level of protection against corporate tax avoidance throughout the EU, while ensuring a fairer and more stable environment for businesses, from both demand and supply perspectives; welcomes the provisions on hybrid mismatches to prevent double non-taxation in order to eliminate existing mismatches and refrain from creating further mismatches, between Member States and with third countries; insists that such measures can be fully effective only if they are applied proportionately and in full transparency by all parties;
Amendment 209 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 21. Welcomes the adoption by the EU of
Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 21 a (new) - having regard to the Recommendation of the EBA to the Maltese FIAU,
Amendment 210 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 Amendment 211 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22. Welcomes the provisions on Controlled Foreign Corporation (CFC) included in ATAD I to ensure that profits made by related companies parked in low or no-tax countries are effectively taxed; acknowledges that they prevent the absence or diversity of national CFC rules within the Union from distorting the functioning of the internal market beyond situations of wholly artificial arrangements as called for repeatedly by Parliament;
Amendment 212 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22. Welcomes the provisions on Controlled Foreign Corporation (CFC) included in ATAD I to ensure that profits made by related companies parked in low or no-tax countries are effectively taxed; acknowledges that they prevent the absence or diversity of national CFC rules within the Union from distorting the functioning of the internal market beyond situations of wholly artificial arrangements as called for repeatedly by Parliament;
Amendment 213 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22. Welcomes the provisions on Controlled Foreign Corporation (CFC) included in ATAD I to ensure that profits made by related companies parked in low or no-tax countries are effectively taxed; acknowledges that they prevent the absence or diversity of national CFC rules within the Union from distorting the functioning of the internal market beyond situations of wholly artificial arrangements as called for repeatedly by Parliament; deplores the coexistence of two approaches to implement CFC rules in ATAD I and calls on Member States to implement only the simpler and most efficient CFC rules as in ATAD I Article 7(2)(a); points out that the second and third actions of the BEPS action plan also aim to neutralise the effects of hybrid structures and interest deductibility; calls on Member States to incorporate into their legislation the measures recommended by the BEPS plan which are beyond the scope of the EU;
Amendment 214 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22. Welcomes the provisions on Controlled Foreign Corporation (CFC) included in ATAD I to ensure that profits made by related companies parked in low or no-tax countries are effectively taxed; acknowledges that they prevent the absence or diversity of national CFC rules within the Union from distorting the functioning of the internal market beyond situations of wholly artificial arrangements as called for repeatedly by Parliament; deplores the coexistence of two approaches to implement CFC rules in ATAD I and calls on Member States to implement only the simpler and most efficient CFC rules as in ATAD I Article 7(2)(a); asks the European Commission to make a legislative proposal reinforcing CFC rules, including a criteria on an actual corporate tax paid on profits lower than 18%;
Amendment 215 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22. Welcomes the provisions on Controlled Foreign Corporation (CFC) included in ATAD I to ensure that profits made by related companies parked in low or no-tax countries are effectively taxed; acknowledges that they prevent the absence or diversity of national CFC rules within the Union from distorting the functioning of the internal market beyond situations of wholly artificial arrangements as called for repeatedly by Parliament; deplores the coexistence of two approaches to implement CFC rules in ATAD I and calls on Member States to implement only the simpler and most efficient CFC rules as in ATAD I Article 7(2)(a); again insists that such measures can be fully effective only if they are applied in full transparency by all parties;
Amendment 216 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22. Welcomes the provisions on Controlled Foreign Corporation (CFC) included in ATAD I to ensure that profits made by related companies parked in low or no-tax countries are effectively taxed; a
Amendment 217 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 a (new) 22 a. Calls on the Commission to review ATAD I in order to eliminate the 2 alternatives for implementing CFC rules and leave only the stronger, most efficient one in Article 7(2)(a): to tax interest, royalties and other relevant types of income of all low-tax foreign subsidiaries, as the second option (to tax income of low-tax subsidiaries arising from non- genuine arrangements which have been put in place for the essential purpose of obtaining a tax advantage)is very weak and open to abuse, because it only protects against profit-shifting out of the home country and requires the tax authority to analyse many individual transactions of low-tax subsidiaries;
Amendment 218 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 23. Welcomes the general anti-abuse rule for the purposes of calculating corporate tax liability included in ATAD I, allowing Member States to ignore arrangements that are not genuine and having regard to all relevant facts and circumstances aimed at obtaining a tax advantage; reiterates its repeated call for the adoption of a general and common anti- abuse rule, namely in existing legislation and in particular in the parent-subsidiary directive, the merger directive and the interest and royalties directive; calls on Member States to consider a general anti- abuse rule including a minimum effective tax rate of 18%;
Amendment 219 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 23. Welcomes the general anti-abuse rule for the purposes of calculating corporate tax liability included in ATAD I, allowing Member States to ignore arrangements that are not genuine and having regard to all relevant facts and circumstances aimed at obtaining a tax advantage; reiterates its repeated call for the adoption of a
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 21 b (new) - having regard to the Formal Opinion to the Maltese FIAU of the Commission,
Amendment 220 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 23. Welcomes the general anti-abuse rule for the purposes of calculating corporate tax liability included in ATAD I, allowing Member States to ignore arrangements that are not genuine and having regard to all relevant facts and circumstances solely aimed at obtaining a tax advantage; reiterates its repeated call for the adoption of a general and common anti-
Amendment 221 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 23. Welcomes the general anti-abuse rule for the purposes of calculating corporate tax liability included in ATAD I, allowing Member States to ignore arrangements that are not genuine and having regard to all relevant facts and circumstances aimed at obtaining a tax advantage; reiterates its repeated call for the adoption of a general and common anti- abuse rule, following wideranging consultations with all public and private stakeholders, namely in existing legislation and in particular in the parent-subsidiary directive, the merger directive and the interest and royalties directive;
Amendment 222 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 Amendment 223 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 Amendment 224 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 24. Reiterates its call for a clear definition of permanent establishment so that companies cannot artificially avoid having a taxable presence in a Member State in which they have economic activity, always taking into account the problems posed by the ambiguities inherent in a digital presence; recalls nonetheless that healthy tax competition should be preserved in the EU as the European Commission in its Communication (2007/785) had recognised that "it is quite legitimate for tax considerations to play a role in the decision on whereto establish a subsidiary" and that "the objective of minimising one's tax burden is in itself a valid commercial consideration as long as the arrangements entered into with a view to achieving it do not amount to artificial transfers of profits";
Amendment 225 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 24. Reiterates its call for a clear definition of permanent establishment, including the concept of a ‘significant digital presence’, so that companies cannot artificially avoid having a taxable presence in a Member State in which they have economic activity;
Amendment 226 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 24.
Amendment 227 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 24. Reiterates its call for a clear definition of 'permanent establishment' and 'virtual permanent establishment' so that companies cannot artificially avoid having a taxable presence in a Member State in which they have economic activity;
Amendment 228 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 24. Reiterates its call for a clear definition of permanent establishment and significant economic presence so that companies cannot artificially avoid having a taxable presence in a Member State in which they have economic activity;
Amendment 229 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 a (new) 24 a. Calls for the definition of a permanent establishment to be more in line with the concept of a permanent establishment as defined in the UN model tax convention considering also the definition in the CCTB proposal, in a way that allows for the definition of permanent establishment not only to comprise tax payers with a fixed place of residence in a Member State, but also economic activities performed without the need of physical presence;
Amendment 23 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 22 a (new) - having regard to the Commission proposal of 23 April 2018 on the protection of whistle-blowers;
Amendment 230 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 Amendment 231 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 26 26. Recalls its concerns relating to the use of transfer prices in ATP and consequently recalls the need for adequate action and improvement of the transfer pricing framework to address the issue; recognizes that subjective and contingent factors related to the competitive strategies followed by MNCs and the product/service mix of their final cross- border output, influence how internally within these conglomerates, and independently of tax finalities, transfer prices are defined; stresses the need to ensure that they reflect the economic reality, provide certainty, clarity and fairness for Member States and for companies operating within the Union, and reduce the risk of misuse of the rules for profit-shifting purposes,
Amendment 232 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 26 26. Recalls its concerns relating to the use of transfer prices in ATP and consequently recalls the need for adequate action and improvement of the transfer pricing framework to address the issue; stresses the need to
Amendment 233 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 26 26. Recalls its concerns relating to the use of transfer prices in ATP and consequently recalls the need
Amendment 234 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 26 26. Recalls its concerns relating to the use of transfer prices in ATP and consequently recalls the need for adequate action and improvement of the
Amendment 235 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 26 a (new) 26 a. Notes that as has been highlighted repeatedly by numerous experts and publications, the use of the ‘independent entity concept’ or ‘arm’s length principle’ recommended by the OECD Transfer Pricing Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises and Tax Administrations of 1979, 1995, 2010 and 2017, is at the core of the problem of tax evasion, tax avoidance and double non-taxation;
Amendment 236 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 27 27. Emphasises that the EU actions aimed at addressing BEPS and ATP have equipped tax authorities with an updated toolbox to ensure
Amendment 237 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 27 27. Emphasises that the EU actions aimed at addressing BEPS and ATP have equipped tax authorities with an updated toolbox to ensure fair tax collection; stresses that tax authorities should be responsible for making effective use of the tools without imposing an additional burden on responsible taxpayers, particularly SMEs; regrets that practices being adopted in this regard are creating excessive operational problems for SMEs;
Amendment 238 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 27 27. Emphasises that the EU actions aimed at addressing BEPS and
Amendment 239 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 27 27. Emphasises that the EU actions aimed at addressing BEPS and ATP have equipped tax authorities with an updated toolbox to ensure fair tax collection; stresses that tax authorities should be responsible for making effective use of the tools without imposing a
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 22 a (new) - having regard to the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on protection of persons reporting on breaches of Union law2a; _________________ 2a 2018/0106(COD)
Amendment 240 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 27 a (new) 27 a. Reiterates its call for a clear definition of permanent establishment so that companies cannot artificially avoid having a taxable presence in a Member State in which they have economic activity;
Amendment 241 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 27 b (new) 27 b. Calls for the finalisation of the work being done within the EU Joint Transfer Pricing Forum (JTPF) on the development of good practices and monitoring of Member States’ implementation by the Commission;
Amendment 242 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 28 28.
Amendment 243 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 28 28. Recognises that the new flow of information to tax authorities following the adoption of ATAD I and DAC4 creates the need for adequate resources to ensure the most efficient use of such information and to effectively reduce the current tax gap; calls upon national tax authorities to ensure that their human, material and financial capabilities are sufficiently in line with the growing requirements placed on them;
Amendment 244 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 28 28. Recognises that the new flow of information to tax authorities following the adoption of ATAD I and DAC4 creates the need for adequate resources to ensure the most efficient use of such information and to effectively reduce the current tax gap; calls on all Member States to evaluate if the tools of the authorities are sufficient and adequate to use this information; points out the importance of combining different sets of information in order to identify patterns which indicate suspicious activity and can thereby help to discover financial crimes, tax evasion or tax avoidance;
Amendment 245 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 28 28. Recognises that the new flow of information to tax authorities following the adoption of ATAD I and DAC4 creates the need for adequate resources to ensure the most efficient use of such information and to effectively reduce the current tax gap; notes that there are continuing loopholes in the DAC regime that need to be closed1; __________________________ [1] Greens/EFA Report Reporting taxation: Analysing loopholes in the EU’s automatic exchange of information and how to close them, October 15 2018
Amendment 246 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 28 a (new) 28 a. Is concerned by the trend amongst some Member States of facilitating onshoring of IP from low tax third countries to EU Member States, through the provision of amortisation relief on IP acquirement, the proliferation of ‘patent boxes’ providing reduced taxation rates on certain IP profits, high or complete capital allowances for intellectual property and the introduction or extension of research and development credits1a; reiterates concerns expressed by the European Parliament1b and European Commission in relation to revenue losses associated with such measures1c; _________________ 1a Eurodad et. al.,Tax Games: the Race to the Bottom, Europe’s role in supporting an unjust tax system 2017, December 2017, pp. 22 – 24;and IMF, Fiscal Monitor: Acting Now, Acting Together, April 2016, p44. 1b European Parliament resolution of 25 November 2015 on tax rulings and other measures similar in nature or effect, OJ C 366, 27.10.2017, p. 26, paragraph 117. 1c European Commission, DG TAXUD, Tax Policies in the European Union. 2016 Survey, 26 October 2016, 2.1.3 R&D tax incentives, p2.
Amendment 247 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 28 a (new) 28 a. Is concerned by the trend amongst some Member States of facilitating onshoring of IP from low tax Third Countries to EU Member States, through the provision of amortisation relief on IP acquirement, the proliferation of ‘patent boxes’ providing reduced taxation rates on certain IP profits, high or complete capital allowances for intellectual property and the introduction or extension of research and development credits1; notes that this while may conform with the BEPS actions’ substance requirements, it is in contrast with the spirit of BEPS; reiterates concerns expressed by the European Parliament2 and European Commission in relation to revenue losses associated with such measures3; _______________________ [1] Eurodad et. al., Tax Games: the Race to the Bottom, Europe’s role in supporting an unjust tax system 2017, December 2017, pp. 22 – 24; and IMF, Fiscal Monitor: Acting Now, Acting Together, April 2016, p 44. [2] European Parliament resolution of 25 November 2015 on tax rulings and other measures similar in nature or effect, OJ C 366, 27.10.2017, p. 26, paragraph 117. [3] European Commission, DG TAXUD, Tax Policies in the European Union. 2016 Survey, 26 October 2016, 2.1.3 R&D tax incentives, p 2.
Amendment 248 #
Motion for a resolution Subheading 2.2 Strengthening EU actions to fight against corporate
Amendment 249 #
Motion for a resolution Subheading 2.2 a (new) Points out that the aim of the BEPS plan is to propose international solutions to enable national authorities to combat the grey area of tax avoidance;
Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 23 a (new) - having regard to the report by the High Level Panel on Illicit Financial Flows from Africa, jointly commissioned by the AU/ECA Conference of Ministers of Finance, Planning and Economic Development,
Amendment 250 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 28 c (new) 28 c. Calls on EU Institutions and Member States to support a global tax reform based on the principles of formulary apportionment as included in the CCCTB proposal;
Amendment 251 #
Motion for a resolution Subheading 2.2.1 Scrutinising Member States’ tax systems and overall tax environment –
Amendment 252 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 29 29. Welcomes the fact that Member States’ tax systems and overall tax environment have become part of the European Semester in line with Parliament’s call to that effect29 ; welcomes the studies and data drawn up by the Commission30 that allow situations that provide economic ATP indicators to be better addressed, and give a clear indication of the exposure to tax planning as well as furnishing a rich data base for all Member States on the phenomenon; calls for these new tax indicators for the European Semester to be given the same rank as the indicators relating to expenditure control; underlines the interest of providing the European Semester with this tax dimension, as it will make it possible to tackle certain harmful tax practices that had not been tackled until now through the ATAD Directive and other existing European regulations; _________________ 29 European Parliament resolution of 25 November 2015 on tax rulings and other measures similar in nature or effect, OJ C 366, 27.10.2017, p. 51, paragraph 96. 30 Referred to above. The studies provide an overview of Member States’ exposure to ATP structures affecting their tax base (erosion or increase), although there is no stand-alone indicator of the phenomenon, a set of indicators seen as a ‘body of evidence’ nevertheless exists.
Amendment 253 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 29 29. Welcomes the fact that Member States’ tax systems and overall tax environment have become part of the European Semester in line with Parliament’s call to that effect29 ; welcomes the studies and data drawn up by the Commission30 that allow situations that provide economic ATP indicators to be better addressed, and give a clear indication of the exposure to tax planning as well as furnishing a rich data base for all Member States on the phenomenon; recommends that in its presentations on the aforementioned issues, in the context of the European semester, the Commission clearly distinguishes between effects that relate to macroeconomic and macro-financial issues, and effects that follow from issues related to taxation policies; _________________ 29 European Parliament resolution of 25 November 2015 on tax rulings and other measures similar in nature or effect, OJ C 366, 27.10.2017, p. 51, paragraph 96. 30 Referred to above. The studies provide an overview of Member States’ exposure to ATP structures affecting their tax base (erosion or increase), although there is no stand-alone indicator of the phenomenon, a set of indicators seen as a ‘body of
Amendment 254 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 29 29. Welcomes the fact that Member States’ tax systems and overall tax environment have become part of the European Semester in line with Parliament’s call to that effect29 ; welcomes the studies and data drawn up by the Commission30 that allow situations that provide economic ATP indicators to be better addressed, and give a clear indication of the exposure to tax planning as well as furnishing a rich data base for all Member States on the phenomenon; calls on the Commission to make full use of this information and give concerned countries precise recommendations in its Specific Country Recommendations’ (SCRs) reports; urges Member States to swiftly follow the Commission's recommendations to fight ATP; _________________ 29 European Parliament resolution of 25 November 2015 on tax rulings and other measures similar in nature or effect, OJ C 366, 27.10.2017, p. 51, paragraph 96. 30 Referred to above. The studies provide an overview of Member States’ exposure to ATP structures affecting their tax base (erosion or increase), although there is no stand-alone indicator of the phenomenon, a set of indicators seen as a ‘body of evidence’ nevertheless exists.
Amendment 255 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 29 29. Welcomes the
Amendment 256 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 30 30. Welcomes the fact that DAC6 sets out the hallmarks of reportable cross- border arrangements that intermediaries must report to tax authorities to allow them to be assessed by the latter; welcomes the fact that these features of ATP schemes can be updated if new arrangements or practices emerge; points out that the implementation deadline of the directive has not yet lapsed and that the provisions will need to be monitored to ensure their efficiency;
Amendment 257 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 30 30.
Amendment 258 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 31 Amendment 259 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 31 31. Calls on the CoC Group to report yearly on the main arrangements reported in Member States to allow decision makers to keep up with the new tax schemes which are being elaborated and to take the necessary countermeasures
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 25 a (new) - having regard to reports on tax avoidance and tax evasion as challenges for governance, social protection and development in developing countries1a, and gender equality and taxation policies in the EU1b; _________________ 1a Report on tax avoidance and tax evasion as challenges for governance, social protection and development in developing countries (2015/2058(INI)) (http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/get Doc.do?pubRef=- //EP//TEXT+REPORT+A8-2015- 0184+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN) 1b Gender equality and taxation policies in the EU (2018/2095(INI)) (https://oeil.secure.europarl.europa.eu/oei l/popups/ficheprocedure.do?lang=&refere nce=2018/2095(INI)
Amendment 260 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 31 31. Calls on the CoC Group report yearly to the Council and Parliament on the main arrangements reported in Member States to allow decision makers to keep up with the new tax schemes which are being elaborated and to take the countermeasures that might potentially be needed;
Amendment 261 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 32 32. Calls on the Commission to
Amendment 262 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 32 32. Calls on
Amendment 263 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 32 32. Calls on the Commission to issue a proposal aimed at repealing patent boxes, and calls on Member States to favour non- harmful and, if appropriate, direct support for R&D; stresses that tax reliefs for companies need to be carefully constructed and implemented only where their positive impact on jobs and growth is evident and any risk of creating new loopholes in the taxation system is excluded; reiterates, in the meantime, its call to ensure that current patent boxes establish a genuine link to economic activity, such as expenditure tests, and that they do not distort competition; welcomes the improved definition of R&D costs in the common corporate tax base (CCTB) proposal; however continues to express its concern about new deductions for R&D expenditure included in the CCTB proposal and which could create opportunities for artificially reducing the tax base;
Amendment 264 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 32 32. Calls on the Commission to issue a proposal aimed at repealing patent boxes, and notes the calls on Member States to favour non-
Amendment 265 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 32 32. Calls on the Commission to issue a proposal aimed at repealing patent boxes, and calls on Member States to favour non- harmful and, if appropriate, direct support for R&D; reiterates, in the meantime, its call to ensure that current patent boxes establish a genuine link to economic activity, such as expenditure tests, and that they do not distort competition;
Amendment 266 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 32 32. Calls on the Commission to issue a proposal aimed at repealing patent boxes, and calls on Member States to favour non- harmful and, if appropriate, direct support
Amendment 267 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 32 32. Calls on the Commission to issue - before the end of its term of office - a proposal aimed at repealing patent boxes, and calls on Member States to favour non- harmful and, if appropriate, direct support for R&D; reiterates, in the meantime, its call to ensure that current patent boxes establish a genuine link to economic activity, such as expenditure tests, and that they do not distort competition; welcomes the improved definition of R&D costs in the common corporate tax base (CCTB) proposal;
Amendment 268 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 32 32. Calls on the Commission to issue a proposal aimed at
Amendment 269 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 32 a (new) 32 a. Calls on both the EU institutions and Member States to ensure public procurement contracts do not facilitate tax avoidance or benefit ATP by suppliers. Member States should monitor and ensure that companies or other legal entities involved in tenders and procurement contracts do not participate in tax evasion and avoidance by interacting with financial intermediaries established in offshore centres and tax havens, or by facilitating illicit capital flows, and to increase their transparency policies by requiring annual public country-by-country reporting, tracing beneficial ownership and controlling transfer pricing in order to ensure the transparencyof investments and prevent tax evasion and tax avoidance; calls on the Commission to clarify existing procurement practice under the EU procurement directive, and if necessary, propose an update to it that does not prohibit the application of tax related considerations as criteria for exclusion or even as selection criteria in public procurement1. ______________ [1] Initiatives such as www.tenderhaven.eu have attempted to introduce more transparency.
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 25 a (new) - having regard to the letter sent by the TAX3 Committee Chair to the Permanent Representative of Malta to the EU, HE Daniel Azzopardi, seeking explanations about the company '17 Black' and why the Chief of Staff of the Prime Minister of Malta, Keith Schembri, and Tourism Minister, Konrad Mizzi, set up structures to receive regular payments of hundreds of thousands of Euros,
Amendment 270 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 32 a (new) 32 a. Calls on both the EU institutions and Member States to ensure public procurement contracts do not facilitate tax avoidance by suppliers. Member States should monitor and ensure that companies or other legal entities involved in tenders and procurement contracts do not participate in tax evasion and avoidance by interacting with financial intermediaries established in offshore centres and tax havens, or by facilitating illicit capital flows, and to increase their transparency policies by requiring annual public country-by-country reporting, tracing beneficial ownership and controlling the valuation of intragroup transactions in order to ensure the transparency of investments and prevent tax evasion and tax avoidance; Calls on the Commission to clarify existing procurement practice under the EU procurement directive, and if necessary, propose an update to it does not prohibit the application of tax related considerations as criteria for exclusion or even as selection criteria in public procurement1a; _________________ 1a Initiatives such as www.tenderhaven.euhave attempted to introduce more transparency.
Amendment 271 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 32 a (new) 32 a. Calls on the Council, assisted by the European Commission, to define a comprehensive and exhaustive list of potential harmful tax practices within the EU, to be updated every year; demands that criteria aiming at identifying harmful tax practices include, notably, schemes allowing for a large deduction of corporate income tax without benefiting the real local economy;
Amendment 272 #
Motion for a resolution Subheading 2.2.2 Amendment 273 #
Motion for a resolution Subheading 2.2.2 Amendment 274 #
Motion for a resolution Subheading 2.2.2 Amendment 275 #
Motion for a resolution Subheading 2.2.2 Amendment 276 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 33 Amendment 277 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 33 Amendment 278 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 33 Amendment 279 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 33 Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 25 a (new) - having regard to the report by Transparency International and Global Witness entitled 'European Getaway. Inside the Murky World of Golden Visas';
Amendment 280 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 33 33. Welcomes the re-launch of the CCCTB project in a two-step approach, with the Commission’s adoption of interconnected proposals on CCTB and CCCTB;
Amendment 281 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 33 33. Welcomes the re-launch of the CCCTB project in a two-step approach, with the Commission’s adoption of interconnected proposals on CCTB and CCCTB;
Amendment 282 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 33 33.
Amendment 283 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 33 33. Welcomes the re-launch of the CCCTB project in a two-step approach, with the Commission’s adoption of interconnected proposals on CCTB and CCCTB; calls on the Council to swiftly adopt them, taking into consideration Parliament’s opinion that already includes the concept of virtual permanent establishment that would close the remaining loopholes allowing tax avoidance to take place and level the playing field in light of digitalisation; notes that among Member States there is resistance to the introduction of CCTB on the grounds that it represents the first step towards tax harmonisation which such states disagree with and on the grounds that there exist material doubts regarding whether its application would respect the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality; further emphasizes that, despite the agreement about the fact that the global economy is digitalising, any chosen solution shall apply to the economy broadly and not to narrow segments of the economy;
Amendment 284 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 33 33. Welcomes the re-launch of the CCCTB project
Amendment 285 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 33 33. Welcomes the re-launch of the CCCTB project in a two-step approach, with the Commission’s adoption of interconnected proposals
Amendment 286 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 33 33. Welcomes the re-launch of the CCCTB project in a two-step approach, with the Commission’s adoption of interconnected proposals on CCTB and CCCTB;
Amendment 287 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 33 33. Welcomes the re-launch of the CCCTB project in a two-step approach, with the Commission’s adoption of interconnected proposals on CCTB and CCCTB, in order to tackle the issue of profit shifting comprehensively; calls on the Council to swiftly adopt them, taking into consideration Parliament’s opinion that already includes the concept of virtual permanent establishment that would close the remaining loopholes allowing tax avoidance to take place and level the playing field in light of digitalisation;
Amendment 288 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 33 33.
Amendment 289 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 33 a (new) 33 a. Urges the Council to adopt these legislative proposals as soon as possible and before the end of this legislature, taking into consideration Parliament’s opinion that already includes the concept of virtual permanent establishment; considers that the deployment of this legislation would significantly contribute to closing the remaining loopholes and level the playing field in light of digitalisation and the growing role of intangible assets in the MNE value chain, which have exacerbated the problems with transfer pricing systems; however, expresses concern about the inclusion of a super-deduction for research and development1; ________________ [1] Council of the European Union, Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee, ECO/419,5.4 (http://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/docu ment/ST-12848-2017-INIT/EN/pdf)
Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 25 a (new) - having regard to reports on tax avoidance and tax evasion as challenges for governance, social protection and development in developing countries, and gender equality and taxation policies in the EU1a; _________________ 1a Report on tax avoidance and tax evasion as challenges for governance, social protection and development in developing countries (2015/2058(INI)), European Parliament Committee on Development. Report adopted on 09/06/2015; and [add link to FEMM report once published]
Amendment 290 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 33 a (new) 33 a. Recalls that to end the practice of profit shifting and to introduce the principle that tax is paid where profit is generated, the CCTB and CCCTB should be introduced simultaneously in all Member States; calls on the Commission to issue a new proposal based on Article 116 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, whereby the European Parliament and the Council act in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure to issue the necessary legislation, should the Council fail to adopt a unanimous decision on the proposal to establish a CCCTB;
Amendment 291 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 33 a (new) 33 a. Notes that CCCTB impact assessments have been carried out on the basis of incomplete data at a time when tax administrations will soon have access to more precise and complete information following the Member States’ implementation of country-by-country reporting, and that going ahead without proper analysis would be deeply irresponsible; calls on the European Commission to conduct a new impact assessment based on high-quality data which would allow for a more informed decision to be made between different possible apportionment formulas;1a _________________ 1a ‘Assessing the impact of the CC(C)TB: European tax base shifts under a range of policy scenarios’; a GUE/NGL Study by Alex Cobham, Petr Janský, Chris Jones and Yama Temouri (Tax Justice Network); November 2017;
Amendment 292 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 33 a (new) 33 a. Calls on the Council to swiftly adopt them, taking into consideration Parliament’s opinion that already includes the concept of virtual permanent establishment that would close the remaining loopholes allowing tax avoidance to take place and level the playing field in light of digitalisation;
Amendment 293 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 33 a (new) 33 a. Stresses that taxation policy in the European Union should not be solely focussed on fighting tax avoidance and aggressive tax planning, but also on facilitating cross-border economic activity by cooperation between tax authorities and smart tax policy design;
Amendment 294 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 33 b (new) 33 b. Welcomes the improved definition of R&D costs in the common corporate tax base (CCTB) proposal;
Amendment 295 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 33 b (new) 33 b. Believes that, as regards proceeding with the CCTB and CCCTB proposals, if aggregation were to take place without considering the differences between Member States’ accounting rules the inconsistencies in the EU tax base might end up being exploited by those seeking to secure advantage from regulatory arbitrage; calls on the Council to consider that ‘consolidated tax base’ should mean the consolidated net taxable revenue of the corporate group members, as calculated on a consistent accounting basis applicable to all group members;
Amendment 296 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 33 b (new) 33 b. Underlines that there is a multitude of tax-related obstacles that hamper cross-border economic activity; urges the European Commission to adopt an action plan addressing these obstacles as a matter of priority;
Amendment 297 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 33 c (new) 33 c. As already stressed by the PANA recommendations, implementing the CCCTB at EU level runs the risk of creating a situation in which current losses from Member States to the rest of world could be locked in, as could the exploitation of the rest of the world by some Member States; notes that an EU- only approach could eliminate the incentives to shift profit within the EU, but open the door to further incentives and opportunities to shift profit out of the EU1a _________________ 1a European Parliament recommendation of 13 December 2017 to the Council and the Commission following the inquiry into money laundering, tax avoidance and tax evasion (Texts adopted, P8_TA- (2017)0491).
Amendment 298 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 33 d (new) 33 d. Calls on the Council to take note of PANA recommendations and consider strengthening the anti-tax avoidance provisions of the CCCTB to eliminate transfer pricing to third-country jurisdictions leading to a reduction in the taxable base of companies in the Union1a; in particular this means considering using the stronger, simpler and most efficient approach regarding the implementation of CFC rules in ATAD I Article7(2)(a); _________________ 1a European Parliament recommendation of 13 December 2017 to the Council and the Commission following the inquiry into money laundering, tax avoidance and tax evasion(Texts adopted, P8_TA- (2017)0491).
Amendment 299 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 34 34. Notes that the phenomenon of digitalisation has created a new situation in the market, whereby digital and digitalised companies are able to take advantage of local markets without having a physical, and therefore taxable, presence in that market, creating a non-level playing field and putting traditional companies at a disadvantage;
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 5 — having regard to its resolution of 16 December 2015 with recommendations to the Commission on bringing transparency
Amendment 30 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Recalls that current
Amendment 300 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 34 34. Notes that the phenomenon of digitalisation has created a new situation in the market, whereby digital and digitalised companies are able to take advantage of local markets without having a physical, and therefore taxable, presence in that market, creating a non-level playing field and putting traditional companies at a disadvantage; notes that digital businesses models in the EU face a lower effective average tax burden than traditional business models31 ; deplores that digital businesses pay almost no taxes in some Member States despite their significant digital presence and large revenues in those Member States; reminds that, when it comes to the digitalisation of the whole economy, the location of the value creation should take into account the input from users as well as information collected on consumers' behaviour online; _________________ 31 As evidenced in the impact assessment of 21 March 2018 accompanying the digital tax package (SWD(2018)0081), according to which on average, digitalised businesses face an effective tax rate of only 9.5 %, compared to 23.2 % for traditional business models.
Amendment 301 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 34 34. Notes that the phenomenon of digitalisation has created a new situation in the market, whereby digital and digitalised companies are able to take advantage of local markets without having a physical, and therefore taxable, presence in that market, creating a non-level playing field and putting traditional companies at a disadvantage; notes that digital businesses models in the EU
Amendment 302 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 34 34. Notes that the phenomenon of digitalisation has created a new situation in the market, whereby digital and digitalised companies are able to
Amendment 303 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 34 34. Notes that the phenomenon of digitalisation has created a new situation in the market, whereby digital and digitalised companies are able to take advantage of local markets without having a physical, and therefore taxable, presence in that market, creating
Amendment 304 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 34 34. Notes that
Amendment 305 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 34 34.
Amendment 306 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 34 Amendment 307 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 34 a (new) 34 a. Notes that digitalisation affects the whole economy with many firms using multi-channel models; thus, instead of creating special regimes for digital businesses, international tax rules should be reformed, based on a principle of neutrality between different business models, both digital and non-digital, and regardless of the extent or form of digitalisation, including multi-channel models, recognising the economic reality businesses operate in today;
Amendment 308 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 34 a (new) 34 a. Underlines that the correct forum for tax challenges stemming from the digitalisation is within the OECD, and that tax challenges stemming from the digitalisation of the economy is a global issue requiring a global solution; believes that the EU should focus on creating a more attractive business environment in order to achieve a well-functioning Digital Single Market while waiting for a global solution on taxing the digital economy;
Amendment 309 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 34 a (new) 34 a. Underlines that a lack of a common Union approach on addressing the taxation of the digital economy will lead Member States to adopt unilateral solutions, which will lead to regulatory uncertainty, fracturing of the single market and might become a burden for companies operating cross-border as well as tax authorities;
Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Recalls that current international and national tax rules were mostly conceived in the early 20th century; asserts that the
Amendment 310 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 34 a (new) (34a) Takes the view that digital taxation should not be restricted to the digital giants, but should be considered within a global framework of combating the tax evasion of all multinationals, inclusively and in all sectors, including the energy sector;
Amendment 311 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 35 35.
Amendment 312 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 35 35.
Amendment 313 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 35 35. Welcomes the digital tax package adopted by the Commission on 21 March 2018;
Amendment 314 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 35 35.
Amendment 315 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 35 35. Welcomes the digital tax package adopted by the Commission on 21 March 2018;
Amendment 316 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 35 35. Welcomes the digital tax package adopted by the Commission on 21 March 2018; calls on the Council to s
Amendment 317 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 35 35. Welcomes the digital tax package adopted by the Commission on 21 March 2018; calls on the Council to swiftly adopt these proposals, taking into account Parliament’s opinion on them, as adopted on the 13th of December2018;
Amendment 318 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 35 35. Welcomes the digital tax package adopted by the Commission on 21 March 2018; calls on the Council to swiftly adopt these proposals, taking into account Parliament’s opinion
Amendment 319 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 35 a (new) 35 a. Notes that changing the definition of permanent establishment to make it more aligned with that of the UN model tax convention in a way that also includes digital significant presence, would be the optimal solution to tackle problems not only affecting the digital market but rather the digitalization of the economy and the earnings created in jurisdictions where companies do not have any physical presence;
Amendment 32 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Recalls that current international and national tax rules were mostly conceived in the early 20th century; asserts that there is an urgent need for reform of the rules, so that international, EU and national tax systems are fit for the new economic, social and technologic challenges of the 21st century; points out, in this context, the gradual shift from tangible production to intangible assets in the value chains of MNEs, as reflected in the relative rates of growth over the last five years of royalties and licensing fee receipts (almost 5 per cent annually) compared with trade in goods and FDI (less than 1 per cent per year)1a; notes the broad understanding that current tax systems are not equipped to keep up with these developments and ensure that all market participants pay fair taxes; _________________ 1a UNCTAD, World Investment Report, 2018.
Amendment 320 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 35 a (new) 35 a. Recalls that the digital services under the scope of the digital tax package should be the processing and sale of data, online advertisement, digital interfaces and the provision of digital content; deplores that the Council is currently considering a proposal that is much less ambitious in scope than the Commission’s proposal and than the Parliament’s position;
Amendment 321 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 35 a (new) 35 a. (new) Emphasizes that sole agreement on what constitutes digital permanent establishment is a step in the right direction, but does not solve the issue of how to determine tax base to that digital permanent establishment;
Amendment 322 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 35 a (new) 35 a. Stresses that some Member States are unilaterally implementing, or are planning to implement, national measures on digital taxation, which might cause fragmentation and distort the level- playing field within the EU;
Amendment 323 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 35 a (new) 35 a. Urges the Commission to consider the possibility of establishing a digital tax within the framework of enhanced cooperation should the Council not be able to reach agreement on the 'Digital Services Tax';
Amendment 324 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 35 a (new) 35 a. Notes that the proposed Digital Services Tax is a tax on turnover instead of on profits, which deviates from fundamental principles of international taxation;
Amendment 325 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 36. U
Amendment 326 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 36.
Amendment 327 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 36. Understands that the so-called interim solution is not optimal; believes that it will help speed up the search for a better solution at global level, while levelling the playing field in local markets to some extent; ; calls on the EU Member States to discuss, adopt and implement the long-term solution concerning the taxation of the digital economy (on the significant digital presence) as soon as possible in order for the EU to be a trendsetter on the global level and to depart from the short-term solution; stresses that the long-term solution proposed by the Commission should serve as a basis for further work on the international level and the EU shall continue to work towards a consensus- based solution in the BEPS Inclusive Framework;
Amendment 328 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 36. Understands that the so-called interim solution is not optimal;
Amendment 329 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 36. Understands that the so-called interim solution is not optimal
Amendment 33 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Recalls that current international and national tax rules were mostly conceived in the early 20th century; asserts that there is an urgent need for reform of the rules, so that international, EU and national tax systems are fit for the new economic, social and technologic challenges of the 21st century; notes the broad understanding that current tax systems are not equipped to keep up with these developments and ensure that all market participants pay fair taxes; accepts that a problem with existing tax rules and the administrative approaches by which they are being implemented arise from the fact that accounting methods were designed in days when value added in economic systems was mainly attributable to manufacturing activities, while now especially in advanced economies, economic value added is in large part and increasingly, attributable to service activities, as well as latterly to a further fast development of digital services, to account for which there has been little adaptation in the accounting methods that measure and enable the evaluation of such sectors;
Amendment 330 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 36. Understands that the so-called interim solution is not optimal; believes that it will help speed up the search for a better solution at global level, while levelling the playing field in local markets to some extent; Underlines the need for common Union approach in order to save guard the integrity of the digital single market;
Amendment 331 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 36.
Amendment 332 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 36. Understands that the so-called interim solution is not optimal; believes that it will help speed up
Amendment 333 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 36. Understands that the so-called interim solution is not optimal; believes that it will help speed up the search for a better solution at global level, while levelling the playing field in local markets to some extent; notes that the OECD/G20 2018 interim report regarding Action 1 of the BEPS Project on the tax challenges of the digital economy did not reach many firm conclusions and largely describes the competing views of stakeholders;
Amendment 334 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 a (new) 36a. Notes that, across the political spectrum, and across Europe, there is an overwhelming support for a digital tax; recalls that surveys show that 80% of citizens from Germany, France, Austria, the Netherlands, Sweden and Denmark are supportive of a Digital Service Tax (DST) and that 80% of the citizens think that the EU should not wait for international efforts before it undertakes such a step; underlines furthermore that a majority of the surveyed citizens want a broad scope for a digital service tax, which includes services providing digital content and e-commerce1a; _________________ 1a KiesKompas, Public Perception towards taxing digital companies in six countries https://policies.kieskompas.nl/digital-tax- report.pdf,December 2018
Amendment 335 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 a (new) 36a. Reiterates its call on the Commission to use the power vested in the article 116 TFEU and to make proposals in the area of taxation under this article, in particular for the adoption of the Digital Services Tax (DST) and the CCCTB; believes that the conditions set out in Article 116 are met since there is a clear evidence that competition in the internal market between digital and traditional firms is distorted and that the Council failed to come to an agreement to eliminate the distortion;
Amendment 336 #
36a. Notes that the interim solution needs to be swiftly replaced by a change in the definition of permanent establishment; calls for the Council to consider the need for the digital service tax to be set at a level that takes the effective taxation of multinational companies within the scope of this proposal to that of other smaller companies in the same sector and other economic sectors, and that for that reason, the rate should be no lower than 5%;
Amendment 337 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 a (new) 36a. Stresses that EU Member States need to adopt a long-term solution for the taxation of the digital economy in order to have the EU lead the debate at OECD and international level.
Amendment 338 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 a (new) 36a. Urges the European Commission to play an active and constructive role in the OECD workstream working on international standards for a virtual permanent establishment;
Amendment 339 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 b (new) 36b. Calls on Member States to ensure that the ‘Digital Services Tax’ remains a temporary measure by including a ‘sunset clause’ to the proposal for a Council Directive on the common system of a digital services tax on revenues resulting from the provision of certain digital services and by speeding up the discussion on a Significant Digital Presence1a ; _________________ 1a Proposal for a Council Directive laying down rules relating to the corporate taxation of a significant digital presence COM(2018) 147 final
Amendment 34 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Recalls that current international and national tax rules were mostly conceived in the early 20th century; asserts that the existing tax rules are often unable to keep up with the increasing speed of the economy; notes that there is an urgent need for reform of the rules, so that international, EU and national tax systems are fit for the new economic, social and technologic challenges of the 21st century; notes the broad understanding that current tax systems are not equipped to keep up with these developments and ensure that all market participants pay fair taxes;
Amendment 341 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 37 37. Stresses that since June 2014 the DAC has been amended four times; believes that the time has now come for a wide-ranging intergovernmental conference and treaty on taxation issues that would bring together the EU, the US, Japan, China, India, Russia among others, also with a view to streamlining and strengthening cooperative procedures to monitor tax avoidance;
Amendment 342 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 37 37. Stresses that since June 2014 the DAC has been amended f
Amendment 343 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 37 37. Stresses that since June 2014 the
Amendment 344 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 38 38.
Amendment 345 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 38 38. Reiterates its call for a broader scope in relation to the exchange of tax rulings and broader access by the Commission; calls on the Commission to swiftly release its first assessment of DAC3 in this regard, looking in particular at the number of rulings exchanged and the
Amendment 346 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 38 38. Reiterates its call for a broader scope in relation to the exchange of tax rulings and broader access by the Commission, and for more harmonisation of the tax ruling practices of different national tax authorities; calls on the Commission to swiftly release its first assessment of DAC3 in this regard, looking in particular at the number of rulings exchanged and the number of occasions on which national tax administrations accessed information held by another Member State; asks that the assessment also consider the impact of disclosing key information related to tax rulings (the number of rulings, the names of beneficiaries, the effective tax rate deriving from each ruling);
Amendment 347 #
38a. Calls on the Commission to tackle existing loopholes in automatic exchange of information, particularly coming from the DAC3 revision; stresses in this regard that this should cover national rulings and rulings with natural persons, that information should be made public, and that information on rulings should be better exchanged with third countries;
Amendment 348 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 38 a (new) 38a. Deplores the fact that the Commissioner in charge of taxation does not recognise the need to extend the existing system for the exchange of information between national tax authorities;
Amendment 349 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 39 39. Reiterates, furthermore, its call to ensure simultaneous tax audits of persons of common or complementary interests (including parent companies and their subsidiaries), and its call to further enhance
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Recalls that current international and national tax rules were mostly conceived in the early 20th century; asserts that there is an urgent need for reform of the rules, so that international, EU and national tax systems are fit for the new economic, social and technologic challenges of the 21st century; notes the broad understanding that current tax systems are not equipped to keep up with these developments and ensure that all market participants pay fair taxes and that the fair tax principle must be at the heart of European taxation initiatives and promoted within the European Semester;
Amendment 350 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 39 39. Reiterates, furthermore, its call to ensure simultaneous tax audits of persons of common or complementary interests (including parent companies and their subsidiaries),
Amendment 351 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 39 39. Reiterates, furthermore, its call to ensure simultaneous tax audits of persons
Amendment 352 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 40 40. Emphasises that not only information exchanges between, but also the sharing of best practices among tax authorities contribute to more efficient tax collection; calls on Member States to give priority to the sharing of best practices among tax authorities; points out that information processing is equally essential when combating fraud and cross-border tax evasion;
Amendment 353 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 40 40. Emphasises that
Amendment 354 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 40 40. Emphasises that not only information exchanges between, but also the sharing of best practices among tax authorities contribute to more efficient tax collection; calls on Member States to give priority to the sharing of best practices among tax authorities, especially regarding the digitalisation of tax administrations;
Amendment 355 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 40 40. Emphasises that not only information exchanges between, but also the sharing of best practices among tax authorities contribute to more efficient tax collection; calls on the Commission and the Member States to give priority to the sharing of best practices among tax authorities;
Amendment 356 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 41 41. Calls on the Commission to swiftly assess the implementation of DAC4 and whether national tax administrations effectively access country-by-country information held by another Member State;
Amendment 357 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 41 41. Calls on the Commission to swiftly assess the implementation of DAC4 and whether national tax administrations effectively access country-by-country information held by another Member State;
Amendment 358 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 42 42. Welcomes the automatic exchange
Amendment 359 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 42 42. Welcomes the automatic exchange of financial account information based on the global standard which has been developed by the OECD with Andorra, Liechtenstein, Monaco, San Marino and Switzerland; believes that the reporting obligation imposed by the OECD in 2015 on the largest multinationals has to cover all multinationals, including those operating in the energy sector; calls on the Commission and the Member States to upgrade the Treaty provisions so as to match the DAC as amended;
Amendment 36 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Recalls that current international and national tax rules were mostly conceived in the early 20th century; asserts that there is an urgent need for reform of the rules, so that international, EU and national tax systems are fit for the new economic, social and technologic challenges of the 21st century; notes the broad understanding that current tax systems are not equipped to keep up with these developments and ensure that all market participants pay fair taxes; stresses the need to draw up legislative proposals at global level by establishing inclusive strategies;
Amendment 360 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 42 42. Welcomes the automatic exchange
Amendment 361 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 42 a (new) 42a. Also stresses the contribution made through the Fiscalis 2020 Programme which aims at enhancing cooperation between participating countries, their tax authorities and their officials; stresses the added value brought by joint actions in this field and the role of the possible programme in developing and operating major trans-European IT systems;
Amendment 362 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 43 43. Reminds Member States of their obligation under the Treaty32 to cooperate loyally, sincerely and expeditiously; calls, therefore, in the light of cross-border cases, most notably in the light of the so- called Cum-Ex files, for the nomination of Single Points of Contact (SPoC) by all Member States’ national tax authorities, in line with the SPoC-system of the Joint International Taskforce on Shared Intelligence and Collaboration (JITSIC) in the framework of the OECD33, to facilitate and enhance cooperation in combating tax fraud, tax evasion and aggressive tax planning; calls further on the Commission to facilitate and coordinate cooperation between Member States’ SPoCs; _________________ 32 Article 4(3) TEU. 33 http://www.oecd.org/tax/forum-on-tax- administration/jitsic/
Amendment 363 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 43 43. Reminds Member States of their obligation under the Treaty32 to cooperate loyally, sincerely and expeditiously with due regard for the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality; calls, therefore, in the light of cross-border cases, most notably the so-called Cum-Ex files, for the nomination of Single Points of Contact (SPoC) by all Member States’ national tax authorities, in line with the SPoC-system of the Joint International Taskforce on Shared Intelligence and Collaboration (JITSIC) in the framework of the OECD33 , to facilitate and enhance cooperation in combating tax fraud, tax evasion and aggressive tax planning; calls
Amendment 364 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 43 43. Reminds Member States of their obligation under the Treaty32 to cooperate
Amendment 365 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 43 a (new) 43a. Notes that the form in which the information is provided between national tax authorities is key when such information coming from a Member States may be introduced as evidence in a judicial proceeding in another Member State; considers that the continuation of the progressive building-up of a common language and understanding in tax related matters is key for a more efficient EU framework as well as its enforcement; believes that it should encompass, inter alia, the type of information transmitted and its form, the automaticity of its transmission and the potential exemption to that principle, common IT tools;
Amendment 366 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 44 44. Recommends that Member States’ authorities which are notified by their counterparts in other Member States of potential breaches of law be
Amendment 367 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 44 a (new) 44a. With reference to its Cum-Ex Resolution of 29 November 2018, calls on Member States to identify loopholes in the arrangements for refunds of dividend tax and other taxes and to reform their tax systems in order to eliminate loopholes; calls on the Commission to support Member States in this task by sharing information on tax collection systems that can combat the tax collection problems that have come to light as a result of the Cum-Ex scandal; calls for an extension of mandatory automatic exchanges of information between tax authorities to include necessary information on dividend tax and tax refunds.
Amendment 368 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 44 a (new) 44a. Calls on Member States and tax supervisory authorities to investigate whether it is necessary to ban financial instruments whose sole profit-making purpose is to bring about tax rebates, such as, for instance, dividend arbitrage and dividend stripping, and where the issuer cannot prove that the financial instruments concerned have another, substantive economic purpose;
Amendment 369 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 44 a (new) 44a. Calls for DAC6 hallmarks to be strengthened in order to require the mandatory disclosure of dividend arbitrage schemes and all information on capital gains, including the granting of dividend and capital gains tax refunds1a _________________ 1a P8_TA-PROV(2018)0475. European Parliament resolution of 29 November 2018 on the cum-ex scandal: financial crime and loopholes in the current legal framework(2018/2900(RSP))
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Recalls that current international and national tax rules were mostly conceived in the early 20th century; asserts that there is an urgent need for reform of the rules, so that international, EU and national tax systems are fit for the new economic, social and technologic challenges of the 21st century; notes the broad understanding that current tax systems are not equipped to keep up with these developments and ensure that all market participants pay
Amendment 370 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 44 a (new) Amendment 371 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 44 a (new) 44a. Underlines that national authorities play a key role in the supervision of financial and fiscal activities in the Member States; considers therefore that it should be established whether national competent authorities have duly fulfilled their supervision tasks in the framework of the cum-ex scandal; asks the Commission to assess whether certain financial techniques used in the cum-ex scandal, such as short-selling might have a disruptive impact on the financial markets; stresses that, should their negative effect on financial markets be proven that they should be banned or at least limited; requests the European Securities and Markets Authority and the European Banking Authority to conduct an inquiry into dividend arbitrage trading schemes such as cum-ex in order to assess potential threats to the integrity of financial markets and to national budgets; to establish the nature and magnitude of actors in these schemes; to assess whether there were breaches of either national or Union law; to assess the actions taken by financial supervisors in Member States; and to make appropriate recommendations for reform and for action to the competent authorities concerned;
Amendment 372 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 44 a (new) 44a. Notes that the German government was aware of the fraudulent cum-ex tax fraud practices for some years but only informed other Member States in 2015, and that the German Finance Ministry reportedly said it was aware of 418 different cases of cum-ex tax fraud with a combined value of EUR 5.7 billion;
Amendment 373 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 44 a (new) 44a. [New sub-heading] 2.3.1 Dividend stripping and coupon washing
Amendment 374 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 44 a (new) 44a. Recalls that ATP practices such as the Cum-Ex and Cum-Cum schemes have generated losses of over 50 billion Euros
Amendment 375 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 44 a (new) 44a. Concludes that the CumEx-files demonstrate the urgent need to improve cooperation between EU Member States’ tax authorities, especially with regard to information sharing; urges therefore Member States to enhance their cooperation in detecting, stopping, investigating and prosecuting tax fraud and evasion schemes such as cum-ex and cum-cum including exchange of best practices, and to support EU-level solutions where justified;
Amendment 376 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 44 a (new) 44a. Notes the magnitude of the CumEx scandal, which according to some estimates, has taken EUR 55 billion from public coffers in the EU; observes that the "CumEx files" reveal a lack of cooperation between Member States' tax authorities and failures of the current system of exchange of information as some Member States were reportedly aware of these fraudulent tax practices but waited several years to inform other Member States; calls for a regulation of dividend arbitrage practices, preventing "CumEx" and "CumCum" schemes in the future, by putting the burden of proof of ownership of the dividends on the foreign beneficiary; calls on the European legislators to evaluate the possibility of implementing this measure at EU level;
Amendment 377 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 44 b (new) 44b. Notes that CumEx transactions are a global problem and have been known about since the 1990s in Europe, too, but no coordinated counteraction has been taken;
Amendment 378 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 44 b (new) 44b. Calls on the Commission to assess the state of play of all potentially harmful taxation agreements and any possible loophole in the EU rules on common taxation of parent companies and their subsidiaries, to come up with new upgraded policy measures to tackle dividend arbitrage practices and to take the necessary steps to prevent traders from exploiting loopholes in the law;
Amendment 379 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 44 b (new) 44b. Further notes that the French Senate, in an effort to combat the practice of dividend arbitrage, has tabled an amendment to the draft budget bill that would make it possible to withhold 30 % of the value of the transaction to a foreign beneficiary, to be reimbursed a posteriori if they prove that they are the ultimate beneficial owner; calls on the EU legislators to evaluate the possibility of implementing this measure at EU level;
Amendment 38 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Recalls that current international and national tax rules were mostly conceived in the early 20th century; asserts that the
Amendment 380 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 44 b (new) 44b. (new under subheading 2.3.1.) Deplores the tax fraud and tax avoidance revealed by the so called CumEx Files scandal which has led to publicly reported losses of Member States’ tax revenue, amounting to as much as EUR 55,2 billion according to some media estimates; highlights that the consortium of European journalists identifies Germany, Denmark, Spain, Italy and France as allegedly the main target markets for cum-ex trading practices, followed by Belgium, Finland, Poland, the Netherlands, Austria and the Czech Republic;
Amendment 381 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 44 b (new) 44b. Notes that the systematic fraud centred around the cum-ex- and cum-cum schemes was made possible in part because relevant Member States’ authorities did not perform sufficient checks on applications for reimbursement of taxes and that relevant authorities lack a clear and complete picture of actual ownership of shares; calls on the Member States to access of all relevant authorities to complete and up-to-date information on ownership of shares; calls on the Commission to assess whether an EU action is needed in this regard, and to present a legislative proposal should the assessment demonstrate a need for such action;
Amendment 382 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 44 c (new) 44c. Underlines that the revelations seem to indicate possible shortcomings in national taxation laws and in the current systems of exchange of information and cooperation between Member State authorities; urges the Member States to effectively use all communication channels, national data and data made available by the strengthened framework for exchange of information;
Amendment 383 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 44 c (new) 44c. Calls on the Commission to make a proposal to strengthen the DAC6 in order to require the mandatory disclosure of dividend arbitrage schemes and all information on capital gains, including the granting of dividend and capital gains tax refunds;
Amendment 384 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 44 c (new) Amendment 385 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 44 d (new) 44d. Urges all Member States to thoroughly investigate and analyse dividend payment practices in their jurisdictions, to identify the loopholes in their tax laws that generate opportunities for exploitation by tax fraudsters and avoiders, to analyse any potential cross- border dimension of these practices and to put an end to all these harmful tax practices; calls on Member States to exchange best practices in this regard;
Amendment 386 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 44 e (new) 44e. Calls upon the Member States and their Financial Supervisory Authorities to assess the need to ban exclusively tax- driven financial practices such as dividend arbitrage or dividend stripping and similar schemes, in absence of the proof to the contrary by the issuer that these financial practices have a substantive economic purpose other than unjustified tax reimbursement and/or tax avoidance;
Amendment 387 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 44 f (new) 44f. Calls on the Commission to start working immediately on a proposal for a European financial police within the framework of Europol with its own investigatory capacities, as well as on a European framework for cross-border tax investigations;
Amendment 388 #
Motion for a resolution Subheading 2.4 a (new) (new para) Welcomes the adoption of DAC4 providing for a CBCR to tax authorities, in line with BEPS Action 13 standard;
Amendment 389 #
Motion for a resolution Subheading 2.4 b (new) (new para) Reiterates its call for mandatory public CBCR for large businesses and 'community interest companies' (MNEs) and recalls similar provisions already exist for the banking sector in Directive 2013/36/EU Article 89 (CDRIV)1b; _________________ 1b Directive 2013/36/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on access to the activity of credit institutions and the prudential supervision of credit institutions and investment firms, amending Directive 2002/87/EC and repealing Directives 2006/48/EC and 2006/49/EC (OJ L 176, 27.6.201363.
Amendment 39 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 a (new) 1 a. (new) Notes that financial flows and tax mobility have substantially increased; warns that some new phenomena are inherently opaque or facilitate opacity allowing for tax avoidance, aggressive tax planning, tax evasion and money laundering; acknowledges this is mainly due to the current rules no longer fitting into the present context in which information and communication technology (ICT) based tools allow to operate faster and remotely;
Amendment 390 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 45 45. Stresses that the proposal for public CBCR was submitted to the co-legislators just after the Panama papers scandal on 12 April 2016, and that Parliament adopted its position on it on 4 July 2017; recalls that the latter called for an enlargement of the scope of reporting and protection of commercially sensitive information;
Amendment 391 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 45 45.
Amendment 392 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 45 45. Stresses that the proposal for public CBCR was submitted to the co-legislators just after the Panama papers scandal on 12 April 2016, and that Parliament adopted its position on it on 4 July 2017; recalls that the latter called for an enlargement of the scope of reporting and protection of commercially sensitive information;
Amendment 393 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 45 45. Stresses that the proposal for public CBCR was submitted to the co-legislators just after the Panama papers scandal on 12 April 2016, and that Parliament adopted its position on it on 4 July 2017; recalls that the latter called for an enlargement of the scope of reporting and protection of commercially sensitive information;
Amendment 394 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 45 45. Stresses that the proposal for public CBCR was submitted to the co-legislators just after the Panama papers scandal on 12 April 2016, and that Parliament adopted its position on it on 4 July 2017; recalls that
Amendment 395 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 45 45.
Amendment 396 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 45 45. Stresses that the proposal for public CBCR was submitted to the co-legislators just after the Panama papers scandal on 12 April 2016, and that Parliament adopted its position on it on 4 July 2017; recalls that the latter called for an enlargement of the scope of reporting and protection of commercially sensitive information for EU companies both within and outside the EU Single Market, so that this directive does not undermine the competitiveness of EU enterprises; deplores the lack of progress and cooperation from the Council since 2016; urges for progress to be made in the Council so that it enters into negotiations with Parliament;
Amendment 397 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 45 45. Stresses that the proposal for public CBCR was submitted to the co-legislators just after the Panama papers scandal on 12 April 2016, and that Parliament adopted its position on it on 4 July 2017;
Amendment 398 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 45 45. Stresses that the proposal for public CBCR was submitted to the co-legislators just after the Panama papers scandal on 12 April 2016, and that Parliament adopted its position on it on 4 July 2017; recalls that the latter called for an enlargement of the scope of reporting and protection of commercially sensitive information; deplores the lack of progress and cooperation from the Council since 2016; urges for progress to be made in the Council so that it enters immediately into negotiations with Parliament as soon as possible and find agreement before the end of this legislature;
Amendment 399 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 45 45. Stresses that the proposal for public CBCR was submitted to the co-legislators just after the Panama papers scandal on 12 April 2016, and that Parliament adopted its
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 5 Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Points out that certain financial scandals or tax practices which are legally borderline must be fought vigorously; reiterates the importance of striking the right balance between an administration which must be able to monitor what is happening on the territory of a Member State and take the necessary measures where appropriate, while at the same time letting companies grow without being suffocated by administrative rules that could be detrimental to the development of their business, albeit without falling into a lowest common denominator situation in terms of surveillance;
Amendment 400 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 45 45. Stresses that the proposal for public CBCR was submitted to the co-legislators just after the Panama papers scandal on 12 April 2016, and that Parliament adopted its position on it on 4 July 2017; recalls that the latter called for an enlargement of the scope of reporting and protection of commercially sensitive information; deplores the lack of progress and cooperation from the Council since 2016; urges for progress to be made in the Council so that it enters into negotiations with Parliament in order to ensure the swift adoption of the proposal;
Amendment 401 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 45 45. Stresses that the proposal for public CBCR was submitted to the co-legislators just after the Panama papers scandal on 12 April 2016, and that Parliament adopted its position on it on 4 July 2017; recalls that the latter called for an enlargement of the scope of reporting and protection of commercially sensitive information;
Amendment 402 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 45 45. Stresses that the proposal for public CBCR was submitted to the co-legislators just after the Panama papers scandal on 12 April 2016, and that Parliament adopted its position on it on 4 July 2017; recalls that the latter called for an enlargement of the scope of reporting
Amendment 403 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 45 45. Stresses that the proposal for public CBCR was submitted to the co-legislators just after the Panama papers scandal on 12 April 2016, and that Parliament adopted its position on it on 4 July 2017; recalls that the latter called for an enlargement of the scope of reporting and protection of commercially sensitive information; deplores the complete lack of progress and cooperation from the Council since 2016; urges
Amendment 404 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 45 a (new) 45a. Recalls the position of the European Parliament in the PANA recommendations when it called for ambitious public country-by-country reporting (CbCR) in order to enhance tax transparency and the public scrutiny of multinational enterprises (MNEs) as this would allow the wider public to have access to information about the profits made, subsidies received and the taxes paid by MNEs in the jurisdictions where they operate; urges the Council to reach a common agreement in order to adopt a public CbCR, one of the key measures for achieving greater transparency in relation to companies’ tax information for all citizens; 1a _________________ 1a European Parliament recommendation of 13 December 2017 to the Council and the Commission following the inquiry into money laundering, tax avoidance and tax evasion(Texts adopted, P8_TA- (2017)0491).
Amendment 405 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 45 a (new) 45 a. Reminds Member States of the legal base of the proposal for public CBCR as found in the impact assessment of the Commission published 12 April 201633a; recalls that the measures on corporate tax transparency cannot be regarded as relating to fiscal provisions affecting the establishment or functioning of the internal market in the sense of Article 115 TFEU; _________________ 33a Commission staff working document assessing the potential for further transparency on income tax information; https://eur- lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do? uri=SWD:2016:0117:FIN:EN:PDF#18
Amendment 406 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 45 a (new) 45a. Notes that transparency is still lacking in numerous areas of taxation in the EU not limited to the corporate taxation; calls on the Commission and on Member States to collect and publish data on non-doms and CBI/RBI schemes; calls on the Commission to present a proposal to make the publication of tax rulings mandatory;
Amendment 407 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 45 a (new) 45a. Calls on the Commission and the Council to create a mandatory standardised public European Business Register in order to gain up-to-date and trustworthy information on companies and to achieve transparency via cross- border access to comparable and reliable information of companies in the EU;
Amendment 408 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 45 b (new) 45b. Calls on the Commission to issue a proposal that would oblige Member States to ensure that economic operators participating in public procurement procedures comply with a minimum level of transparency regarding tax, particularly public CBCR and transparent ownership structures;
Amendment 409 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 45 c (new) 45c. Reminds Member States of the legal base of the proposal for public CBCR as found in the impact assessment of the Commission published 12 April 2016; recalls that the measures on corporate tax transparency cannot be regarded as relating to fiscal provisions affecting the establishment or functioning of the internal market in the sense of Article 115 TFEU;
Amendment 41 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 a (new) 1 a. Notes that money laundering, tax evasion and tax avoidance have important economic, political, and social impacts, including loss of tax revenue, productivity loss, unfair competition and inequality, and incentivise certain economic outcomes that undermine both the countries’ political stability and social contract; stresses that the negative effects on public resources also impact the realisation of the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs);
Amendment 410 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 46 46. Recalls that the area of direct business taxation falls within the scope of
Amendment 411 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 46 a (new) 46a. Notes that tax competition, with its detrimental effects, is not only allowed but encouraged by the European Commission, excluding only ‘special deals’ which are treated as State Aid, in an attempt to attract foreign investment even when the effectiveness of this strategy has been greatly questioned1a; _________________ 1a ICRICT, 'Four ways to tackle international tax competition', December 2016
Amendment 412 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 47 Amendment 413 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 47 47. Calls on the Commission to assess possible measures to discourage Member States from granting such State aid in the form of a tax advantage, and to develop a robust method for measuring such indirect state aid;
Amendment 414 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 47 47. Calls on the Commission and, in particular, the competition authority to assess possible measures to discourage Member States from granting such State aid in the form of a tax advantage;
Amendment 415 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 47 a (new) 47a. Welcomes the Commission’s new proactive and open approach to investigations into illegal state aid during the present term, which has led to a number of high-impact cases being concluded by the Commission;
Amendment 416 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 47 a (new) 47a. Calls on the Commission to assess possible measures to discourage Member States from granting such State aid in the form of selective tax advantages;
Amendment 417 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 48 48. Welcomes the fact that since 2014, the Commission has been investigating the tax ruling practices of Member States, following up on allegations of the favourable tax treatment of certain companies, and has launched nine formal investigations since 2014, six of which concluded that the tax ruling constituted
Amendment 418 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 48 a (new) 48a. Recognises the Commission’s success in enforcing competition rules in the areas of antitrust, cartels, mergers and state aid; recognizes the Commission’s contribution towards promoting international cooperation in competition issues and contribution to the principle of tax fairness;
Amendment 419 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 48 a (new) 48a. Is concerned by the lack of transparency of tax rulings and notes that the tax rulings investigated by the Commission were only available to them because of revelations by investigative journalists, civil society organisations and trade unions.
Amendment 42 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 a (new) 1 a. Stresses that capitalistic globalisation and the free movement of capital created the perfect conditions for the design of base erosion and profit shifting schemes and, at the same time, enshrined a structural bias in policymaking to the benefit of capital owners and multinational enterprises (MNEs), which has served to promote divergences and asymmetries between countries and social classes; emphasises, furthermore, that the free movement of capital, the deregulation and liberalisation of the financial and banking system, and the increasing tax competition among Member States – all promoted by EU institutions and legislation with the support of the European right wing and social democracy –are at the root of the rise of tax evasion and tax avoidance schemes and scandals;
Amendment 420 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 48 a (new) 48a. Is concerned by the lack of transparency of tax rulings and notes that the tax rulings investigated by the Commission were only available to them because of revelations by investigative journalists, civil society organisations and trade unions;
Amendment 421 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 49 Amendment 422 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 49 49.
Amendment 423 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 49 49. Notes that despite the fact that the Commission found McDonald’s benefited from double non-taxation on
Amendment 424 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 49 49. Notes that despite the fact that the Commission found McDonald’s benefited from double non-taxation on certain of its profits in the EU, no decision under EU State Aid rules could be issued, as the Commission concluded that the double non-taxation stemmed from a mismatch between Luxembourg and US tax laws and the Luxembourg-United States double taxation treaty38 ; calls on the Commission to put forward a legislative proposal to harmonise double taxation treaties of Member States and terminate existing mismatches in the qualification of profits and expenses; _________________ 38 http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP- 18-5831_en.htm
Amendment 425 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 49 a (new) 49a. Deplores the fact that companies can make agreements with governments to pay almost no tax in a given country despite conducting substantial activity; points in this light to a tax ruling between the Dutch tax revenue authority and Royal Dutch Shell plc that seems to be in violation of Dutch tax law on the sole ground that the head office would be located in the Netherlands after the unification of the two former parent companies, which results in an exemption from Dutch dividend withholding tax, while at the same time recent investigations seem to show that the company pays no profit tax in The Netherlands either; reiterates its call on the Commission to investigate this case of potential illegal state aid;
Amendment 426 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 49 a (new) 49a. Is concerned with the fact that the Commission ruled that double-non taxation achieved by McDonald’s stemmed from a mismatch between Luxembourg and US tax laws and the Luxembourg-United States double taxation treaty, a mismatch from which McDonald’s profited by arbitrating between such jurisdictions; and that such tax avoidance is enabled by the current legal framework in the EU to a point that the only means found effective by the European Commission to tackle it is through State Aid rules, something which has proved not to be possible in the case of McDonald’s;
Amendment 427 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 50 50. Is concerned by the magnitude of tax unpaid for all Member States over long
Amendment 428 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 50 50. Is concerned by the magnitude of tax unpaid for all Member States over long periods39
Amendment 429 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 50 50. Is concerned by the magnitude of tax unpaid for all Member States over long periods39; recalls that the aim of the recovery of unlawful aid (and interest) is to restore the position to the status quo, and that calculating the exact amount of aid to be repaid is part of the implementation obligation incumbent on the national authorities; calls on the Commission to assess possible countermeasures, including fines, to prevent Member States from offering selective favourable tax treatment
Amendment 43 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Recalls that improving tax collection in EU countries is likely to reduce crime associated with tax evasion and the money laundering that follows it;
Amendment 430 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 50 50. Is gravely concerned by the magnitude of tax unpaid for all Member States over long periods39 ; recalls that the aim of the recovery of unlawful aid is to restore the position to the status quo, and that calculating the exact amount of aid to be repaid is part of the implementation obligation incumbent on the national authorities; calls on the Commission to assess and establish possible countermeasures, including fines, to prevent Member States from offering selective favourable tax treatment which constitutes State aid is non-
Amendment 431 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 50 50. Is concerned by the magnitude of tax unpaid for all Member States over long periods39 ; recalls that the aim of the recovery of unlawful aid is to restore the position to the status quo, and that calculating the exact amount of aid to be repaid is part of the implementation obligation incumbent on the national authorities; calls on the Commission to assess possible countermeasures, including fines, to prevent Member States from offering selective favourable tax treatment which constitutes State aid that is non- compliant with EU rules; _________________ 39 As in the case of decision of 30 August 2016 (SA.38373) on State aid implemented by Ireland to Apple. The tax rulings in question were issued by Ireland on 29 January 1991 and 23 May 2007.
Amendment 432 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 51 51. Reiterates its calls for guidelines clarifying what constitutes tax-related State aid
Amendment 433 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 51 51. Reiterates its calls to the European Commission for guidelines clarifying what constitutes tax-related State aid and ‘appropriate’ transfer pricing, with a view to removing legal uncertainties for both compliant taxpayers and tax administrations, and providing a framework for Member States’ tax practices accordingly;
Amendment 434 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 51 51. Reiterates its calls for clear guidelines clarifying what constitutes tax- related State aid and ‘appropriate’ transfer pricing,
Amendment 435 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 51 a (new) 51a. Regrets the fact that the current framework for tackling profit shifting between related parties through transfer pricing is based on the ‘arm’s length’ principle, a principle that grants a higher regard to the contractual arrangement among related parties than to the economic reality of the transactions taking place between one party and another one subject to it; deplores that the generalization of the ‘arm’s length principle’ has resulted in the ‘legalization’ of tax avoidance through transfer pricing; notes that in this context, the only effective solution within the European Union to tackle the tax evasion and tax avoidance of multinational companies has been through the identification of abuses to State aid rules;
Amendment 436 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 51 a (new) 51a. Points out that the scope of state aide cases proves the urgent need to for a systemic change and approval of EU-wide reforms to curb tax avoidance including mandatory public Country-by-Country Reporting, Common Corporate Tax Base and Common Consolidate Corporate Tax Base or digital taxation; calls for a reform of the European State Aid framework in order to make tackling tax avoidance schemes between multinationals and Member States faster and more effective;
Amendment 437 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 51 a (new) 51a. Calls for discussion to determine what should be done with the proceeds of fines imposed under European regulations for unlawful State aid, the object being to ensure that, when fines relate to laws or rulings which allow aggressive tax optimisation, they benefit countries whose public finances have been wrongfully deprived of revenue and not countries which have passed such laws or granted such rulings;
Amendment 438 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 51 b (new) 51b. Deplores that Apple’s new European tax structure remains shrouded in secrecy, partially due to a lack of financial transparency in Ireland and Jersey; and that most of its financial information remains secret globally1a _________________ 1a Brehm Christensen, M.; Clancy, E. (2018) ‘Exposed: Apple’s delicious tax deals, Is Ireland Helping Apple Pay less than 1% in the EU?’; GUE/NGL; June 2018.
Amendment 439 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 51 c (new) 51c. Deplores that with the assistance of the Irish government, Apple has successfully created a structure that has allowed it to gain a tax write-off against almost all of its non-US sales profits; calls on the Commission to further investigate Apple’s case in the context of State Aid rules;
Amendment 44 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 a (new) (1a) Points out that tax fraud, tax evasion and aggressive tax planning are the direct consequence of the entire process of liberalising economies, given the privatisation and deregulation of the financial system and the free movement of capital. Therefore, public control of the financial system and the movement of capital should be a fundamental part of the fight against this scourge.
Amendment 440 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 51 d (new) 51d. Notes that the law governing the use of capital allowances for IP is not subject to Ireland’s transfer pricing legislation, but it includes a prohibition from being used for tax avoidance purposes; deplores that Apple is potentially breaking Irish law by its restructure and it exploitation of the capital allowance regime for tax purposes; notes that if the same legal reasoning used in the European Commission’s state aid ruling on Apple and Ireland is applied, Apple is in breach of Irish tax law, and owes Irish Revenue at least 2.5 billion additional euros in unpaid tax annually from the period 2015-2017;1a _________________ 1a Brehm Christensen, M.; Clancy, E. (2018) ‘Exposed: Apple’s delicious tax deals, Is Ireland Helping Apple Pay less than 1% in the EU?’; GUE/NGL; June 2018.
Amendment 442 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 51 a (new) 51a. Points out that national measures to specifically ban commercial relationships with letterbox companies exist, for example in Latvia1a; _________________ 1a Latvian legislation defines a letterbox company as an entity having no actual economic activity and holding no documentary proof to the contrary, as being registered in a jurisdiction where companies are not required to submit financial statements, and/or as having no place of business in its country of residence;
Amendment 443 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 52 Amendment 444 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 52 52.
Amendment 445 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 52 52. Notes that there is no single definition of
Amendment 446 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 52 52. Notes that there is no single definition of letterbox companies; points out, however, that simple criteria such as actual business activity or the physical presence of staff working for a company could serve to identify letterbox companies and combat their proliferation;
Amendment 447 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 52 52. Notes that there is no single definition of shell or letterbox companies, i.e. companies registered in a jurisdiction for tax avoidance or tax evasion purposes only and without any significant economic presence;
Amendment 448 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 52 a (new) 52a. Notes that shell companies offer anonymity to its ultimate beneficiaries and allow them to abuse tax treaties; notes in this regard that the central register on the beneficial ownership foreseen in AMLD4 covers shell companies but regrets that the threshold for disclosure (25% of shareholding) will not prevent owners from remaining hidden; highlights that shell companies can be used as a vehicle for money laundering, tax evasion and tax avoidance; calls on the Commission to propose an amendment to the AMLD5 requiring obliged entities to file a suspicious transaction report whenever they enter into business or help setting up a shell company;
Amendment 449 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 53 Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 b (new) 1 b. Notes with regret that tax fraud, tax evasion and aggressive tax planning are important factors causing income and wealth inequality, and have shifted the tax burden from rich individuals to poorer citizens, from capital income to labour income and consumption, from MNEs to SMEs and from the financial sector to the real economy; notes that this has resulted in weaker and less efficient tax-and- transfer systems that are essential to finance public goods and stabilise the economy;
Amendment 450 #
Amendment 451 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 53 53. Points out national measures to specifically ban commercial relationships with letterbox companies;
Amendment 452 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 53 53. Points out national measures to specifically ban commercial relationships with
Amendment 453 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 53 a (new) 53a. Regrets however that the banning of letterbox companies in Latvia cannot be used to ban letterbox companies resident in EU Member States, as that would be considered discriminatory in the current EU legislative framework1a;calls for the European Commission to propose changes in the current legislation that would enable to ban letterbox companies even if resident in EU Member States; _________________ 1a TAX3 Delegation to Riga (Latvia), 30- 31 August 2018, MISSION REPORT
Amendment 454 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 53 a (new) 53a. Notes that Latvia adopted in May 2018 a law banning financial institutions, as well as intermediaries, from cooperating and doing business with shell companies; calls on the Commission to put forward a legislative proposal to introduce the Latvian legislation in EU legislation and to encourage all EU Member States to follow this example;
Amendment 455 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 54 Amendment 456 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 54 Amendment 457 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 54 Amendment 458 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 54 54. Highlights that the high level of inward and outward foreign direct investment as a percentage of GDP in seven Member States (Belgium, Cyprus, Hungary, Ireland, Luxembourg, Malta, and the Netherlands) can only be partially explained by real economic activities taking place in these Member States;40 notes that no factual evidence is available to link this phenomenon to the existence or otherwise of letterbox companies in the Member States cited; notes moreover that by its very nature, the provision from within a given country of financial services to companies and individuals running significant cross border business, frequently involves on a fully legitimate basis the keeping on their behalf of funds, “parked” within a jurisdiction on a short or even long term basis, and this would account for the fact that countries where such financial services are provided, hold what is recorded as incoming or outgoing foreign direct investment that exceeds greatly the investment carrying capacity based on estimates of the “real” economy; _________________ 40 Kiendl Kristo I. and Thirion E., An overview of shell companies in the European Union, EPRS, European Parliament, October 2018, p.23.
Amendment 459 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 54 54.
Amendment 46 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 b (new) 1 b. Notes that the lowering of wealth taxes, which prioritize the wellbeing of the most privileged casts of the society, can lead to social unrest, as has been the case in the recent episodes in France, as the rest of the society which does not benefit from such tax cuts, but is more and more affected by the reduction of the welfare state, is bound to feel abandoned and neglected by its governing State1a _________________ 1a See comments by Piketty of 9 December 2018; URL: https://www.lemonde.fr/idees/article/2018/ 12/08/thomas-piketty-gilets-jaunes-et- justice-fiscale_5394443_3232.html
Amendment 460 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 54 54. Highlights that the high level of inward and outward foreign direct investment as a percentage of GDP in seven Member States (Belgium, Cyprus, Hungary, Ireland, Luxembourg, Malta, and the Netherlands) can only
Amendment 461 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 54 54. Highlights that the high level of inward and outward foreign direct investment as a percentage of GDP in s
Amendment 462 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 54 54. Highlights that the high level of inward and outward foreign direct investment as a percentage of GDP in seven Member States (Belgium, Cyprus,
Amendment 463 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 55 Amendment 464 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 55 55. Underlines that subject to the observation raised in paragraph 54 above, a high share of foreign direct investment held by special
Amendment 465 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 55 55.
Amendment 466 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 55 55. Underlines that a high share of foreign direct investment held by special purpose entities exists
Amendment 467 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 55 55. Underlines that a high share of foreign direct investment held by special purpose entities exists in several Member States
Amendment 468 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 55 55. Underlines that a high share of foreign direct investment held by special purpose entities (SPEs) exists in several Member
Amendment 469 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 55 55. Underlines that a high share of foreign direct investment held by special purpose entities and exploiting existing tax loopholes exists in several Member States, particularly in Malta, Luxembourg and the Netherlands;41 _________________ 41 Kiendl Kristo I. and Thirion E.
Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 c (new) 1 c. Notes that tax evasion and tax avoidance are major contributors to gender inequality in the Union and globally as they limit the resources available to governments to increase equality at national and international level; calls on the Commission, the Council and the Member States to include a gender perspective in the formulation of its proposal to tackle tax evasion;
Amendment 470 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 55 a (new) 55a. Recalls that the European Parliament has called on the Commission to assess the role of Special Purpose Vehicles (SPVs) and Special Purpose Entities (SPEs) revealed by the cum-ex papers and, where appropriate, to propose limiting the use of these instruments1a;calls on the European Commission to assess the role of the special purpose entities holding foreign direct investment in Malta, Luxembourg and the Netherlands; _________________ 1a P8_TA- (2018)0475European Parliament resolution of 29 November 2018 on the cum-ex scandal: financial crime and loopholes in the current legal framework (2018/2900(RSP))
Amendment 471 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 56 Amendment 472 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 56 56. Notes that, subject to the observation raised in paragraph 54 above, economic indicators such as an unusually high level of foreign direct investment, as well as foreign direct investment held by special purpose entities are ATP indicators42 ; _________________ 42 IHS, Aggressive tax planning indicators, prepared for the European Commission, DG TAXUD Taxation papers, Working paper No 71, October 2017.
Amendment 473 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 56 56. Notes that economic indicators such as an unusually high level of foreign direct investment, as well as foreign direct investment held by special purpose entities are two of many ATP indicators42 ; _________________ 42 IHS, Aggressive tax planning indicators, prepared for the European Commission, DG TAXUD Taxation papers, Working paper No 71, October 2017.
Amendment 474 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 56 56. Notes that economic indicators such as an unusually high level of foreign direct investment, as well as foreign direct investment held by special purpose entities are
Amendment 475 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 56 Amendment 476 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 57 Amendment 477 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 57 Amendment 478 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 57 Amendment 479 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 57 57. Notes that the ATAD anti-abuse rules (artificial arrangements) cover letterbox companies, and that the CCTB and CCCTB would ensure that the income is attributed to where the real economic activity takes place, but without prejudice to the claim by number of Member States that CCTB and CCCTB are meant to function as enabling procedures for the harmonisation of tax rates within the EU, for which there is no agreement between Member States, and even less consensus;
Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Highlights that Parliament has made a substantial contribution to the fight against financial crimes, tax evasion and tax avoidance as uncovered in the LuxLeaks, Panama Papers and Paradise Papers cases, notably with the work of the TAXE, TAXE2 and TAX3 Special Committees, the PANA inquiry committee and the ECON committee;
Amendment 480 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 57 57. Notes that the ATAD anti-abuse rules (artificial arrangements) cover letterbox companies
Amendment 481 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 57 57. Notes that the ATAD anti-abuse rules (artificial arrangements) cover letterbox companies,
Amendment 482 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 57 57. Notes that the ATAD anti-abuse rules (artificial arrangements) cover letterbox companies
Amendment 483 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 57 a (new) 57a. Notes that there is no yet a single definition of letterbox companies; calls therefore for a single European definition of letterbox companies;
Amendment 484 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 58 Amendment 485 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 58 Amendment 486 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 58 58. Urges the Commission and the Member States to establish coordinated, binding, enforceable and substantial economic activity requirements as well as expenditure tests;
Amendment 487 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 58 58. Urges the Commission and the Member States to establish coordinated substantial economic activity requirements as well as expenditure tests as soon as meaningful and proportional methods for how which this can be done have been devised, discussed and agreed;
Amendment 488 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 58 a (new) 58a. Deplores that shell companies associated with anonymity, circumvention of the Posting of Workers Directive and treaty abuse, can generate serious risks of tax avoidance, tax evasion, money laundering and abuse of social rights; and that such abuses have an impact in the rise of inequalities and decreased trust in public institutions1a _________________ 1a Kiendl Kristo I. and Thirion E., An overview of shell companies in the European Union, EPRS, European Parliament, October 2018.
Amendment 489 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 59 59. Calls on the Commission to carry out, within two years, fitness checks of the interconnected legislative and policy initiatives aimed at addressing the use of letterbox companies in the context of tax fraud, tax evasion
Amendment 49 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Highlights that the European Parliament has made a substantial contribution to the fight against financial crimes, tax evasion and tax avoidance as uncovered in the LuxLeaks, Panama Papers and Paradise Papers cases, notably with the work of the TAXE, TAX2 and TAX3 Special Committees, the PANA inquiry committee and the ECON committee;
Amendment 490 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 59 59. Calls on the Commission to carry out
Amendment 491 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 59 a (new) 59a. Notes that abusive conversions, mergers or divisions constituting artificial arrangements or social dumping, but also reducing fiscal obligations or undercutting social rights of employees are therefore to be avoided in order to respect Treaty principles;1a _________________ 1a OPINION of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs for the Committee on Legal Affairs on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive (EU) 2017/1132 as regards cross-border conversions, mergers and divisions (COM(2018)0241 – C8 0167/2018 –2018/0114(COD))
Amendment 492 #
59a. Calls for the identities of actual owners to be disclosed to tax authorities;
Amendment 493 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 59 b (new) 59b. Notes that cross-border conversions should be conditioned to the company moving its registered office together with its head office in order to carry out a substantial part of its economic activity in the Member State of destination1a _________________ 1a OPINION of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs for the Committee on Legal Affairs on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive (EU) 2017/1132 as regards cross-border conversions, mergers and divisions (COM(2018)0241 – C8 0167/2018 –2018/0114(COD))
Amendment 494 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 59 c (new) 59c. Calls for Member States to request that a set of financial information be published ahead of the execution of cross- border conversions, mergers or divisions; and for that financial information to be accompanied by public country by country reporting;
Amendment 495 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 59 a (new) Amendment 496 #
Motion for a resolution Subheading 3 a (new) (new para) Underscores the need for harmonisation of VAT rules at EU level to the extent that it is necessary to ensure the establishment and the functioning of the internal market and to avoid distortion of competition1c; _________________ 1c Article 113 of TFEU
Amendment 497 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 60 60. Stresses that VAT is an important
Amendment 498 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 60 a (new) Amendment 499 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 61 61. Regrets, however, that every year, large amounts of the expected VAT revenue are lost because of fraud; highlights that according to the Commission’s statistics, the VAT gap in 2016 amounted to EUR 147 billion, which represents more than 12 % of the total expected VAT revenue43; notes that the Commission estimates that around EUR 50 billion – or EUR 100 per EU citizen each year – is lost to cross-border VAT fraud44; deplores the fact that this tax, which is paid by all citizens, is affected by fraud of such magnitude; notes that the degree of harmonisation of VAT systems has advanced greatly in Europe, whereas cooperation is still in its infancy and not sufficiently effective; calls on the Commission and the Member States to intensify their cooperation on VAT, not least with a view to tackling fraud more effectively; calls on the next Commission to make completion of the definitive VAT regime a priority for its term of office; _________________ 43 Study and Reports on the VAT Gap in the EU-28 Member States: 2018 Final Report / TAXUD/2015/CC/131. 44 See Commission press release: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-17- 3443_en.htm
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 6 — having regard to
Amendment 50 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Highlights that Parliament has made a substantial contribution to the fight against financial crimes, tax evasion and tax avoidance as uncovered in the LuxLeaks, Panama Papers
Amendment 500 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 61 61.
Amendment 501 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 61 61. Regrets, however, that every year, large amounts of the expected VAT revenue are lost because of fraud; highlights that according to the Commission’s statistics, the VAT gap in 2016 amounted to EUR 147 billion, which represents more than 12 % of the total expected VAT revenue43; notes that the Commission estimates that around EUR 50 billion – or EUR 100 per EU citizen each year – is lost to cross-border VAT fraud44; notes that, as regards closing the VAT gap, there are big differences between Member States; _________________ 43 Study and Reports on the VAT Gap in the EU-28 Member States: 2018 Final Report / TAXUD/2015/CC/131. 44 See Commission press release: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-17- 3443_en.htm
Amendment 502 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 61 61. Regrets, however, that every year,
Amendment 503 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 61 61. Regrets, however, that every year, large amounts of the expected VAT revenue are lost because of fraud; highlights that according to the Commission’s statistics, the VAT gap in 2016 amounted to EUR 147 billion, which represents more than 12 % of the total expected VAT revenue43 ; notes that the Commission estimates that around EUR 50 billion – or EUR 100 per EU citizen each year – is lost to cross-border VAT fraud and that media reports have linked large- scale VAT fraud with organised crime including terrorism44 ;
Amendment 504 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 61 a (new) 61a. Highlights with concern that the VAT gap in 2016 amounted to EUR 147 billion; notes that the Commission estimates that around EUR 50 billion each year is lost to cross-border VAT fraud and that the proceeds from criminal activity in the EU are estimated to amount to EUR 110 billion per year; notes that the UNODC estimates that between 2 and 5% of global GDP is laundered each year;
Amendment 505 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 62 Amendment 506 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 62 62. Calls for additional statistics to estimate the VAT gap; stresses that there is no common approach to data collection and sharing within the EU; urges the Commission to ensure that harmonised statistics are collected and published regularly in Member States;
Amendment 507 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 62 62. Calls for additional statistics to estimate the VAT gap;
Amendment 508 #
62. Calls for additional statistics to estimate the VAT gap
Amendment 509 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 62 62. Calls for
Amendment 51 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 a (new) 2 a. Stresses that during the work of the TAX3 Special Committee more revelations concerning financial crimes, tax evasion and tax avoidance have come to light, particularly connected to cases such as those of the ABLV Bank in Latvia, the murder of investigative journalists Ján Kuciak and Martina Kušnírová, the Danske Bank in Denmark and Estonia or the Cum Ex scandal involving at least 11 EU countries; stresses that as a result of the Panama Papers scandal, four people have been charged in the US;
Amendment 510 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 63 63. Underlines that the feature of the current VAT (transitional) regime of applying an exemption to intracommunity supplies and exports within the EU has been abused by fraudsters, in particular in the VAT carousel fraud; stresses that cash transactions still remain a very high risk regarding VAT fraud;
Amendment 511 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 64 64. Takes note that according to the Commission, businesses trading on a cross- border basis currently suffer from compliance costs which are 11 % higher compared to those incurred by companies that only trade domestically; calls on the Commission and the Member States to devise concrete technical solutions to lower the cost of cross-border trading;
Amendment 512 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 64 64. Takes note that according to the Commission, businesses trading on a cross- border basis currently suffer from compliance costs which are 11 % higher compared to those incurred by companies that only trade domestically; also notes that such tax compliance costs weigh heaviest on SMEs which is one reason why most SMEs have remained wary of reaping the advantages of the Single market;
Amendment 513 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 64 64. Takes note that according to the Commission, businesses trading on a cross- border basis currently suffer from compliance costs which are 11 % higher compared to those incurred by companies that only trade domestically; notes that in particular SMEs suffer from disproportionate VAT compliance costs;
Amendment 514 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 64 a (new) 64a. Is of the opinion that the participation of all Member States in Eurofisc shall be mandatory and conditional for receiving EU funds; echoes the preoccupation of the European Court of Auditors on VAT reimbursement in Cohesion spending1a and on the EU Anti-Fraud Programme1b; _________________ 1a ECA, Rapid case review, VAT reimbursement in Cohesion - an error- prone and, sub-optimal use of EU funds, November 2018 1b ECA Opinion No 9/2018 concerning the proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the EU Anti-Fraud Programme.
Amendment 515 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 65 Amendment 516 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 65 65.
Amendment 517 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 65 65. Welcomes, therefore, the Commission’s VAT action plan of 6 April 2016 to reform the VAT framework and the 13 legislative proposals adopted by the Commission since December 2016 that address the shift towards the definitive VAT regime, remove VAT obstacles to e- commerce, review the VAT regime
Amendment 518 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 65 65. Welcomes, therefore, the Commission’s VAT action plan of 6 April 2016 to reform the VAT framework and the 13 legislative proposals adopted by the Commission since December 2016 that address the shift towards the definitive VAT regime, remove VAT obstacles to e- commerce, review the VAT regime for SMEs, modernise the VAT rates policy, update the list of VAT exemptions, in order to, amongst others, tackle the current discrimination that education operators are facing when compared to other companies as they cannot claim VAT back on expenses related to their business and tackle the VAT tax gap;
Amendment 519 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 65 a (new) 65a. Welcomes that a VAT Mini One Stop Shop (MOSS) on telecommunications, broadcasting and electronic services was introduced in 2015 as a voluntary system for registration, declaration and payment of VAT; welcomes the extension of the MOSS to other supplies of goods and services to final consumers as of 1 January 2021;
Amendment 52 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 a (new) 2 a. Recalls the analysis of the reports from these previous Special Committees and calls for the implementation of the recommendations outlined1a; _________________ 1a http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getD oc.do?pubRef=-//EP//TEXT+TA+P8-TA- 2015- 0408+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN uage=EN, http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getD oc.do?pubRef=-//EP//TEXT+TA+P8-TA- 2016- 0310+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN uage=EN, http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getD oc.do?pubRef=-//EP//TEXT+TA+P8-TA- 2017- 0491+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN uage=EN
Amendment 520 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 66 Amendment 521 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 66 a (new) 66a. Calls on the European Commission to prioritise the issue of the harmonisation and simplification of the common system of value added tax; points out that several countries have implemented fraud-proof systems that allow input tax reduction based on proof of VAT payment and that could serve as a blueprint for VAT reform in the EU;
Amendment 522 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 68 Amendment 523 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 68 Amendment 524 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 68 68. Welcomes the definitive VAT system proposals adopted on 4 October 201745 and 24 May 201846 ; welcomes in particular the Commission’s proposal to apply the destination principle to taxation, which means that VAT would be paid in the country of the customer; notes however that tax authorities in the Member States of consumption's reactions will be slower and their means of action more limited, given that most of the relevant data and auditing powers will be in the hands of the Member State of identification; calls therefore on the Commission to set up a compensation mechanism in order to safeguard Member States’ VAT revenues and incentivise Member States of identification to act; _________________ 45 COM(2017)0569, COM(2017)0568 and COM(2017)0567. 46 COM/2018/329.
Amendment 525 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 68 68. Welcomes the definitive VAT system proposals adopted on 4 October 201745 and 24 May 201846; welcomes in particular the Commission’s proposal to apply the destination principle to taxation, which means that VAT would be paid in the
Amendment 526 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 69 69. Welcomes in particular the progress made by the Council towards the definitive VAT regime by adopting the Quick Fixes47 on 4 October 2018; expresses its concern, however, that no safeguards in relation to its fraud-sensitive aspects were adopted along the lines of Parliament’s position48 on the Certified Taxable Person (CTP) proposal49 , as expressed in its opinion of 3 October 201850 ;
Amendment 527 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 69 a (new) 69a. Is of the view that the granting of certified taxable person (CTP) status to businesses considered reliable taxpayers remains problematic as the criteria for granting the status are vague and thus may result in different approaches taken by the Member States; remains concerned about the potential difficulties for medium enterprises to obtain the CTP status which in turn could in effect result in only the biggest companies being considered reliable taxpayers;
Amendment 528 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 69 a (new) 69a. Calls on the Council to ensure that the CTP status is consistent with the Authorised Economic Operator (AEO) status which is delivered by customs authorities;
Amendment 529 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 69 b (new) 69b. Calls for a minimal EU transparent coordination on the definition of CTP status, including a regular assessment by the Commission on how Member states grant CTP status; demands exchange of information between Member States’ tax authorities about refusals to grant CTP status to certain companies, in order to enhance coherence and common standards
Amendment 53 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 Amendment 530 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 69 b (new) 69b. Stresses the problems that could arise from two parallel systems of accounting for VAT depending on whether the buyer has obtained a CTP status or not;
Amendment 531 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 70 70. Welcomes, furthermore, the revision of the special schemes for SMEs51 which is key to ensuring a level playing field as VAT exemption schemes are currently only available to domestic players, and can contribute to the reduction of VAT compliance costs for SMEs; calls on the Council to take Parliament’s opinion of 11 September 201852 into account, particularly when it comes to further administrative simplification for SMEs; calls, therefore, on the Commission to set up an online portal through which SMEs willing to avail themselves of the exemption in another Member State are required to register, and to put in place a one-stop shop through which small enterprises can file VAT returns for the different Member States in which they operate; _________________
Amendment 532 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 70 70. Welcomes, furthermore, the revision of the special schemes for SMEs51 which is key to ensuring a level playing field, and can contribute to the reduction of VAT compliance costs; calls on the Council to take Parliament’s opinion of 11 September 201852 into account, particularly when it comes to further administrative simplification for SMEs; calls, therefore, on the Commission to set up an online portal through which SMEs willing to avail themselves of the exemption in another Member State are required to register, and to put in place a one-stop shop through which small enterprises can file VAT returns for the different Member States in which they operate; _________________ 51 Proposal for a Council Directive amending Directive 2006/112/EC on the common system of value added tax as regards the special scheme for small
Amendment 533 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 70 a (new) 70a. Calls for the introduction of the reverse charge system as an optional and, at the same time, optimum system of rules for EU Member States;
Amendment 534 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 70 a (new) Amendment 535 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 70 a (new) 70a. Regards with concern the Council's adoption of a Proposal to amend the common system of value added tax as regards the temporary application of a generalised reverse charge mechanism (GRCM) in relation to supplies of goods and services above a certain threshold of 2 October 2018, which allows for a GRCM with much weaker criteria than those approved by the European Parliament; acknowledges that a generalised application of the RCM shifts the tax liability to the retail stage, transforming the VAT system into a Sales Tax, jeopardising the in-built faithful reporting incentives of the VAT fractional payments system by concentrating the risk of fraud at the end of the value chain; notes that this creates risks for other types of fraud to arise, through underreporting of sales volumes and the exploitation of the variability of VAT rates across Member States, and that VAT fraud can be passed on to neighbouring countries, creating market disruptions in those borders where some Member States apply GRCM and others do not; calls on the Commission to closely monitor the application and consequences of this new legislation;
Amendment 536 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 70 a (new) 70a. Welcomes the spirit of the proposed implementing rules adopted December 11 by the European Commission according to which, notably, from 2021, large online marketplaces will have the responsibility to ensure that VAT is collected on sales of goods by non-EU companies to EU consumers taking place on their platforms; marks its willingness to work as swiftly as possible in the consultation process;
Amendment 537 #
Motion for a resolution Subheading 3.2 a (new) (new para) Recalls that the European Parliament has called for addressing the factors contributing to the tax gap, namely regarding VAT;
Amendment 538 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 71 Amendment 539 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 71 Amendment 54 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Welcomes the fact that during its current term the Commission has put forward 22 legislative proposals aimed at closing some of the loopholes, improving the fight against financial crimes and aggressive tax planning, and enhancing tax collection efficiency and tax fairness; calls for the swift adoption of initiatives that have not yet been finalised and for careful monitoring of the implementation to ensure efficiency and proper enforcement
Amendment 540 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 71 71. Welcomes the opening of infringement procedures by the Commission on 8 March 2018 against Cyprus, Greece and Malta, and on 8 November 2018 against Italy and the Isle of Man, to ensure that they stop offering unlawful favourable tax
Amendment 541 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 71 71. W
Amendment 542 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 71 71.
Amendment 543 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 71 71.
Amendment 544 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 71 71. Welcomes the opening of infringement procedures by the Commission on 8 March 2018 against Cyprus, Greece and Malta to ensure that they stop offering unlawful favourable tax treatment for private yachts, which could distort
Amendment 545 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 71 71. Welcomes the opening of infringement procedures by the Commission on 8 March 2018 against Cyprus, Greece and Malta to ensure that they stop offering
Amendment 546 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 71 a (new) 71a. Condemns the singling out of some member states on the tax treatment of private yachts despite some larger member states having similar systems;
Amendment 547 #
Amendment 548 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 72 72. Calls on the Commission and Eurofisc to rapidly conclude their investigations on the Isle of Man’s VAT collection practices on private yachts and aircraft, as revealed by the Paradise papers;
Amendment 549 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 72 72.
Amendment 55 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3.
Amendment 550 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 72 72. Calls on the Commission and Eurofisc to rapidly conclude their investigations on the Isle of Man’s VAT collection practices on private yachts and aircraft, as revealed by the Paradise papers;
Amendment 551 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 72 a (new) 72a. Takes note of the letter of formal notice sent on 8 November 2018 to the United Kingdom concerning the Isle of Man’s abusive practices regarding aircraft deliveries and leasing; maintains that compliance with tax justice implies that every individual or business should pay the right amount of VAT on such products; notes that infringement procedures have been initiated; welcomes the fact that the Commission’s programme to combat tax evasion has been strengthened where yachts and aircraft are concerned;
Amendment 552 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 74 74.
Amendment 553 #
74. Welcomes the adoption of the Protection of Financial Interests (PIF) Directive53, which clarifies the issues of cross-border cooperation and mutual legal assistance between Member States, Eurojust, Europol, the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) and the Commission in tackling VAT fraud (OLAF); _________________ 53 Directive (EU) 2017/1371 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2017 on the fight against fraud to the Union’s financial interests by means of criminal law, OJ L 198, 28.7.2017, p. 29, in particular Articles 3 and 15 thereof.
Amendment 554 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 74 a (new) 74a. Welcomes the Commission proposal to reform OLAF; calls for account to be taken of the opinion delivered on 28 November 2018 in which the Court of Auditors recommends that OLAF investigations should be reviewed by the Court of Justice in order to ascertain that procedural safeguards are being observed; calls for more thoroughgoing reform to enhance of effectiveness of OLAF investigations, proceeding on the basis of a study summarising the problems encountered by OLAF (operating deadlines, recovery of funds, etc.);
Amendment 555 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 75 75. Points, however, to the need for better cooperation between the administrative, judicial and law- enforcement authorities within the EU, as highlighted by experts during the hearing held on 28 June 2018 and in a study commissioned by the TAX3 Committee; calls on the EPPO, OLAF, Eurofisc, Europol and Eurojust to closely cooperate with a view to coordinating their efforts against VAT fraud and to identifying and adapting to new fraudulent practices;
Amendment 556 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 75 75. Points, however, to the need for better cooperation between the administrative, judicial and law- enforcement authorities within the EU, as highlighted by experts during the hearing held on 28 June 2018 and in a study commissioned by the TAX3 Committee; calls on all Member States to more actively participate in the Transactional Network Analysis (TNA) system in the framework of Eurofisc;
Amendment 557 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 75 a (new) 75a. Urges the Commission to examine the possibilities of real-time collection and communication of transactional VAT data by the Member States, as this would increase the effectiveness of Eurofisc and would allow further development of new strategies to defeat VAT fraud;
Amendment 558 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 76 Amendment 559 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 76 76. Calls on the EPPO to begin operating
Amendment 56 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Welcomes the fact that during its current term the Commission has put forward 22 legislative proposals aimed at closing some of the loopholes, improving the fight against financial crimes and aggressive tax planning, and enhancing tax collection efficiency and tax fairness; calls for the swift adoption of initiatives that have not yet been finalised and for careful monitoring of the implementation to ensure efficiency and proper enforcement, in order to keep pace with the versatility of tax fraud, tax evasion and aggressive tax planning; acknowledges that the full liberalisation of capital flows on a global scale has opened up the international financial system to large scale attempts at tax evasion, avoidance, ATP and money laundering, but accepts that there is no appetite fora reintroduction of capital controls at a national or EU level, even if this would counter head on most prevalent tax abuses;
Amendment 560 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 76 76. Calls on the Commission and Member States to ensure that EPPO
Amendment 561 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 76 76. Calls on the Commission to ensure the EPPO
Amendment 562 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 76 76. Calls on the EPPO to begin operating as soon as possible and
Amendment 563 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 77 Amendment 564 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 77 77. Considers that one of the main issues allowing fraudulent behaviour in relation to VAT to occur is the ‘cash profit’ that a fraudster can make; calls, therefore, on the Commission to analyse the proposal made by experts54 to place cross-border transactional data on a blockchain
Amendment 565 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 77 77. Considers that one of the main issues allowing fraudulent behaviour in relation to VAT to occur is the ‘cash profit’ that a fraudster can make; calls, therefore, on the Commission to analyse the proposal made by experts54 , to place cross-border transactional data on a blockchain
Amendment 566 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 77 a (new) 77a. Recalls that VAT competences lie in the hand of both the EU institutions and the Member States; considers that a comprehensive strategy of modernising the operational VAT framework is needed; calls on all relevant authorities to use various statistical and data-mining technologies to identify anomalies, suspicious relationships and patterns, enabling tax agencies to better address a wide spectrum of noncompliance behaviours in a proactive, targeted and cost-effective way; underlines that such digitalisation is a complement to professional experience in the field;
Amendment 567 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 78 a (new) 78a. Calls on Member States to mandate Eurofisc to develop new strategies to track goods under Customs procedure 42, the mechanism which allows the importer to obtain a VAT exemption when the imported goods are intended to be eventually transported to a business customer in another Member State than the Member State of importation;
Amendment 568 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 78 a (new) 78a. Highlights the importance of the implementation of a register of beneficial owners as an important tool to tackle VAT fraud; stresses the need and calls on Member States to create specialised units of police and tax services as well as to appoint specialised prosecutors and judges to deal with this type of fraud;
Amendment 569 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 79 a (new) 79a. Recalls that effective cross checks of the data held by tax authorities with data held by customs authorities are crucial to detect and eliminate VAT fraud linked to imports; and recalls on Member States and on the Commission to act in order to facilitate the flow of information between tax and customs authorities regarding imports under Customs Procedure 42, as recommended by the European Court of Auditors1a ;considering that experience has shown that administrative cooperation between tax authorities is suboptimal;1b _________________ 1a P8_TA(2016)0453European Parliament resolution of 24 November 2016 on towards a definitive VAT system and fighting VAT fraud (2016/2033(INI))[ 1b Study entitled ‘VAT fraud: Economic impact, challenges and policy issues’, European Parliament, Directorate- General for Internal Policies, Policy Department for Economic, Scientific and Quality of Life Policies, 15 October2018.
Amendment 57 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Welcomes the fact that during its current term the Commission has put forward 22 legislative proposals aimed at closing some of the loopholes, improving the fight against financial crimes and aggressive tax planning, and enhancing tax collection efficiency and tax fairness;
Amendment 570 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 79 b (new) 79b. Notes that among the most used crimes in VAT fraud, the one known as "Missing Trader fraud (MTIC fraud) or Carousel fraud" is the most widespread and most used; notes that a particularity of this fraud is that it is carried out, for the most part, by organized crime; notes that in recent years, this fraud has diversified to include online commerce; notes that the extension of this type of fraud to online commerce is partly due to the suboptimal cooperation between tax administrations1a;calls for EU Member States and the European Commission to keep on developing swift cooperation between tax administrations; _________________ 1a Study entitled ‘VAT fraud: Economic impact, challenges and policy issues’, European Parliament, Directorate- General for Internal Policies, Policy Department for Economic, Scientific and Quality of Life Policies, 15 October2018.
Amendment 571 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 79 c (new) 79 c. Notes that the extension of e- commerce is posing an important challenge for the economic and fiscal authorities, to whom, this type of economic transactions, poses enormous difficulties, e.g. absence of registration, VAT declarations well below the real value of the declared transactions, ghost transactions for criminal purposes, fraudulent use of customer data; notes that national legislations continue to present enormous deficiencies in the control of e-commerce; notes that the improvement of cooperation between administrations and a more efficient use of the resources available at European level can help to reduce the impact of this type of crime and its consequences, as well as the improvement of European legislation;
Amendment 572 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 79 d (new) 79d. Notes that the "reverse charge mechanism" should be used only and exclusively in exceptional cases, and that the Commission and the Council should encourage countries to use existing resources more effectively; notes that at present, a group of bodies and institutions such as Eurofisc, OLAF, Europol or EPPO (European Public Prosecutor Office) provide a panel of options with a very high potential to combat VAT fraud;
Amendment 573 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 80 80. Calls on the Commission to investigate seriously the possibility of new fraud risks in the definitive VAT system, notably the potentially missing supplier in cross-border transactions supplanting the missing customer type of carousel fraud; stresses in this regard that the custom transit system can certainly facilitate trade within the EU however, abuses are possible and criminal organisations, by avoiding the payment of taxes and duties, may cause a huge loss both to Member States (mainly through avoiding VAT and excises) and the EU (avoiding VAT); calls therefore on the Commission to monitor the custom transit system and come with proposals building on recommendations notably by OLAF, Europol and Eurofisc;
Amendment 574 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 80 80. Calls on the Commission to investigate seriously the possibilit
Amendment 575 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 80 a (new) 80а. Recalls that VAT fraud can also be used on a large scale for terrorist financing purposes; considers that combating terrorist financing is an effective way of thwarting the activities of terrorist organisations; points out that around 2% of those who commit VAT fraud make some 80% of the profits from crime, for which reason exchanges of information between the police, tax authorities and other authorities should be expedited, including in cross-border cases;
Amendment 576 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 80 a (new) 80a. Deplores that VAT fraud in the European Union reaches colossal magnitudes: approximately 150 billion euros in 2017; notes that the figure hide, however, huge differences between countries, from percentages of fraud of minor importance (less than 2%); to countries with fraud indicators of around 30%;1a _________________ 1a European Parliament; VAT Fraud, economic impact, challenges and policy issues. October2018.
Amendment 577 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 80 a (new) 80a. Regrets the hesitant approach of some Member States to the reverse charge system;
Amendment 578 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 80 a (new) 80a. Believes that a large majority of European citizens expect clear European and national legislation that enables those who do not pay the tax which they are due to pay to be identified, sanctioned and for the missing tax to be recuperated in a timely manner;
Amendment 579 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 80 b (new) 80b. Notes that the preservation of VAT fraud has, in addition to the negative economic effects, perverse consequences for inadequate social commitment with the payment of taxes and with a view to improving tax justice;
Amendment 58 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Welcomes the fact that during its current term the Commission has put forward 22 legislative proposals
Amendment 580 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 80 c (new) 80c. Regrets that tax fraud has become a crime whose effects are to be managed, rather than a crime to be suppressed; calls on the Commission and the EU Member States to have policy design as a guiding principle, and for such policy design to be driven by efficiency considerations; notes that when efficiency is focused only in the enforcement, but not in the policy design, the credibility of the tax system is undermined, representing a serious risk to the rule of law1a _________________ 1a De la Feria, Rita (2018) ‘Tax Fraud and the Rule of Law’; WP18/02; Oxford University Centre for Business Taxation; January 2018.
Amendment 581 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 81 81. Emphasises that natural persons do not generally exercise their freedom of movement for the purposes of tax fraud, tax evasion and aggressive tax planning; underlines, however, that some natural persons have a tax base large enough to span several tax jurisdictions;
Amendment 582 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 81 81. Emphasises that natural persons do not generally exercise their freedom of movement for the purposes of tax fraud, tax evasion and aggressive tax planning; underlines, however, that some natural persons
Amendment 583 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 81 81. Emphasises that natural persons do not generally exercise their freedom of movement for the purposes of tax fraud, tax evasion and aggressive tax planning; underlines, however, that some natural persons
Amendment 584 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 81 81. Emphasises that natural persons do not generally exercise their freedom of movement for the purposes of tax fraud, tax evasion and aggressive tax planning; underlines, however, that some natural persons can have a tax base large enough to span several tax jurisdictions;
Amendment 585 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 81 a (new) 81a. Draws attention to the obligation under Article 8(2) of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) to observe privacy laws at all times;
Amendment 586 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 82 Amendment 587 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 82 82. Regrets that high net worth individuals (HNWI) and ultra HNWI (UHNWI) continue to have the possibility to shift their earnings and funds or their purchases through different tax jurisdictions to obtain substantially reduced or zero liability by using the services of wealth managers and other intermediaries; Further notes that the threat of evasion and avoidance have created a race to the bottom regarding taxation of wealth, inheritance and capital incomes visible in the fact that –even without all the loopholes and avoidance strategies – the headline rates for labour income are usually higher than for effortless income from wealth and capital throughout the EU;
Amendment 588 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 82 82. Regrets that even without shifting tax residence high net worth individuals (HNWI) and ultra HNWI (UHNWI) continue to have the possibility to shift their earnings and funds or their purchases through different tax jurisdictions to obtain substantially reduced or zero liability by using the services of wealth managers and other intermediaries; deplores that some EU Member States have implemented tax schemed to attract high net worth individuals and create space for double non-taxation;
Amendment 589 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 82 82. Regrets that mainly as a result of the elimination of capital controls, high net worth individuals (HNWI) and ultra HNWI (UHNWI) continue to have the possibility to shift their earnings and funds or their purchases through different tax jurisdictions to obtain substantially reduced or zero liability by using the services of wealth managers and other intermediaries;
Amendment 59 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Welcomes the fact that during its current term the Commission has put forward 22 legislative proposals aimed at closing some of the loopholes, improving the fight against financial crimes and aggressive tax planning, and enhancing tax collection efficiency and tax fairness, but is astonished that the administrative system of the United States still seems to be more effective at detecting abuses; calls for the swift adoption of initiatives that have not yet been finalised and for careful monitoring of the implementation
Amendment 590 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 83 Amendment 591 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 83 83. Notes with regret that corporate tax fraud, tax evasion and aggressive tax planning contribute to shifting the tax burden on to honest and fair taxpayers; notes though that this shift is also being achieved by budgetary policies that as in France, remain anchored on high taxation and high public expenditure levels which fail to deliver adequate returns that benefit the welfare of citizens;
Amendment 592 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 83 83. Notes with regret that corporate tax fraud, tax evasion and aggressive tax
Amendment 593 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 83 Amendment 594 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 83 a (new) 83a. Notes that the threat of tax evasion and avoidance has created a race to the bottom regarding taxation of wealth, inheritance and capital incomes visible in the fact that – even without all the loopholes and avoidance strategies – the headline rates for labour income are usually higher than for effortless income from wealth and capital throughout the EU;
Amendment 595 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 83 b (new) 83b. Recognizes that low top marginal rates, whether on labour income or on capital income, incentivise certain behaviour from Chief Executive Officers that result in poorer corporate economic governance and increased income inequality;
Amendment 596 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 84 Amendment 597 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 84 Amendment 598 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 84 Amendment 599 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 84 84.
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 7 — having regard to the Commission’s follow-up to each of the above mentioned Parliament resolutions
Amendment 60 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Welcomes the fact that during its current term the Commission has put forward 22 legislative proposals aimed at closing some of the loopholes, improving the fight against financial crimes and aggressive tax planning, and enhancing tax collection efficiency and tax fairness; calls for the swift adoption of initiatives that have not yet been finalised before the end of this legislature, particularly the key legislative proposals for public Country by Country reporting, Common Corporate tax Base and Common Consolidated Corporate tax base and digital taxation; and for careful monitoring of the implementation to ensure efficiency and proper enforcement, in order to keep pace with the versatility of tax fraud, tax evasion and aggressive tax planning;
Amendment 600 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 84 84. Deplores the fact that some Member States have created tax regimes allowing non-nationals to obtain income tax benefits, hereby undermining other Member States’ tax base and fostering harmful policies which discriminate against their own citizens; calls on the Member States to establish a model for society based on financial and tax solidarity, as well as on cooperation, with a view to combating tax fraud by, for example, imposing dissuasive, clear, and proportionate penalties when fiscal oversight by the proper authorities is impeded;
Amendment 601 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 84 84. Deplores the fact that some Member States, such as Portugal, have created tax regimes
Amendment 602 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 84 84. Deplores the fact that some Member States have created tax regimes allowing non-nationals to obtain income tax benefits, hereby undermining other Member States’ tax base and fostering harmful policies which discriminate against their own citizens; proclaims that on a Europe-wide basis, a register should be established by the European Commission to list and publicise objectively all such policies;
Amendment 603 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 84 84. Deplores the fact that some
Amendment 604 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 84 a (new) 84a. Notes that corporation and wealth taxes play a crucial role in reducing inequality through redistribution within the tax system and in providing revenues to fund social provisions and social transfers;
Amendment 605 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 84 a (new) 84a. Reminds that the Commission in its communication of 2001 suggested to include special regimes for expatriates in its list of harmful tax practices1 but has not provided any data on the scope of the problem since; calls on the Commission to reactivate its work on this issue and to start by collecting information on the users and costs of existing regimes, including the costs of double non-taxation of cross-border capital income that is usually ignored by cost estimates of national tax agencies. __________________ [1] COM (2001) 260: Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament and the Economic and Social Committee Tax policy in the European Union - Priorities for the years ahead (https://eur- lex.europa.eu/procedure/EN/164839)
Amendment 606 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 84 b (new) 84b. Calls on the Member States to eliminate gender gaps in wealth across the EU in terms of financial assets, property ownership, business assets, insurance entitlements, pension savings and stock options1a; notes that the reduction in capital gains and property taxes primarily benefits men, as they are more likely to control such resources1b; _________________ 1a Action Aid. Making tax work for women’s rights 1b Institute of Development Studies (2016). Redistributing Unpaid Care Work – Why Tax Matters for Women’s Rights. Policy Briefing. Issue 109.
Amendment 607 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 84 c (new) 84c. Deplores the fact that, overall, the contribution of wealth-based taxes to overall tax revenues has remained rather limited, at 5.8 % of overall tax revenues in the EU-15 and4.3 % in the EU-281a; _________________ 1a European Parliament Policy Department C, Gender equality and taxation in the European Union, 2017.
Amendment 608 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 84 d (new) 84d. Deplores the fact that the share of taxes on capital has shown a declining trend since 2002 as a consequence, inter alia, of the general tendency of no longer applying the regular personal income tax schedule to capital incomes, but rather taxing them at relatively moderate flat rates, observable in many Member States1a _________________ 1a European Parliament Policy Department C, Gender equality and taxation in the European Union, 2017.
Amendment 609 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 84 e (new) 84e. Recalls the Commission communication of 20011a, which suggested to include special regimes for expatriates in its list of harmful tax practices but has not provided any data on the scope of the problem since; Calls on the Commission to reactivate its work on this issue and to start by collecting information on the users and costs of existing regimes, including the costs of double non-taxation of cross-border capital income that is usually ignored by cost estimates of national tax agencies; _________________ 1a COM (2001) 260:Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament and the Economic and Social Committee Tax policy in the European Union - Priorities for the years ahead (https://eur- lex.europa.eu/procedure/EN/164839)
Amendment 61 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 a (new) 3 a. Deplores the fact that some EU Member States confiscate the tax base of other Member States by attracting profits generated elsewhere, thereby allowing companies to artificially lower their tax base; upholds that this practice not only harms the principle of EU solidarity, but also produces a wealth redistribution towards multinationals and their shareholders, at the expense of EU citizens; supports the important work by academics and journalists who help to shed light on these practices;
Amendment 610 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 85 85. Observes that a majority of Member States have adopted citizenship by investment (CBI) or residency by
Amendment 611 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 85 85. Observes that a majority of Member States have adopted citizenship by investment (CBI) or residency by investment (RBI) schemes57, generally known as visa or investor programmes, by which citizenship or residence is granted to non-EU citizens in exchange for financial investment;
Amendment 612 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 85 85. Observes that a majority of Member States have adopted citizenship by investment (CBI) or residency by investment (RBI) schemes57 , generally known as golden visa or investor programmes, by which citizenship or residence is granted to non-EU citizens in exchange for financial investment; observes that these programmes of state- facilitated corruption do not necessarily require applicants to spend time on the territory in which the investment is made57a; acknowledges, however, that there is a difference between those schemes run on a large commercial scale and those contributing to legitimate and legal value creation; _________________ 57 18 Member States have some form of RBI scheme in place, including four Member States that operate CBI schemes in addition to RBI schemes: Bulgaria, Cyprus, Malta, Romania. 10 Member States have no such schemes: Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Hungary, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia and Sweden. At least 5000 non-EU citizens have obtained EU citizenship through citizenship by investment schemes. Source: study entitled ‘Citizenship by investment (CBI) and residency by investment (RBI) schemes in the EU‘, EPRS, October 2018, PE: 627.128; ISBN: 978-92-846-3375-3. 57a In the OECD’s view, the visa schemes which are potentially high-risk for the integrity of the CRS are those that give a taxpayer access to a low personal income tax rate of less than 10 % on offshore financial assets, and do not require a significant physical presence of at least 90 days in the jurisdiction offering the golden visa scheme; is concerned that Malta and Cyprus have schemes among those that potentially pose a high risk to the integrity of CRS
Amendment 613 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 85 85.
Amendment 614 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 85 85. Observes that a majority of Member States have adopted citizenship by investment (CBI) or residency by investment (RBI) schemes57
Amendment 615 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 85 85. Observes that a majority of Member States have adopted citizenship by investment (CBI) or residency by investment (RBI) schemes57 , generally known as visa or investor programmes, by which citizenship or residence is granted to
Amendment 616 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 85 85. Observes that a majority of Member States have adopted citizenship by investment (CBI) or residency by investment (RBI) schemes57, generally known as visa or investor programmes, by which citizenship or residence is granted to
Amendment 617 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 85 85. Observes that
Amendment 618 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 86 Amendment 619 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 86 86. Observes that at least 5 000 non-EU citizens have obtained EU citizenship through citizenship by investment schemes58 ;
Amendment 62 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 a (new) 3 a. Recalls the observation of the European Parliament in the interim report on MFF noting that effective measures against corruption and tax evasion by multinationals and the wealthiest individuals would make it possible to return to the Member States’ budgets an amount estimated by the Commission at one trillion euros per year, and that in this field there has been a serious lack of action by the European Union1a; _________________ 1a Par. 49 of theInterim report on the Multiannual Financial Framework 2021- 2027 adopted inPlenary
Amendment 620 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 86 86. Observes that at least 5 000 non-EU citizens have obtained EU citizenship through citizenship by investment schemes58 ; notes that, according to a study published by Transparency International and Global Witness, at least 6 000 people have been granted citizenship and almost 100 000 residence permits have been issued; _________________ 58 See the above-mentioned study.
Amendment 621 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 86 86. Observes that at least 5 000 non-EU citizens have obtained EU citizenship through citizenship by investment
Amendment 622 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 86 86. Observes that
Amendment 623 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 86 a (new) 86a. Notes that Citizenship by investment and residency by investment schemes in Member States such as Latvia, Austria or the UK have been used by a significant number of actors originating from Russia and countries under Russian influence; deplores that the secrecy surrounding these money flows has significantly increased the political, economic and security risks for European countries, particularly the risks of money laundering.
Amendment 624 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 86 b (new) 86b. Notes that CBI and RBI schemes offered by third countries might pose EU security risks regarding visa issuing, and may increase the potential for tax evasion; highlights that, according to the OECD, CBI and RBI schemes are even more problematic when implemented by low or no-taxation jurisdiction and when no minimum presence is required;
Amendment 625 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 87 87. Stresses that CBI and RBI schemes
Amendment 626 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 87 87. Stresses that CBI and RBI schemes carry significant risks, including
Amendment 627 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 87 87. Stresses that CBI and RBI schemes carry significant risks, including a devaluation of EU citizenship and the potential for corruption, money laundering and tax evasion; emphasizes that these schemes might serve as a possibility to escape EU sanctions, especially in the case of Russian citizens who were put on the sanctions list after the illegal annexation of Crimea and the aggression of Russia on Ukraine; reiterates its concern that citizenship or residence could be granted through these schemes without proper or indeed any customer due diligence (CDD) having been carried out; notes that several formal investigations into corruption and money laundering have been launched at national and EU level directly related to CBI and RBI schemes; underlines that, at the same time, the economic sustainability and viability of the investments provided through these schemes remain uncertain;
Amendment 628 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 87 87. Stresses that CBI and RBI schemes carry significant risks, including
Amendment 629 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 87 87. Stresses that CBI and RBI schemes
Amendment 63 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 a (new) 3 a. Regrets that the Council has repeatedly failed to pass the measures that are necessary to require transnational corporations to fulfil their part of the social contract; notes that such failure undermines faith in the ability of democratic politicians to solve issues of injustice that are deeply troubling for our citizens;
Amendment 630 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 87 87. Stresses that CBI and RBI schemes carry significant risks, including a devaluation of EU citizenship, threats to security and the potential for corruption, money laundering and tax evasion; reiterates its concern that citizenship or residence c
Amendment 631 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 87 87. Stresses that CBI and RBI schemes carry significant risks, including a devaluation of EU citizenship and the potential for corruption, money laundering and tax evasion as well as security risks; reiterates its concern that citizenship or residence could be granted through these schemes without proper or indeed any customer due diligence (CDD) having been carried out by competent authorities; notes that the obligations contained in AMLD5 subjecting obliged entities to consider CBI or RBI applicants as a high-risk factor in the course of their due diligence process do not mitigate the risks associated with the schemes and should not constitute a way to absolve Member States from their responsibility to establish, abide by and monitor enhanced due diligence standards; notes that several formal investigations into corruption and money laundering have been launched at national and EU level directly related to CBI and RBI schemes; underlines that, at the same time, the economic sustainability and viability of the investments provided through these schemes remain uncertain; notes that one Member State’s decision to implement CBI and RBI schemes have spillover effects on other EU Member States;
Amendment 632 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 87 87. Stresses that CBI and RBI schemes carry significant risks, including a devaluation of EU citizenship and the potential for corruption, money laundering and tax evasion; reiterates its concern that citizenship or residence could be granted through these schemes without proper or indeed any customer due diligence (CDD) having been carried out by competent authorities; notes that the obligations contained in AMLD5 subjecting obliged entities to consider CBI or RBI applicants as a high-risk factor in the course of their due diligence process do not mitigate the risks associated with the schemes and should not constitute a way to absolve Member States from their responsibility to establish, abide by and monitor enhanced due diligence standards; notes that several formal investigations into corruption and money laundering have been launched at national and EU level directly related to CBI and RBI schemes; underlines that, at the same time, the economic sustainability and viability of the investments provided through these schemes remain uncertain;
Amendment 633 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 87 87. Stresses that CBI and RBI schemes can carry significant risks if they are not checked and monitored, including a devaluation of EU citizenship and the potential for corruption, money laundering and tax evasion; reiterates its
Amendment 634 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 87 87. Stresses that CBI and RBI schemes
Amendment 635 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 87 a (new) 87a. Alerts for the dangers of CBI and RBI schemes allowing associated family reunification, whereby family members of CBI/RBI beneficiaries can acquire residence or citizenship with minimum or no checks;
Amendment 636 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 88 88. Notes that these programmes regularly involve tax privileges or special tax regimes for the beneficiaries;
Amendment 637 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 88 88. Notes that these programmes regularly involve tax privileges or special tax regimes for the beneficiaries; understands that such tax treatment if and when given, has to be evaluated against the background of the financial commitment that applicant beneficiaries are being asked to make; is concerned that these privileges could hamper the objective of making all citizens contribute fairly to the tax system but accepts that no factual evidence that such is the case has been made available;
Amendment 638 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 88 88.
Amendment 639 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 88 88. Notes that these programmes regularly involve tax privileges
Amendment 64 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 a (new) 3 a. Underlines however that much remains to be done in this field and urgent further action is required by the Commission and the Council in order to ensure that the required amount of tax contributions are paid to public budgets, as expected by the Europe’s citizens;
Amendment 640 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 88 a (new) 88a. Deplores that the financial benefits of such schemes accrue to a limited number of Member States whereas the potential costs of providing services to those who buy them may be borne by other states, creating an injustice across the Union;
Amendment 641 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 89 89. Worries that there is
Amendment 642 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 89 89. Worries that there is very little transparency in relation to the number and origin of applicants, the numbers of individuals granted citizenship or residency by these schemes and the amount invested through these schemes; worries too about the total lack of transparency about the granting of citizenship by countries that on the side of CBI/RBI schemes or without operating such schemes, grant citizenship on an ad hoc, “private” manner; appreciates the fact that some Member States make explicit the name and nationalities of the individuals who are granted citizenship or residency under these schemes;
Amendment 643 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 89 89. Worries that there is very little transparency in relation to the number and origin of applicants, the numbers of individuals granted citizenship or residency by these schemes and the amount invested through these schemes;
Amendment 644 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 89 89. Worries that there is very little transparency in relation to the number and origin of applicants, the numbers of individuals granted citizenship or residency by these schemes and the amount invested through these schemes;
Amendment 645 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 89 89. Worries that there is very little transparency in relation to the number and origin of applicants, the numbers of individuals granted citizenship or residency by these schemes and the amount invested through these schemes;
Amendment 646 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 89 89. Worries that there is very little transparency in relation to the number and origin of applicants, the numbers of individuals granted citizenship or residency by these schemes and the amount invested
Amendment 647 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 89 89. Worries that there is very little transparency in relation to the number and origin of applicants, the numbers of individuals granted citizenship or residency by these schemes and the amount invested through these schemes; appreciates the fact that some Member States make explicit the name and nationalities of the individuals who are granted citizenship or residency under these schemes; calls on the other Member States to be equally transparent in this field;
Amendment 648 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 89 89. Worries that there is very little
Amendment 649 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 89 89. Worries that there is very little transparency in relation to the number and origin of applicants, the numbers of individuals granted citizenship or residency by these schemes and the amount invested through these schemes in some Member States; appreciates the fact that some Member States make explicit the name and nationalities of the individuals who are granted citizenship or residency under these schemes;
Amendment 65 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 a (new) 3 a. (new) Recalls that a tax jurisdiction has control only over tax matters related to its territory whereas economic flows and some taxpayers such as multinational enterprises (MNEs) and high net worth-individuals (HNWI) operate globally;
Amendment 650 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 90 90. Is concerned that according to the OECD, CBI and RBI schemes could be misused to undermine the common reporting standard (CRS) due diligence procedures, leading to inaccurate or incomplete reporting under the CRS, in particular when not all jurisdictions of tax residence are disclosed to the financial institution;
Amendment 651 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 90 90. Is concerned that according to the OECD, CBI and RBI schemes could be misused to undermine the common reporting standard (CRS) due diligence procedures, leading to inaccurate or incomplete reporting under the CRS, in particular when not all jurisdictions of tax residence are disclosed to the financial institution; notes that in the OECD’s view, the visa schemes which are potentially high-risk for the integrity of the CRS are those that give a taxpayer access to a low personal income tax rate of less than 10 % on offshore financial assets, and do not require a significant physical presence of at least 90 days in the jurisdiction offering the golden visa scheme; is concerned that Malta
Amendment 652 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 90 90. Is concerned that according to the OECD, CBI and RBI schemes could be misused to undermine the common reporting standard (CRS) due diligence procedures, leading to inaccurate or incomplete reporting under the CRS, in particular when not all jurisdictions of tax residence are disclosed to the financial
Amendment 653 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 90 90. Is concerned that according to the OECD, CBI and RBI schemes could be misused to undermine the common reporting standard (CRS) due diligence procedures, leading to inaccurate or incomplete reporting under the CRS, in particular when not all jurisdictions of tax residence are disclosed to the financial institution; notes that in the OECD’s view, the visa schemes which are potentially high-risk for the integrity of the CRS are those that give a taxpayer access to a low personal income tax rate of less than 10 % on offshore financial assets, and do not require a significant physical presence of at least 90 days in the jurisdiction offering the golden visa scheme; is concerned that Malta and Cyprus have schemes59 among those that potentially pose a high risk to the integrity of CRS; notes with concern that Member States that offer this kind of schemes and refuse at the same time to receive information from other non-EU Member States via CRS create a loophole in automatic exchange of information systems; _________________ 59 The Cypriot Citizenship by Investment: Scheme for Naturalisation of Investors by Exception, the Cypriot Residence by Investment, the Maltese Individual Investor Programme, and the Maltese Residence and Visa programme.
Amendment 654 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 90 90. Is concerned that according to the OECD, CBI and RBI schemes could be misused to undermine the common reporting standard (CRS) due diligence procedures, leading to inaccurate or incomplete reporting under the CRS, in particular when not all jurisdictions of tax residence are disclosed to the financial institution; notes that in the OECD’s view, the visa schemes which are potentially high-risk for the integrity of the CRS are those that give a taxpayer access to a low personal income tax rate of less than 10 % on offshore financial assets, and do not require a significant physical presence of at least 90 days in the jurisdiction offering the golden visa scheme; is concerned that Malta and Cyprus in particular have schemes59 among those that potentially pose a high risk to the integrity of CRS; _________________ 59 The Cypriot Citizenship by Investment: Scheme for Naturalisation of Investors by Exception, the Cypriot Residence by Investment, the Maltese Individual Investor Programme, and the Maltese Residence and Visa programme.
Amendment 655 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 91 91.
Amendment 656 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 91 91. Concludes that
Amendment 657 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 91 91. Concludes that the potential economic benefits of CBI and RBI schemes do not offset the serious money laundering and tax evasion risks they present;
Amendment 658 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 91 91. Concludes that the potential economic benefits of CBI and RBI schemes do not offset the serious money laundering and tax evasion risks they present
Amendment 659 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 91 91. Concludes that the potential economic benefits of CBI and RBI schemes do not offset the serious money laundering and tax evasion risks they present; calls on Member States to
Amendment 66 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Stresses the need to maintain the balance between combating unfair competition due to potentially aggressive planning and the ability to engage in business honestly;
Amendment 660 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 91 91. Concludes that the potential economic benefits of CBI and RBI schemes do not offset the serious money laundering and tax evasion risks they present;
Amendment 661 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 91 91. Concludes that the potential economic benefits of CBI and RBI schemes do not offset the serious money
Amendment 662 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 91 91. Concludes that the potential economic benefits of CBI and RBI schemes do not offset the serious money laundering and tax evasion risks they present; calls on Member States to phase out all existing CBI or RBI schemes as soon as possible; stresses that, in the meantime, Member States should properly ensure that enhanced CDD on applicants for citizenship or residence through these schemes is duly carried out, a
Amendment 663 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 91 91. Concludes that the potential economic benefits of CBI and RBI schemes do not offset the serious money laundering and tax evasion risks they present; calls on Member States to phase out all existing CBI or RBI schemes as soon as possible; stresses that, in the meantime, Member States
Amendment 664 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 91 91. Concludes that the potential, yet questionable economic benefits of CBI and RBI schemes do not offset the serious money laundering and tax evasion and potential security risks they present; calls on Member States to phase out all existing CBI or RBI schemes as soon as possible; stresses that, in the meantime, Member States should properly ensure that enhanced CDD on applicants for citizenship or residence through these schemes is duly carried out, as required by AMLD5; calls on the Commission to monitor rigorously and continuously the proper implementation and application of CDD within the framework of CBI and RBI schemes until they are repealed in each Member State;
Amendment 665 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 91 Amendment 666 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 91 a (new) 91 a. Notes that the acquisition of citizenship of a Member State gives the grantee access to a wide range of rights and entitlements in the entire territory of the Union, including the right to move and reside freely; calls thus on Member States implementing CBI and RBI programmes, until they are finally repealed, to duly verify the character of the applicants and refuse their application if they present security risks, including money laundering; calls in this context Member States to compile and publish transparent data related to their CBI and RBI schemes, including the number of refusals and the reasons for denial; calls on the Commission to ensure better data collection and exchange of information among Member States in the context of their CBI and RBI schemes, including on applicants who have had their application denied due to security issues;
Amendment 667 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 92 92. Calls on Member States to prevent conflicts of interest linked to CBI and RBI schemes, which might arise when private firms which assisted the government in the design, management and promotion of these schemes, also advised and supported individuals by screening them for suitability and filing their applications for citizenship or residence; calls on Member States to require physical presence in the country as a condition for benefiting from CBI and RBI schemes before the phase out;
Amendment 668 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 92 92. Calls on Member States to prevent conflicts of interest linked to CBI and RBI schemes, which might arise when private firms which assisted the government in the design, management and promotion of these schemes, also advised and supported individuals by screening them for suitability and filing their applications for citizenship or residence; emphasizes that customer due diligence (CDD) cannot be outsourced to these private companies since it must be assumed that a conflict of interest prevents them from choosing eligible over solvent candidates;
Amendment 669 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 92 92. Calls on Member States to prevent conflicts of interest linked to CBI and RBI schemes, which might arguably arise when private firms which assisted the government in the design, management and promotion of these schemes, also advised and supported individuals by screening them for suitability and filing their applications for citizenship or residence;
Amendment 67 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 b (new) 3 b. (new) Emphasizes that defining tax bases requires having a full picture of a taxpayer’s situation, including those parts that are outside of the tax jurisdiction, and determining which part refers to which jurisdiction; notes that it also requires that such tax bases are allocated between tax jurisdictions to avoid double-taxation and double non- taxation; affirms priority should be given to eliminating double non-taxation as well as ensuring that the issue of double taxation is tackled;
Amendment 670 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 92 92. Calls on Member States to prevent conflicts of interest linked to CBI and RBI schemes, which
Amendment 671 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 92 a (new) 92 a. Is concerned with the fact that the beneficiaries of CBI and RBI schemes may take advantage of the free movement rules applicable to the Schengen area; expresses its concern over the compatibility of such schemes with the full application of the Schengen acquis; worries over the potential implications these schemes may have on the security of the Schengen area and the Union;
Amendment 672 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 93 93. Urges the Commission to finalise its study on CBI and RBI schemes in the Union;
Amendment 673 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 93 93. Urges the Commission to finalise its study on CBI and RBI schemes in the Union; urges the Commission to examine whether, and, if so, which of these schemes
Amendment 674 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 93 93. Urges the Commission to finalise its study on CBI and RBI schemes in the Union; urges the Commission to examine whether, and, if so, which of these schemes posed a threat to EU legislation
Amendment 675 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 93 93. Urges the Commission to finalise its study on CBI and RBI schemes in the Union; urges the Commission to examine whether, and, if so, which of these schemes posed a threat to EU legislation; calls on the Commission to assess the risks associated with the selling of citizenship and residence as part of its next Supranational Risk Assessment; urges the Commission to also assess the risks associated with the adoption of visa- waiver agreements with third countries that have CBI or RBI schemes in place; calls on the Commission to expand the scope of obliged entities covered by AMLD5 to include all agents or firms acting as intermediaries in the trade of citizenship and residency or acting as advisors in residence and citizenship planning; calls on the Commission to establish mechanisms for coordinating information sharing between Member States on rejected applications; calls on the Commission to assess the extent to which these schemes have been used by EU citizens;
Amendment 676 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 93 93. Urges the Commission to finalise its study on CBI and RBI schemes in the Union as well as to include in its study all other arrangements by which citizenship is granted, especially on an ad hoc, “private” and hidden basis for political economic or security or other reasons; urges the Commission to examine whether, and, if so, which of these schemes posed a threat to EU legislation;
Amendment 677 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 93 93. Urges the Commission to finalise its study on CBI and RBI schemes in the Union; urges the Commission to e
Amendment 678 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 93 93. Urges the Commission to finalise its study on CBI and RBI schemes in the Union; urges the Commission to examine whether, and, if so, which of these schemes posed a threat to EU legislation; calls on the Member States to take swift action where shortcomings have been identified;
Amendment 679 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 93 93. Urges the Commission to finalise its study on CBI and RBI schemes in the Union; urges the Commission to examine whether, and, if so, which of these schemes posed a threat to EU legislation, not just on paper but also in practice; reiterates that citizenship and all the rights associated with it should never be for sale;
Amendment 68 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 b (new) 3 b. Considers that efforts need to be made by all EU institutions, including by this Parliament, as well as Member States to explain to citizens the work done in the field of taxation and actions taken to remedy existing problems and loopholes;
Amendment 680 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 93 93. Urges the Commission to finalise its study on CBI and RBI schemes in the Union; urges the Commission to examine whether, and, if so, which of these schemes
Amendment 681 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 93 93. Urges the Commission to finalise its study on CBI and RBI schemes in the Union; urges the Commission to examine whether, and, if so, which of these schemes posed a threat to EU legislation; in particular AMLD and ATAD;
Amendment 682 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 93 93. Urges the Commission to finalise its study on CBI and RBI schemes in the Union; urges the Commission to examine whether, and, if so, which of these schemes posed a threat to EU legislation and security of the Member States;
Amendment 683 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 93 a (new) 93 a. Condemns Member States implementing CBI and RBI schemes in opaque circumstances and without proper enforcement of AML controls; urges Member States which operate these schemes to publish annually the names and nationalities of beneficiaries of CBI and RBI and their relatives in order to minimise risks of money laundering, tax crimes and related criminality;
Amendment 684 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 93 a (new) 93 a. Stresses that better data collection is critical to forecast vulnerabilities induced by CBI and RBI schemes; urges the Commission to provide some guidance on the transparency standards to be followed by the Member States, which could include making the most relevant information and data they hold publicly available;
Amendment 685 #
Motion for a resolution Subheading 4.2 a (new) Amendment 686 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 95 95. Notes that free ports within the EU can be established under the ‘free zone’ procedure; notes that free zones are enclosed areas within the customs territory of the Union where non-Union goods can be introduced free of import duty, other charges (i.e. taxes) and commercial policy measures; highlights with concern that free ports can be also used for the purpose of tax evasion;
Amendment 687 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 95 a (new) 95a. Stresses that free zones must not be used to achieve the same effects as tax havens;
Amendment 688 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 96 Amendment 689 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 96 96. Recalls that free ports are warehouses in free zones, which were – originally – intended as spaces to store merchandise in transit;
Amendment 69 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 c (new) 3 c. Considers that open and transparent tax competition where Member States and regions compete in offering better conditions for doing business can contribute to stimulating entrepreneurship, for the benefit of both citizens and companies; stresses however that tax competition that deprives Member States of appropriate generating revenues is not fair; considers that in order to end unfair tax competition developed by some Member States, the EU needs to adopt a broad strategy whereby the EU supports, with relevant policies, those Member States to move from their current detrimental tax systems to a tax system compatible with the EU legal framework and the spirit of the EU treaties;
Amendment 690 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 96 96. Recalls that free ports are warehouses in free zones, which were – originally – intended as spaces to store merchandise in transit; deplores the fact that they have since become popular for the storage of substitute assets, including art, precious stones, antiques, gold and wine collections – often on a permanent basis;60 but recalls that in the past this practice was part of the operating profile of major banks and financial institutions, as well as of leading European ministries and foundations; _________________ 60 EPRS study entitled ‘Money Laundering and tax evasion risks in free ports‘, October 2018, PE: 627.114; ISBN: 978-92- 846-3333-3.
Amendment 691 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 96 96. Recalls that free ports are warehouses in free zones, which were – originally – intended as spaces to store merchandise in transit; deplores the fact that in some cases they have since become popular for the storage of substitute assets, including art,
Amendment 692 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 96 96. Recalls that free ports are warehouses in free zones, which were – originally – intended as spaces to store merchandise in transit; deplores the fact that they have since become popular for the storage of substitute assets, including art, precious stones, antiques, gold and wine collections – often on a permanent basis
Amendment 693 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 97 97. Notes that, apart from secure storage, the motivations for the use of free ports often include a high degree of secrecy and the deferral of import duties and indirect taxes such as VAT or user tax;
Amendment 694 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 97 97. Notes that, apart from secure storage, the motivations for the use of free ports include a high degree of secrecy and the deferral of import duties and indirect taxes such as VAT or user tax; recognizes that the purpose of free ports is not to constitute a place for the safe and tax-free storage of value for the wealth of individuals while it has been found that they are frequently used as such;
Amendment 695 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 97 97. Notes that, apart from secure storage, the motivations for the use of free ports include a high degree of secrecy and the deferral of import duties and indirect taxes such as VAT or user tax
Amendment 696 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 98 98. Underlines that there are over 80 free zones in the EU61 and many thousands of other warehouses under ‘special storage procedures’ in the EU, notably ‘customs warehouses’, which can or could offer the same degree of secrecy and (indirect) tax advantages;62 _________________ 61 European Commission list of EU free zones. 62 EPRS study entitled ‘Money Laundering and tax evasion risks in free ports’, October 2018, PE: 627.114; ISBN: 978-92- 846-3333-3.
Amendment 697 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 99 99. Observes that under the Union Customs Code, customs warehouses are on an almost identical legal footing with free ports; recommends, therefore, they be put
Amendment 698 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 100 100. Notes that money laundering risks in free ports
Amendment 699 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 100 a (new) Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 8 — having regard to the numerous revelations
Amendment 70 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 b (new) 3 b. Regrets that due to resistance of Member States, several legislative proposals in the field of tax justice have not been adopted yet to the detriment of European citizens.
Amendment 700 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 101 101. Notes that under DAC5, as of 1 January 2018, direct tax authorities have ‘access upon request’ to a broad information set with regard to ultimate beneficial ownership (UBO) information collected under the AMLD; notes that EU AML legislation is built on the trust in reliable CDD research and the diligent reporting of suspicious transactions by obliged entities, which will become AML gatekeepers; notes with concern that ‘access upon request’ to information held by free ports may only have very limited effect in specific cases63 ; takes the view that direct tax offices should be able to fish into UBO data as part of their surveillance tasks; _________________ 63 EPRS study entitled ‘Money Laundering and tax evasion risks in free ports’, October 2018, PE: 627.114; ISBN: 978-92- 846-3333-3.
Amendment 701 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 102 102. Calls on the Commission to table a legislative proposal to ensure the automatic exchange of information between the relevant authorities, including tax and customs authorities, on beneficial ownership and transactions taking place in free ports, customs warehouses or SEZs, and to include a traceability obligation;
Amendment 702 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 102 102. Calls on the Commission to
Amendment 703 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 102 102. Calls on the Commission to table a legislative proposal to ensure the automatic
Amendment 704 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 102 102. Calls on the Commission to table a legislative proposal to ensure the automatic exchange of information between the relevant authorities, including law enforcement, tax and customs authorities, on beneficial ownership and transactions taking place in free ports, customs warehouses or SEZs;
Amendment 705 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 102 102. Calls on the Commission to table a legislative proposal to ensure the automatic exchange of information between the relevant authorities, including law enforcement, tax and customs authorities, on beneficial ownership and transactions taking place in free ports, customs warehouses or SEZs;
Amendment 706 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 102 102. Calls on the Commission to table a legislative proposal to ensure the automatic exchange of information between the relevant authorities, including law enforcement, tax and customs authorities, on beneficial ownership and transactions taking place in free ports, customs warehouses or SEZs;
Amendment 707 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 102 102. Calls on the Commission to table a legislative proposal to ensure the automatic exchange of information between the relevant authorities, including law enforcement tax and customs authorities, on beneficial ownership and transactions taking place in free ports, customs warehouses or SEZs;
Amendment 708 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 102 102. Calls on the Commission to table a legislative proposal to ensure the automatic exchange of information between the relevant authorities,
Amendment 709 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 102 a (new) 102a. Notes that the end of banking secrecy has led to the emergence of investment in new assets such as art, which has led to rapid growth of the art market in recent years; stresses that free zones provide them with a safe and widely disregarded storage space, where trade can be conducted untaxed and ownership can be concealed, while art itself remains an unregulated market, due to factors such as the difficulty of determining market prices and finding specialists; points out that, for example, it is easier to move a valuable painting to the other side of the world than a similar amount of money;
Amendment 71 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 d (new) 3 d. Supports the use of digital tools; is aware however that the use of smart technologies is giving rise to new types of digital tax fraud such as fraudulent e- filings of tax returns across territories, use of software programs to automatically skim cash from electronic cash registers or point of sale systems (“zapping”) or the growing usage of third-party payroll processors enabling fraudsters to channel off legitimate taxes; calls therefore on the EU institutions and Member States to adopt a comprehensive, transformative and dynamic strategy with a long-term vision, roadmap and multifaceted solutions involving people, processes and technology;
Amendment 710 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 102 a (new) 102 a. Calls on the Commission to begin the process and propose concrete steps for the phasing out of the system of free ports in Europe;
Amendment 712 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 103 Amendment 713 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 103 103.
Amendment 714 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 103 a (new) 103 a. Recalls the European Parliament’s position in the PANA recommendation whereby it called on the Member States to identify and stop all use of any form of tax amnesties that could lead to money laundering and tax evasion or that could prevent national authorities from using the data provided to pursue financial crime investigations1a _________________ 1a European Parliament recommendation of 13 December 2017 to the Council and the Commission following the inquiry into money laundering, tax avoidance and tax evasion (Texts adopted, P8_TA- (2017)0491).
Amendment 715 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 103 a (new) 103 a. Points out that tax amnesties represent a high risk of decreased tax compliance in the long run and a threat to the rule of law and the fight against money laundering;
Amendment 716 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 103 b (new) 103 b. Calls on the Member States to refrain from further using tax amnesties as this measure only represents a source of quick tax collection in the short run while has a significantly negative impact on the overall tax systems;
Amendment 717 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 103 b (new) 103 b. Regrets the fact that EU Member States have prioritized short-term revenue benefits over the elimination of tax fraud by providing tax amnesties;1a _________________ 1a De la Feria, Rita (2018) ‘Tax Fraud and the Rule of Law’; WP18/02; Oxford University Centre for Business Taxation; January 2018.
Amendment 718 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 103 c (new) 103 c. Notes that tax amnesties allow tax fraudsters to voluntarily repay all or parts of unpaid taxes without being subject to criminal prosecutions or full penalties; regrets that tax amnesties have become popular in the last few years in the context of the financial crisis1a and the austerity policies; _________________ 1a De la Feria, Rita (2018) ‘Tax Fraud and the Rule of Law’; WP18/02; Oxford University Centre for Business Taxation; January 2018.
Amendment 719 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 103 d (new) 103 d. Notes that tax amnesties are very negative they affect the most affluent sectors of society and extend the idea that having many resources guarantees impunity and makes it easy to circumvent legality; calls for Member States to stop tax amnesties and that economic and penal sanctions against the fraudsters be increased;
Amendment 72 #
Motion for a resolution Subheading 1.2 a (new) (new para under subheading 1.2) Stresses that tax fraud, tax evasion and aggressive tax planning result in lost resources for national and European Union budgets; acknowledges that quantification of these losses is not straightforward; notes however that increased transparency requirements would not only provide better data but also would contribute to reducing opacity;
Amendment 720 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 104 Amendment 721 #
104. Calls on the Commission to assess past amnesty programmes enacted by Member States, and, in particular, the public revenues recovered and their impact in the medium and long term on tax base volatility; urges Member States to ensure that relevant data related to the beneficiaries of previous and future tax amnesties is duly shared with the judiciary, law enforcement, and tax authorities, to ensure compliance with AML/CFT rules and possible prosecution for other financial crimes;
Amendment 722 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 105 Amendment 723 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 105 105. Takes the view that
Amendment 724 #
Motion for a resolution Subheading 4.4 a (new) (new para) Acknowledges that administrative cooperation in the field of direct taxes framework covers now both individual and corporate taxpayers;
Amendment 725 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 106 a (new) 106a. Stresses that international standards on administrative cooperation are only minimum standards; notes, therefore, that within the European Union, Member States should go further than merely complying with these minimum standards; calls on the Member States already working responsibly to facilitate this cooperation by removing the administrative barriers in order to make it more direct, simple and effective;
Amendment 726 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 106 a (new) 106 a. Call on Member States to do group requests and to harmonise the definition of tax crimes; call on the Commission to eliminate any obstacles in administrative and legal cooperation;
Amendment 727 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 106 b (new) 106 b. Calls on the Commission to assess and presents proposals to close loopholes in the DAC2, particularly by including hard assets and cryptocurrencies in the scope of the directive, by prescribing sanctions for non-compliance or false reporting from financial institutions, as well as by including more types of financial institutions and types of accounts that are not being reported at the moment, such as pension funds;
Amendment 728 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 106 c (new) 106 c. Considers that coordinated on-site inspections and joint audits should be part of the European framework of cooperation between tax administrations;
Amendment 729 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 107 107. Stresses that money laundering can assume various forms, and that the money laundered can have its origin in various illicit activities ranging from terrorism to
Amendment 73 #
Motion for a resolution Subheading 1.2 b (new) Amendment 730 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 107 107. Stresses that money laundering can assume various forms, and that the money laundered can have its origin in various illicit activities ranging from terrorism to tax evasion and fraud; reiterates in this regard the magnitude of laundered money from Russia, used for subversive political purposes; notes with concern that the proceeds from criminal activity in the EU are estimated to amount to EUR 110 billion per year64 , corresponding to 1 % of the Union’s total GDP; highlights that the Commission estimates that in some Member States up to 70 % of money laundering cases have a cross-border dimension65 ; further notes that the scale of money laundering is estimated by the UN66 to be the equivalent of between 2 to 5 % of global GDP, or around EUR 715 billion and 1.87 trillion a year; _________________ 64 From illegal markets to legitimate businesses: the portfolio of organised crime in Europe, Final report of Project OCP – Organised Crime Portfolio, March 2015. 65
Amendment 731 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 107 107. Stresses that money laundering can assume various forms, and that the money laundered can have its origin in various illicit activities ranging from
Amendment 732 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 107 a (new) 107 a. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to report on the effects money laundering on women’s rights, as money laundering impacts on gender inequality by concealing the origin of assets obtained via human trafficking, in which women and girls amount to 70%of the victims, as reported by FATF1a,UNODC2a,among others; _________________ 1a FATF (2011) Money Laundering Risks Arising from Trafficking in Human Beings and Smuggling of Migrants. Seehttp://www.fatf- gafi.org/media/fatf/documents/reports/Tra fficking%20in%20Human%20Beings%20 and%20Smuggling%20of%20Migrants.pd f 2a See UNODC’s reports on Trafficking in Persons.
Amendment 733 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 107 a (new) 107 a. Acknowledges that money laundering and organised criminal financial activities are being used for subversive political purposes, as an instrument in hybrid warfare aimed at weakening European democracies, economies and institutions;
Amendment 734 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 107 a (new) 107 a. Deplores those financial institutions and the related banking models which have actively facilitated, or prevented putting a stop to, systemic money laundering;
Amendment 735 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 108 108. Welcomes the adoption of AMLD4 and
Amendment 736 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 108 a (new) 108a. Notes that the successive revisions of the Anti-Money Laundering Directive have strengthened the European supervisory framework; stresses that these revisions have not been completely transposed throughout Europe; calls on the national administrations to transpose these texts in order to ensure effective protection against money laundering, including that connected with virtual currencies; notes that the multifaceted nature of money laundering techniques requires the development of new and more flexible tools to combat this phenomenon;
Amendment 737 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 108 a (new) 108 a. Notes that, according to AMLD4, the Commission shall identify high risk third countries presenting strategic deficiencies in their regime on anti-money laundering and countering terrorist financing; welcomes in this regard the adoption by the Commission in June 2018 of the methodology for identifying high risk third countries; urges the Commission to publish first results as soon as possible, and acknowledges that, in the meantime, the Commission uses the list from the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), however excluding Serbia, which is on the FATF list;
Amendment 738 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 108 a (new) 108 a. (new) Notes that the Union’s AML framework chiefly relies on a preventive approach to money laundering, with a focus on the detection and the reporting of suspicious transactions;
Amendment 739 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 109 109. Deplores the fact that
Amendment 74 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Deplores again
Amendment 740 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 109 109. Deplores the fact that a large number of Member States have failed to fully or partially transpose AMLD4 into their domestic legislation within the set deadline,
Amendment 741 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 109 109. Deplores the fact that a large number of Member States have failed to fully or partially transpose AMLD4 into their domestic legislation within the set deadline, and that for this reason, infringement procedures have had to be opened by the Commission against them, including referrals before the Court of Justice of the European Union67 ; calls on these Member States to swiftly remedy this situation; reminds Member States of their legal obligation to respect the deadline of 10 January 2020 for the transposition of AMLD5 into their domestic legislation; and calls on the Commission to ensure that the AMLD5 is transposed fully in a timely manner or to consider using the legal tool of a regulation instead; _________________
Amendment 742 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 109 109. Deplores the fact that a large number of Member States have failed to fully or partially transpose AMLD4 into their domestic legislation within the set deadline, and that for this reason, infringement procedures have had to be opened by the Commission against them, including referrals before the Court of Justice of the European Union67 ; calls on these Member States to swiftly remedy this situation; reminds Member States of their legal obligation to respect the deadline of 10 January 2020 for the transposition of AMLD5 into their domestic legislation; supports the Council conclusions of 23 November inviting Member States to transpose the AMLD5 into their domestic legislation ahead of the 2020 deadline; _________________ 67 On 19 July 2018, the Commission referred Greece and Romania to the Court
Amendment 743 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 109 109. Deplores the fact that a large number of Member States have failed to fully or partially transpose AMLD4 into their domestic legislation within the set deadline, and that for this reason, infringement procedures have had to be opened by the Commission against them, including referrals before the Court of Justice of the European Union67 ; calls on these Member States to swiftly remedy this situation;
Amendment 744 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 109 a (new) 109 a. Deplores the fact that a number of Member States misuse the transposition of AML Directives for imposing additional financial burdens on NGOs and independent media outlets67a; calls on the Commission to closely monitor the transposition processes of AMLD4 and AMLD5, sanctioning any such misuse; _________________ 67a https://civicspacewatch.eu/romania- anti-money-laundering-agency-proposes- legislation-that-increases-ngo- administrative-burdens-under-threat-of- dissolution/
Amendment 745 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 110 110. Recalls the crucial importance of CDD as part of the know-your-customer (KYC) obligation which consists of obliged entities having to properly identify their customers and the source of their funds as well as the ultimate beneficial owners of the assets, including the immobilisation of anonymous accounts;
Amendment 746 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 110 110. Recalls the crucial importance of CDD as part of the know-your-customer (KYC) obligation which consists of obliged entities having to properly identify their customers and the source of their funds as well as the ultimate beneficial owners of the assets, including the immobilisation of anonymous accounts; notes that adequate resources within tax administrations are necessary for the effective implementation of this obligation;
Amendment 747 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 110 a (new) 110 a. Welcomes the Action Plan adopted by the Council on the 4th of December 2018, including several non-legislative measures to better tackle money laundering and terrorist financing in the EU; requests the Commission to regularly update the Parliament on the progress of the implementation of the Action Plan;
Amendment 748 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 110 b (new) 110 b. Is concerned by the absence of concrete procedures to assess and review the probity of members of the governing council of the European Central Bank, in particular when they are formally accused of criminal activity; calls for mechanisms to monitor and review the conduct and propriety of the members of the governing council of the European Central Bank and to protect them in case of abuse of power by the authority that has the appointment power;
Amendment 749 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 111 111. Condemns the fact that systemic failures in the enforcement of AML requirements, coupled with inefficient supervision, has led to a number of recent high-profile cases of ML in European banks linked to systematic breaches of the most basic KYC and CDD requirements; recalls the crucial importance of developing Public and Private Partnerships (PPPs) and highlights the existence and positive results of the only transnational PPP, the Europol Financial Intelligence Public Private Partnership, promoting the sharing of strategic and tactical information amongst banks, FIUs, LEAs and national regulators across States;
Amendment 75 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Deplores again ‘the lack of reliable and unbiased statistics on the magnitude of tax avoidance and tax evasion [and] stresses the importance of developing appropriate and transparent methodologies to quantify the scale of these phenomena, as well as their impact on countries’ public finances, economic activities and public investments’; notes that transparency in general is central to the fight against money laundering, tax evasion and tax avoidance, and that some jurisdictions have interest in keeping the secrecy at place;
Amendment 750 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 111 111. Condemns the fact that systemic failures in the enforcement of AML requirements, coupled with inefficient supervision, has led to a number of recent high-profile cases of ML in European banks linked to systematic breaches of the most basic KYC and CDD requirements; regrets the unequal treatment of the alleged system failures, such that large scale breaches of AML requirements that happened over the long term by the bigger financial institutions in the larger Member States went unobserved while relatively smaller scale, shorter-term failures in smaller economies were slapped with the full weight of sanctions on a European scale, and opines that this undermines the thrust of AML provisions;
Amendment 751 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 111 a (new) 111 a. Stresses the continued use of cash in cases of money laundering; highlights the new Regulation on controls on cash entering or leaving the Union, which harmonises and expands controls on large sums of cash and highly liquid stores of value; regrets that while rules on the EU external borders are harmonised, rules among Member States concerning cash movements within EU borders vary;
Amendment 752 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 111 a (new) 111 a. Recalls the crucial importance of developing Public and Private Partnerships (PPPs) and highlights the existence and positive results of the only transnational PPP, the Europol Financial Intelligence Public Private Partnership, promoting the sharing of strategic and tactical information amongst banks, FIUs, LEAs and national regulators across States;
Amendment 753 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 111 a (new) Amendment 754 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 111 b (new) 111 b. Notes that high-denomination euro notes provide a way to move large amounts of cash and thus potentially evade AML controls; welcomes that the ECB announced in 2016 it would no longer issue new €500 notes (even though the outstanding stock remains legal tender); calls on the ECB to extend this action to the €200 notes and for determining the phasing out of the ability to use of both €500 and €200 notes;
Amendment 755 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 112 112. Recalls that KYC and CDD are essential, that they must continue
Amendment 756 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 112 112. Recalls that KYC and CDD continues uninterrupted throughout the business relationship, and that customers’ transactions have to be permanently monitored for suspicious or unusual activities; recalls, in this context, the obligation for obliged entities to promptly inform national FIUs, on their own initiative, of transactions suspected of ML, associate predicate offences or terrorist financing;
Amendment 757 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 112 112. Recalls that KYC and CDD continues throughout the business
Amendment 758 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 112 112. Recalls that KYC and CDD continues throughout the business relationship, and that customers’ transactions have to be monitored for suspicious or unusual activities; recalls, in this context, the obligation for obliged entities to promptly inform national FIUs, on their own initiative, of transactions suspected of ML, associate predicate offences or terrorist financing; is concerned that AMLD5 continues to allow for managing directors to be registered as beneficial owners while the real beneficial owner of a company or trust is not known; calls on the Commission to present a legislative proposal to end the practice of accepting the ultimate beneficial owners to hide behind straw men and to urge other jurisdictions at international level to do the same; calls on the Member States when transposing AMLD5 into national law to ensure that obliged entities terminate the business relationship with another company whose ultimate beneficial owners are not known;
Amendment 759 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 112 a (new) 112 a. Notes the positive results of the UK law establishing the Unexplained Wealth Order (UWO) in tracking proceeds of criminal activities; highlights that a UWO is a court order that requires a person who is reasonably suspected of involvement in, or of being connected to a person involved in, serious crime to explain the nature and extent of their interest in particular property, and to explain how the property was obtained, where there are reasonable grounds to suspect that the respondent’s known lawfully obtained income would be insufficient to allow the respondent to obtain the property; calls on the Commission to assess the feasibility of proposing a similar measure through EU legislation and report back to Parliament;
Amendment 76 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Deplores again ‘the lack of reliable and unbiased statistics on the magnitude of tax avoidance and tax evasion [and] stresses the importance of developing appropriate and transparent methodologies to quantify the scale of these phenomena, as well as their impact on countries’ public finances, economic activities and public investments’; points out that recent examples have demonstrated the importance of the political and financial independence of statistical institutes to ensure the reliability of statistical data;
Amendment 760 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 112 a (new) 112 a. Is concerned with the reliance of the AMLD on self-regulation by obliged entities; and notes that this is a matter of concern as all leaks so far have exposed the role of banks, lawyers, traders, insurance companies, and other enablers and promoters, as accomplices in money laundering cases;
Amendment 761 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 112 a (new) 112 a. Underlines the threat to European security and stability posed by money laundering from Russia with the aim to finance subversive activities, disinformation and corruption as well as unfair competition; considers the magnitude of this money laundering as part of hostile activities meant to undermine, misinform and destabilise, while at the same time upholding criminal activities;
Amendment 762 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 112 b (new) 112 b. Welcomes the decision in some Member States to ban the issuing of bearer shares and to convert the current ones into nominal securities; reiterates its call on the Commission to propose EU- wide legislation to the same effect;
Amendment 763 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 112 c (new) 112 c. Stresses the urgent need to create a more efficient system for communication and information exchange among judicial authorities within the EU, replacing the traditional instruments of mutual legal assistance in criminal matters, which provide lengthy and burdensome procedures harming investigations of money laundering and other serious crimes; reiterates its call on the Commission to assess the need for legislative action in this field;
Amendment 764 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 112 d (new) 112 d. Calls on the Commission to assess and report to Parliament about the role and particular risks presented by legal arrangements such as Special Purpose Vehicles (SPVs), Special Purpose Entities (SPEs) and Non Charitable Purpose Trusts (NCPTs) in money laundering, particularly in the UK, and Crown Dependencies and Overseas territories;
Amendment 765 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 112 e (new) 112 e. Urges Member States to fully comply with AML legislation when issuing sovereign bonds on the financial markets; recalls that money laundering and financing of terrorism takes many forms and that due diligence in such financial operations is strictly necessary;
Amendment 766 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 113 113. Notes that during
Amendment 767 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 113 113. Notes that during the mandate of the TAX3 Committee alone, three
Amendment 768 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 113 a (new) 113 a. Stresses that ML is a wider issue that cannot be pinpointed to just a few financial institutions in a given year; Regrets that more revelations of ML involving financial institutions in the EU may emerge;
Amendment 769 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 113 b (new) Amendment 77 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Deplores again ‘the lack of reliable and unbiased statistics on the magnitude of tax avoidance and tax evasion [and] stresses the importance of developing appropriate and transparent methodologies to quantify the scale of these phenomena, as well as their impact on countries’ public finances, economic activities and public investments’; further deplores the lack of reliable quantitative assessment of the extent of financial crimes, tax evasion and tax avoidance;
Amendment 770 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 114 114. Notes that in the case of Danske Bank, transactions worth upwards of EUR 200 billion flowed in and out of its Estonian branch
Amendment 771 #
114. Notes that in the case of Danske Bank, transactions worth upwards of EUR 2
Amendment 772 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 114 a (new) Amendment 773 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 114 a (new) 114 a. Notes that in the case of ING Bank N.V. its clients in the Netherlands were able to use their bank accounts to launder hundreds of millions of euros, without bank having put in place adequate AML and KYC procedures.
Amendment 774 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 115 a (new) 115 a. Is concerned that illicit proceeds entering the European financial system in order to be laundered are further used to finance criminal activities posing threat to the security of Union citizens and/or creating distortions and unfair competitive disadvantages to law-abiding citizens and companies; calls on relevant national authorities to track the destinations of the transactions deemed suspicious by the 6200 customers of the Estonian branch of Danske Bank to confirm that money laundered have not been used for further criminal activity; calls on the relevant national authorities to duly cooperate in this matter as the chains of suspicious transactions are clearly cross-border;
Amendment 775 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 116 116. Highlights that the European Central Bank (ECB) has withdrawn the banking licence of Malta’s Pilatus Bank following the arrest in the United States of Ali Sadr Hashemi Nejad, Chairman of Pilatus Bank and its sole shareholder, on, among other things, charges of money laundering with respect to sanctions applied by the US to Iran and Venezuela and following a request made by the Malta Financial Services Authority to do so, submitted in June 2018; stresses that the European banking Authority (EBA) concluded that the Maltese Financial Intelligence Analysis Unit had breached EU law because it had failed to conduct an effective supervision of Pilatus Bank due to, among other things, procedural deficiencies and lack of supervisory actions; expresses surprise that while the Maltese financial intelligence analysis unit was stigmatised by the EBA for lack of effective supervision over Pilatus bank, a relatively minor investment vehicle, a similar procedure was not followed with respect to the relevant supervisory and investigative authorities in the cases of ING bank, Danske Dank, Latvian ABLV, or Deutsche Bank, etc. where money laundering activities were much more important in value and volume, and of much longer standing;
Amendment 776 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 116 116. Highlights that the European Central Bank (ECB) has withdrawn the banking licence of Malta’s Pilatus Bank following the arrest in the United States of Ali Sadr Hashemi Nejad, Chairman of Pilatus Bank and its sole shareholder, on, among other things, charges of money laundering; stresses that the European banking Authority (EBA) concluded that the Maltese Financial Intelligence Analysis Unit had breached EU law because it had failed to conduct an effective supervision of Pilatus Bank due to, among other things, procedural deficiencies and lack of supervisory actions; notes that the Maltese authority managing Malta's cash-for- citizenship scheme, Identity Malta, included references to Pilatus Bank in its promotion of the cash-for- citizenship scheme;
Amendment 777 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 116 116. Highlights that the European Central Bank (ECB) has withdrawn the banking licence of Malta’s Pilatus Bank following the arrest in the United States of Ali Sadr Hashemi Nejad, Chairman of
Amendment 778 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 116 a (new) 116a. Regrets that the TAXE3 Committee did not have the time to devote more attention to specific cases of financial crime; draws attention, in this regard, to the case of the Kazakh oligarch Mukhtar Ablyazov, sentenced to life in prison in his country for murder and convicted of embezzling an estimated USD 7.5 billion in clients' deposits and pensions from Bank Turan Alem (BTA), of which he was chairman; notes, in this connection, that in the proceedings against him in the United Kingdom, where he first sought exile before fleeing to France, it was found that Mr Ablyazov made extensive use of opaque offshore structures to channel the embezzled funds as well as certain loans granted by EU credit institutions; notes that he was also able to operate under false identities, visibly and with the connivance of certain administrations; recalls that many building projects had to be stopped when the BTA financial support disappeared, as a direct result of the wrongdoing of Mr Ablyazov; notes that Mr Ablyazov has been convicted in the United Kingdom, France and Kazakhstan and is subject to an international arrest warrant issued by Ukraine and Russia; is surprised at the decision of the Council of State of 9 December 2016, given that all Mr Ablyazov’s cassation appeals had been systematically rejected up until 5 October 2016; calls on the authorities of the Member States concerned to implement the necessary legal remedies to ensure that the court decisions can be enforced and the sums recovered.
Amendment 779 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 116 a (new) 116 a. Regrets that no action were taken by EU institutions in relation to the ABLV Bank, in advance of those by the US Fin CEN; is concerned by what seems to be acknowledged by experts in this matter which observe that US standards are much stricter than European ones, that even when EU banks manage to apply EU rules, they are not sufficiently capable of applying US rules, and that the EU system seems to be guaranteed by the US one 1a _________________ 1a TAX3 Delegation to Riga (Latvia), 30- 31 August 2018, MISSION REPORT
Amendment 78 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Calls for statistics to be collected in accordance with the guidelines of Eurostat or other experts concerning not only taxation but also measures against money laundering, applicants for CBI and RBI and applications that have been accepted and rejected, large transactions at free ports, customs warehouses and special economic zones, as well as disclosures made by intermediaries and whistle-blowers;
Amendment 780 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 116 a (new) 116 a. Underlines that various EU cases of money laundering, including the ING Bank, ABLV Bank, Danske Bank as well as Deutsche Bank were linked to Russian capital and/or citizens; calls for more effective scrutiny of all suspicious transaction reports; stresses in this context the need for more actions by the Commission and better cooperation amongst Member States in the control of capital coming from Russia;
Amendment 781 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 116 a (new) 116 a. Is concerned about the increase of money laundering in the context of other forms of business activities, in particular the phenomenon of the so-called ‘flying money’ and ‘notorious streets‘; stresses that a stronger coordination and cooperation between local and regional administrative and law enforcement authorities is necessary to address these issues in European cities;
Amendment 782 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 116 a (new) 116 a. Is aware that the 500 euro note, the issuing of which has been abandoned by the ECB, continues to be used for money laundering and criminal activities; notes that some Member States are considering banning it; recalls that for such a measure to be effective the ban needs to be extended to all countries where the euro is accepted as a currency;
Amendment 783 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 116 a (new) 116 a. Notes that the financial advisers Nexia BT that allegedly planned to use Pilatus Bank for the purpose of money laundering and created the highly suspect financial structures exposed by the Panama Papers for Maltese PEPs continue to operate without consequence;
Amendment 784 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 116 b (new) 116 b. Notes that Malta's FIAU has yet to take any action against Nexia BT as well as its managing partners Brian Tonna and Karl Cini whose beach of AML rules are well-documented and in the public domain, further notes that Brian Tonna and Karl Cini continue to hold their accountancy warrants and that Karl Cini remains a member of the ACCA.
Amendment 785 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 116 c (new) 116 c. Calls on Maltese authorities and bodies regulating and overseeing the accountancy profession to take appropriate action including the launching of investigative and disciplinary processes against Nexia BT, Brian Tonna and Karl Cini;
Amendment 786 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 116 d (new) 116 d. Notes that Maltese PEPs Konrad Mizzi and Keith Schembri exposed by the Panama Papers and the reporting of the Daphne Project as being involved in international corruption and money laundering continue to hold their posts in the Maltese government and to escape justice;
Amendment 787 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 116 e (new) 116 e. Notes that revelations concerning the ownership of the UAE-based company 17 Black provides further evidence of the involvement of Konrad Mizzi and Keith Schembri in international corruption and money laundering;
Amendment 788 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 116 f (new) 116 f. Demands the dismissal of Maltese PEPs suspected of corruption and money laundering currently holding positions at the highest levels of the Maltese government and for efforts to obstruct justice to cease;
Amendment 789 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 117 117. Is aware that the current AML legal framework has so far consisted of directives and is based on minimum harmonisation, which has led to different national supervisory and enforcement practices in the Member States; calls on the Commission to assess, in the context of a future revision of the AML legislation, in the required impact assessment, whether a regulation would be a more appropriate legal act than a directive; calls, in this context, for a swift transformation into a regulation of the AML legislation if the impact assessment so advises but subject to a full understanding about how this should be done proportionately and with full awareness of the need to attract new direct investment by the smaller Member States, especially those having a peripheral status;
Amendment 79 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 a (new) 4 a. Deplores the fact that the Council has not yet made any progress to enter into negotiations with the Parliament on the proposal for CBCR; notes however that Member States have already started implementation of OECD BEPS Action 13 on Country-by-Country Report, and DAC4; calls for the Commission to request information collected from the Member States under CBCR for quantitative impact assessments;
Amendment 790 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 117 117. Is aware that the current AML legal framework has so far consisted of directives and is based on minimum harmonisation, which has led to different national supervisory and enforcement practices in the Member States; calls on the Commission to assess, in the context of a future revision of the AML legislation and in the light of the remits established in the EU Treaties, in the required impact assessment, whether a
Amendment 791 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 117 117. Is aware that the current AML legal framework has so far consisted of directives and is based on minimum harmonisation, which has led to different national supervisory and enforcement practices in the Member States; calls on the Commission to assess, in the context of a future revision of the AML legislation, in the required impact assessment, whether a regulation would be a more appropriate legal act than a directive; calls, in this context, for a swift transformation into a regulation of the AML legislation if the impact assessment so advises; calls on the Commission to make, in the meantime, full use of the instruments at hand to enforce AML legislation in the Member States, starting with formal opinions and ending with infringement procedures or to consider the legal tool of a regulation instead;
Amendment 792 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 117 a (new) 117 a. Calls on the Commission to take into consideration the recommendations of the EPRS study on ‘Offshore activities and money laundering: recent findings and challenges’ from 20171a,and consider that in order to reach a harmonized anti- money laundering policy in Europe, it needs to be noted that European countries are too different to all comply in the same way, and therefore different groups of countries within the EU should be targeted differently and some be trained and supported by other Member States; _________________ 1a http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/e tudes/STUD/2017/595371/IPOL_STU(201 7)595371_EN.pdf
Amendment 793 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 117 a (new) Amendment 794 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 117 a (new) 117 a. Notes that a number of Member States already have in place restrictions on cash payments as a measure to combat money laundering and terrorist financing activities; notes that fragmentation and the divergent nature of these measures have the potential of interfering with the proper functioning of the internal market; thereby calls on the Commission to come up with a proposal on European restrictions on payments in cash;
Amendment 795 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 117 a (new) 117 a. Believes that any AML institutional set-up needs to be crystal clear on the distribution of responsibilities between the EU and national levels and accompanied by the corresponding accountability requirements; considers that granting AML powers to an EU agency can only be done if appropriate human and financial means are allocated to it;
Amendment 796 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 117 a (new) 117 a. Deplores cases such as the Russian Laundromat, the Danske Banks case, the ABLV case and the Azerbaijan Laundromat that have demonstrated how hundreds of billions of euros of dirty Russian money connected to Russian ruling elites and oligarchs have been laundered via EU banks and offshore jurisdictions;
Amendment 797 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 117 a (new) 117 a. Calls for competent financial authorities to increase cooperation with each other and with relevant intelligence and security services; urges the Commission to propose legislative reforms in order to facilitate increased cooperation between banking authorities;
Amendment 798 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 117 b (new) 117 b. Calls on the Commission to assess the way in which derivatives can be used for money laundering, as ‘mirror trading’ can allow brokers to create multiple trades where it can conveniently locate washed funds1a; calls on the Commission to investigate whether this has been the case in the exposed cum-ex and cum-cum scandals; _________________ 1a EPRS (2017) ‘Offshore activities and money laundering: recent findings and challenges’. See http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/e tudes/STUD/2017/595371/IPOL_STU(201 7)595371_EN.pdf
Amendment 799 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 117 b (new) 117 b. Notes with concern that undetected flow of Russian money to Europe can create political, economic and security risks that have become clearly visible in cases such as the Salisbury attacks or the case of Cambridge Analytica and other interference in the democratic process in Europe;
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 8 a (new) - having regard to the European Parliament resolution of 29 November 2018 on the 'cum-ex' scandal: financial crime and loopholes in the current legal framework,
Amendment 80 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 b (new) 4b. Considers that the detection of criminal offences requires both rapid provision of information by banks and intermediaries and rapid exchanges of information between national and EU authorities; takes the view that, in addition to making it possible to require banks to afford immediate access to data, it is necessary to make the information systems of tax administrations and financial intelligence units (FIUs) compatible and uniform in order to accelerate exchanges of information; considers that, in developing information systems, one objective should be a European standard to facilitate rapid exchanges of information between the Member States' police and tax authorities in cases where fraud is suspected;
Amendment 800 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 117 c (new) 117 c. Calls on the Commission and the Council to ensure that the issues of money laundering and illicit financial flows are given an adequate degree of attention in EU sanction programmes in order to cut oligarchs off from their funds; calls for an EU wide Magnitsky Act to freeze assets of human rights violators; considers that it is time to end the free flow of money from Russia to EU banks; calls on the European Commission to explore the option of reversing the burden of proof so that Russian-origin money is considered suspect until proven otherwise;
Amendment 801 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 119 Amendment 802 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 119 119. Calls for increased scrutiny and supervision of non-resident deposit portfolios and the share within them originating from count
Amendment 803 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 119 119. Calls for the necessary increased scrutiny and continuous supervision of the members of management boards and shareholders of credit institutions and investment firms in the EU, and stresses in particular the difficulty of revoking banking licences or equivalent specific authorisations;
Amendment 804 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 120 120. Supports the work undertaken by the Joint Working Group comprising representatives of the Commission’s Directorate-General for Justice and Consumers and its Directorate-General for Financial Stability, Financial Services and Capital Markets Union, the ECB, the European Supervisory Authorities (ESAs) and the Chair of the ESAs Joint Committee Anti-money Laundering Sub-committee, with a view to detecting current shortcomings and proposing measures to enable effective coo
Amendment 805 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 121 121. Concludes that the current level of coordination of anti-money laundering and combating the financing of terrorism (AML/CFT) supervision of financial institutions, particularly in AML/CFT situations with cross-border effects, is not sufficient to address current challenges in this sector and that the Union’s ability to enforce coordinated AML rules and practices is currently inadequate; acknowledges that smaller EU Member States have been targeted for money laundering as a result of their lack of capacity to police illegal flows adequately; calls therefore for a new centralised system at EU level for AML/CFT supervision, with proper resources; calls on the Commission to develop specialized trainings for FIUs, particularly with respect to capacities in smaller Member States;
Amendment 806 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 121 a (new) 121 a. Notes that the recent scandals affecting banks in Malta, Latvia, Estonia, the Netherlands, Germany and Denmark reveal the failure of supervision by national anti-money laundering authorities; highlights, at the same time, that ESAs have limited abilities to take a more substantial role in the anti-money laundering field due to tight resources coupled with a lack of appropriate powers;
Amendment 807 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 121 a (new) 121 a. Recalls that pursuant to AMLD5, the carrying out of AML/CFT investigations should be held at centralised automated mechanisms for banks and payment accounts such as registers and data retrieval systems, as to guarantee the highest levels of data protection and privacy standards;
Amendment 808 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 122 122. Calls for an assessment of long- term objectives leading to an enhanced AML/CFT framework as mentioned in the ‘Reflection Paper on possible elements of a Roadmap for seamless cooperation between Anti Money Laundering and Prudential Supervisors in the European Union’, such as the establishment at EU level of a mechanism to better coordinate the activities of AML/CFT supervisors of financial sector entities, notably in situations where AML/CFT concerns are likely to have cross-border effects
Amendment 809 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 122 122. Calls for an assessment of long- term objectives leading to an enhanced AML/CFT framework as mentioned in the ‘Reflection Paper on possible elements of a Roadmap for seamless cooperation between Anti Money Laundering and Prudential Supervisors in the European Union’, such as the establishment at EU level of a mechanism to better coordinate the activities of AML/CFT supervisors of financial sector entities, notably in situations where AML/CFT concerns are likely to have cross-border effects, and
Amendment 81 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Recalls in particular the empirical assessment of the magnitude of annual revenue losses caused by aggressive corporate tax planning in the EU which was drawn up in 2015; notes that the assessment ranges from EUR 50-70 billion (sum lost to profit-shifting only, equivalent to at least 17 % of corporate income tax (CIT) revenue in 2013 and 0.4% of GDP) to EUR 160-190 billion (adding individualised tax arrangements of major MNEs, and inefficiencies in collection);
Amendment 810 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 122 122. Calls for an assessment of long- term objectives leading to an enhanced AML/CFT framework as mentioned in the ‘Reflection Paper on possible elements of a Roadmap for seamless cooperation between Anti Money Laundering and Prudential Supervisors in the European Union’, such as the establishment at EU level of a mechanism to better coordinate the activities of AML/CFT supervisors of financial sector entities, notably in situations where AML/CFT concerns are likely to have cross-border effects, and a possible centralisation of AML supervision via an existing or new Union body
Amendment 811 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 122 a (new) 122 a. Calls for increased scrutiny and continuous supervision of the members of management boards and shareholders of credit institutions, investment firms and insurers in the EU, and stresses in particular the difficulty of revoking banking licences or equivalent specific authorisations;
Amendment 812 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 123 123. Recalls that the ECB has the competence and responsibility for withdrawing authorisation from credit institutions for serious breaches of AML/CFT rules; notes, however, that the ECB is fully dependent on national AML supervisors for information relating to such breaches detected by national authorities; calls thus on national AML authorities to make quality information available to the ECB in a timely manner so the ECB can properly perform its function; encourages in this connection the ECB and all relevant AML authorities to continue negotiations on a multilateral agreement on exchange of information that should be ready by 10 January 2019;
Amendment 813 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 123 123. Recalls that the ECB has the competence and responsibility for withdrawing authorisation from credit institutions for serious breaches of AML/CFT rules; considers, therefore, that it is essential to guarantee its independence and give it the competences within the framework of the Single Supervisory Mechanism (SSM) to guarantee its functions in AML/ CFT matters, ensuring that the competent authorities exchange confidential information with it.
Amendment 814 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 124 124. Stresses that ESAs, and in particular the EBA, should be pro
Amendment 815 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 124 124. Stresses that ESAs, and in particular the EBA, should be provided with sufficient financial and administrative resource capacity to carry out their oversight functions and improve AML supervision; notes, however, the continued and increased importance the national supervisors;
Amendment 816 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 124 124. Stresses that ESAs, and in particular the EBA, must urgently should be provided with sufficient resource capacity to carry out their oversight functions and improve AML supervision in order to respond to the expectations of Europe’s tax payers; points out that according to the PANA report the EBA has only 0.8 of an employee in charge of this issue;
Amendment 817 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 124 124. Stresses that ESAs, and in particular the EBA, should be provided with sufficient resource capacity to carry out their oversight functions and improve AML supervision; notes the recommendation to the Maltese FIAU of the EBA pointing to uncertainties in the current banking legislation preventing the EBA from taking further actions to effectively enforce the Union law and calls on Member States to swiftly transpose the recently adopted changes to the Capital Requirements Directive into national law;
Amendment 818 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 124 124. Stresses that ESAs, and in particular the EBA, should be provided with sufficient resource capacity to carry out their oversight functions and improve AML supervision, in particular the risk assessment of national AML supervisors and the enhanced anti-money laundering peer reviews by the recent amendments to the Authority’s founding Regulation [subject to their forthcoming adoption]; calls for greater publicity for the peer reviews conducted by AML supervisors within the EBA framework, and in particular for systematic information to be provided to Parliament and the Council in the event of a serious deficiency; calls for priority to be given to harmonising the supervisory practices of the different national AML authorities;
Amendment 819 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 124 a (new) 124a. calls for greater publicity for the peer reviews conducted by AML supervisors within the European Banking Authority framework, and for information to be provided systematically to Parliament and the Council, particularly in the event of a serious deficiency;
Amendment 82 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 Amendment 820 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 124 a (new) 124 a. Stresses that prudential and anti- money laundering supervision cannot be treated as separate;
Amendment 821 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 124 b (new) 124 b. Highlights that in order to fight effectively against money laundering activities, increased and productive cooperation between national supervisors and the Member States’ financial intelligence units (FIUs) is key;
Amendment 822 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 125 125.
Amendment 823 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 125 125. Welcomes the Commission communication of 12 September 2018 on
Amendment 824 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 125 a (new) 125 a. Recalls the request made by the European Parliament resolution of 29 November 2018 on the cum-ex scandal, on ESMA and EBA to assess potential threats to the integrity of financial markets and to national budgets; to establish the nature and magnitude of actors in these schemes; to assess whether there were breaches of either national or Union law; to assess the actions taken by financial supervisors in Member States; and to make appropriate recommendations for reform and for action to the competent authorities concerned;
Amendment 825 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 125 a (new) 125 a. Notes the concerns expressed by the EBA with regards to the implementation of the Directive 2013/36/EU on access to the activity of credit institutions and the prudential supervision of credit institutions and investment firms1a; welcomes the suggestions made by the EBA to tackle the deficiencies caused by the current Union legal framework; _________________ 1a https://www.eba.europa.eu/documents/101 80/2101654/Letter+to+Tiina+Astola+on+t he+request+to+investigate+a+possible+B UL+under+Article+17+of+Regulation+% 28EU%29%20No+10932010+- +24092018.pdf
Amendment 826 #
Motion for a resolution Subheading 5.2 Cooperation
Amendment 827 #
Motion for a resolution Subheading 5.2 Cooperation between financial intelligence units (FIUs) and law enforcement
Amendment 828 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 126 126. Recalls that pursuant to AMLD5 Member States are obliged to set up automated centralised mechanisms enabling swift identification of holders of bank and payment accounts, and to ensure that any FIU is able to provide information held in those centralised mechanisms to any other FIU in a timely manner; calls on the Member States to speed up the establishment of these mechanisms so that Member States’ FIUs are able to cooperate effectively with each other in order to detect and counteract money-laundering activities;
Amendment 829 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 126 126. Recalls that pursuant to AMLD5 Member States are obliged to set up automated centralised mechanisms enabling swift identification of holders of bank and payment accounts, and to ensure that any FIU is able to provide information held in those centralised mechanisms to any other FIU in a timely manner; calls on the Member States to speed up the establishment of these mechanisms so that Member States’ FIUs are able to cooperate effectively with each other in order to detect and counteract money-laundering activities; notes that EU FIUs can cooperate in their fight against money laundering and the financing of terrorism by using the FIU.net system; calls for more measures and systems to be adopted in order to facilitate and strengthen such cooperation;
Amendment 83 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Calls on the Council and Member States to prioritise projects, notably with the support of the Fiscalis programme, aimed at quantifying the magnitude of tax avoidance in order to better address the current tax gap; points out that the complexity of tax regimes raises the issue of legibility and comprehension, both for taxable persons and for tax administrations themselves; stresses, in this regard, that this complexity can give rise to legal loopholes which are subsequently exploited by financial institutions and lead to scandals such as the 'CumEx Files';
Amendment 830 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 126 126. Recalls that pursuant to AMLD5 Member States are obliged to set up automated centralised mechanisms enabling swift identification of holders of bank and payment accounts, and to ensure that any FIU is able to provide information held in those centralised mechanisms to any other FIU in a timely manner; calls on the Member States to speed up the establishment of these mechanisms so that Member States’ FIUs and competent authorities are able to cooperate effectively with each other in order to detect and counteract money-laundering activities; calls on Member States to intensify cooperation between Financial Intelligence Units (FIUs) through FIU.net, thereby improving transparency, administrative cooperation and coordination and information exchange;
Amendment 831 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 126 a (new) 126 a. Recalls that EU FIUs are strongly encouraged to use the FIU.net system; highlights that information sharing between FIUs and LEAs, including with Europol, should be improved;
Amendment 832 #
126 a. Recalls that EU FIUs are strongly encouraged to use the FIU.net system and highlights that information sharing between FIUs and LEAs, including with Europol, should be improved;
Amendment 833 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 126 a (new) 126 a. Highlights that the fight against money laundering and tax evasion also requires good cooperation between FIUs and customs authorities;
Amendment 834 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 126 a (new) 126 a. Recalls that EU FIUs are strongly encouraged to use the FIU.net system;
Amendment 835 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 126 a (new) 126 a. Recalls that EU FIUs are strongly encouraged to use the FIU.net system;
Amendment 836 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 126 a (new) 126 a. Calls on Member States to establish information sharing arrangements between public authorities, law enforcement and specific private sector stakeholders, such as data providers and credit institutions, who hold relevant financial information relating to financing of terrorism;
Amendment 837 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 126 b (new) 126 b. Highlights that information sharing between FIUs and LEAs, including with Europol, is vital and should be rapidly enhanced;
Amendment 838 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 126 b (new) 126 b. Highlights that information sharing between FIUs and LEAs, including with Europol, should be improved;
Amendment 839 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 127 127. Highlights that in order to fight effectively against money laundering activities, cooperation is essential not only between Member States’ FIUs but also between Member States’ FIUs and the FIUs of third countries; calls on the Commission to engage actively with Member States to find mechanisms to improve and enhance the cooperation of Member States’ FIUs with the FIUs of third countries; calls on the Commission to take opportune action in this regard at the relevant international forums, such as the OECD and the Financial Action Task Force (FATF); recommends that in all such initiatives, top priority be given to the tracking of illegal financial flows organised and powered by organised crime; considers that in any resulting agreement proper consideration should be given to the protection of personal data;
Amendment 84 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Calls on the Council and Member States to prioritise projects, notably with the support of the Fiscalis programme, aimed at quantifying the magnitude of tax avoidance in order to better address the current tax gap; urges the Commission and Member States to analyse their tax gaps in the EU and Member States including VAT gaps in order to design tax policies in an effective manner.
Amendment 840 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 127 127. Highlights that in order to fight effectively against money laundering activities, cooperation is essential not only between Member States’ FIUs but also between Member States’ FIUs and the FIUs of third countries; calls on the Commission to engage actively with Member States to find mechanisms to improve and enhance the cooperation of Member States’ FIUs with the FIUs of third countries; notes that the Egmont Group, which brings together 159 FIUs, aims to strengthen their operational cooperation by encouraging the continuation and implementation of numerous projects; calls on the Commission to produce its assessment, as provided for under the revised Anti- Money Laundering Directive (Article 65(2)), of the framework for FIUs’ cooperation with third countries and obstacles to cooperation between FIUs in the Union, and the opportunities for improving it; calls on the Commission to take opportune action in this regard at the relevant international forums, such as the OECD and the Financial Action Task Force (FATF); considers that in any resulting agreement proper consideration should be given to the protection of personal data;
Amendment 841 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 127 127. Highlights that in order to fight effectively against money laundering activities, cooperation is essential not only between Member States’ FIUs but also between Member States’ FIUs and the FIUs of third countries; notes that the Egmont Group, bringing together 159 FIUs, enhances its operational cooperation by encouraging the continuation and implementation of numerous projects; urges the Commission to produce its assessment, as provided for under the revised Anti-Money Laundering Directive (Article 65(2)), of the framework for FIUs’ cooperation with third countries and obstacles and opportunities to enhance cooperation between FIUs in the Union; calls on the Commission to engage actively with Member States to find mechanisms to improve and enhance the cooperation of Member States’ FIUs with the FIUs of third countries; calls on the Commission to take opportune action in this regard at the relevant international forums, such as the OECD and the Financial Action Task Force (FATF); considers that in any resulting agreement proper consideration should be given to the protection of personal data;
Amendment 842 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 127 127. Highlights that in order to fight effectively against money laundering activities, cooperation is essential not only between Member States’ FIUs but also between Member States’ FIUs and the FIUs of third countries; recalls
Amendment 843 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 127 127. Highlights that in order to fight effectively against money laundering activities, cooperation is essential not only between Member States’ FIUs but also between Member States’ FIUs and the FIUs of third countries; calls on the Commission to engage actively with Member States to find mechanisms to improve and enhance the cooperation of Member States’ FIUs with the FIUs of third countries; calls on the Commission to take opportune action in this regard at the relevant international forums, such as the OECD and the Financial Action Task Force (FATF); considers that in any resulting agreement proper consideration
Amendment 844 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 127 a (new) 127 a. Stresses the benefits of developing Public and Private Partnerships (PPPs); highlights the existence and positive results of the Europol Financial Intelligence Public Private Partnership, promoting the sharing of strategic and tactical information amongst banks, FIUs, LEAs and national regulators across countries;
Amendment 845 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 127 a (new) 127 a. Stresses that in order to help fight effectively against money laundering activities, adequate financial and administrative capacity of the Member States’ FIUs is of vital importance;
Amendment 846 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 128 128. Points out that the non- standardisation of suspicious transaction report formats and non-standardisation of suspicious transaction report thresholds among Member States and with respect to the different obliged entities leads to difficulties in the processing and exchange of information between FIUs; calls on the Commission to
Amendment 847 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 128 128. Points out that the non- standardisation of suspicious transaction report formats and non-standardisation of suspicious transaction report thresholds among Member States and with respect to the different obliged entities leads to difficulties in the processing and exchange of information between FIUs; calls on the Commission to explore mechanisms to set up standardised reporting formats for obliged entities in order to facilitate the exchange of information between FIUs in cases with a cross-border dimension; and to reflect on the standardisation of suspicious transaction thresholds;
Amendment 848 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 128 128. Points out that the non- standardisation of suspicious transaction report formats and non-standardisation of suspicious transaction report thresholds among Member States and with respect to the different obliged entities leads to difficulties in the processing and exchange of information between FIUs; calls on the Commission to explore mechanisms to set up standardised reporting formats for obliged entities in order to facilitate the exchange of information between FIUs in cases with a cross-border dimension and to reflect on the standardisation of suspicious transaction thresholds;
Amendment 849 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 128 128. Points out that the non- standardisation of suspicious transaction report formats and non-standardisation of suspicious transaction report thresholds among Member States and with respect to the different obliged entities leads to difficulties in the processing and exchange of information between FIUs; calls on the Commission to explore
Amendment 85 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Calls on the Council and Member States to prioritise projects, notably with the support of the Fiscalis programme
Amendment 850 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 128 128. Points out that the non- standardisation of suspicious transaction report formats and non-standardisation of suspicious transaction report thresholds among Member States and with respect to the different obliged entities leads to difficulties in the processing and exchange of information between FIUs; calls on the Commission to explore mechanisms to set up standardised reporting formats for obliged entities in order to facilitate the exchange of information between FIUs in cases with a cross-border dimension
Amendment 851 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 128 128. Points out that the non- standardisation of suspicious transaction report formats among Member States and with respect to the different obliged entities leads to difficulties in the processing and exchange of information between FIUs; calls on the Commission to
Amendment 852 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 128 128. Points out that the non- standardisation of suspicious transaction report formats among Member States and with respect to the different obliged entities leads to difficulties in the processing and exchange of information between FIUs; calls on the Commission to explore, with support from the European Banking Authority (EBA), mechanisms to set up standardised reporting formats for obliged entities in order to facilitate the exchange of information between FIUs in cases with a cross-border dimension;
Amendment 853 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 128 128. Points out that the non- standardisation of suspicious transaction report formats among Member States and with respect to the different obliged entities leads to difficulties in the processing and exchange of information between FIUs; calls on the Commission to explore mechanisms to set up standardised reporting formats containing a common minimum set of the mandatory information and data to be collected for obliged entities in order to facilitate the exchange of information between FIUs in cases with a cross-border dimension;
Amendment 854 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 128 a (new) 128 a. (new) Calls on the Commission to explore the possibility to set up automated decentralized database of suspicious transactions reports that would allow Member States’ FIUs to look up transactions and their initiators and receivers repeatedly reported as suspicious in different Member States;
Amendment 855 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 129 129. Encourages the competent authorities and FIUs to engage with financial institutions and other obliged entities to enhance suspicious activity reporting, ensuring that FIUs receive more useful, focused and complete information to properly perform their duties, whi
Amendment 856 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 129 129. Encourages the competent authorities and FIUs to engage with financial institutions and other obliged entities to enhance suspicious activity reporting
Amendment 857 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 129 a (new) 129 a. Considers the established swift information exchange by the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) of the United States Department of the Treasury as a model for the EU and calls on the Commission to put forward a legislative proposal to set up a European Financial Intelligence Unit (EFIU) to facilitate coordination, including the exchange of information between FIUs within the Union; considers that this EFIU shall coordinate, assist and support Member Sates FIUs in cross-border cases, shall lend support to those Member States especially in maintaining and developing the technical infrastructure for ensuring the exchange of information, assisting them in joint analysis of cross-border cases and strategic analysis, and shall coordinate the work of Member States FIUs for cross-border cases; requires the Commission to provide the EFIU with adequate financial, human and technical resources in order to fulfil its tasks;
Amendment 858 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 129 a (new) 129 a. Notes the Commission’s assessment of the framework for FIUs’ cooperation with third countries and obstacles and opportunities to enhance cooperation between FIUs in the Union including the possibility of establishing an EU level coordination and support mechanism; recalls that according to the AMLD5 this assessment should be ready by 1 June 2019; asks the Commission to consider this opportunity to make a legislative proposal for a EU Financial Intelligence Unit, creating a hub for joint investigative work and coordination, with its own remit of autonomy and investigatory competences on cross border financial criminality, and an early warning mechanism;
Amendment 859 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 129 a (new) 129 a. (new) Awaits the Commission’s assessment of the framework for FIUs’ cooperation with third countries and obstacles and opportunities to enhance cooperation between FIUs in the Union including the possibility of establishing an EU level coordination and support mechanism; recalls that according to the AMLD5 this assessment should be ready by 1 June 2019;
Amendment 86 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 a (new) 6 a. Calls on the Member States to estimate their tax gaps, and publish the results annually;
Amendment 860 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 129 a (new) 129 a. Stresses the importance of timely information in order to investigate serious crimes, disrupt criminal activities, stop terrorist plots, and detect and freeze proceeds of crime; highlights that many investigations come to a dead end because of failure to secure timely, accurate and comprehensive access to the relevant financial data;
Amendment 861 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 129 a (new) 129 a. Calls for the Commission to report on the status quo and improvements in EU Member States FIUs in relation to dissemination, exchange and processing of information, following the PANA Recommendations and the mapping report carried out by the EU FIUs Platform 1a _________________ 1a European Parliament recommendation of 13 December 2017 to the Council and the Commission following the inquiry into money laundering, tax avoidance and tax evasion (Texts adopted, P8_TA- (2017)0491).
Amendment 862 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 129 a (new) 129 a. Notes that while some Member States are members of FATF, others are members of MONEYVAL which may lead to double standards; considers that all EU Member States should be members of FATF;
Amendment 863 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 129 b (new) 129 b. Calls on the Commission to draw up a report assessing the necessity of uniformisation or harmonisation of the organisational status conferred to FIUs in Member States, to ensure better cooperation and exchange of information, without interfering with their independence;
Amendment 864 #
129 c. Calls on the Commission to propose legislation for the creation of a European Financial Police within the framework of Europol, with its own autonomous investigatory competence, based on the European legal framework to tackle cross-border tax fraud, money laundering, financing of terrorism and predicate offences;
Amendment 865 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 130 130. Welcomes the fact that AMLD5 has broadened the list of obliged entities to include providers engaged in exchange services between virtual currencies and fiat currencies, custodian wallet providers, art traders and free ports; calls on the Commission to further broaden the list of obliged entities to include agents and service providers engaged in the trade of citizenship and residency or acting as advisors in residence and citizenship planning;
Amendment 866 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 130 130. Welcomes the fact that AMLD5 has broadened the list of obliged entities to include providers engaged in exchange services between virtual currencies and fiat currencies, custodian wallet providers, art traders and free ports; calls on the Commission to further broaden the list of obliged entities to include agents and service providers engaged in the trade of citizenship and residency or acting as advisors in residence and citizenship planning;
Amendment 867 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 130 130. Welcomes the fact that AMLD5 has broadened the list of obliged entities to include providers engaged in exchange services between virtual currencies and fiat currencies, custodian wallet providers, art traders and free ports; calls on the Commission to extend the list of obliged entities to operators and service providers involved in trade in citizenship or residence permits or acting as advisers in this field;
Amendment 868 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 130 130. Welcomes the fact that AMLD5 has broadened the list of obliged entities to include providers engaged in exchange services between virtual currencies and fiat currencies, custodian wallet providers, art traders and free ports; urges the Commission to closely follow-up on relevant crypto players that are currently not caught by AMLD5, and to expand the list of obliged entities when required;
Amendment 869 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 130 a (new) 130а. Calls on the Commission, in the forthcoming review of the Anti-Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing Directive, to include on the list of obliged entities service providers in the field of transactions involving exchanges of one or more virtual currencies;
Amendment 87 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 a (new) 6 a. Calls on the Council and Member States to prioritise projects, notably with the support of the Fiscalis programme, aimed at quantifying the magnitude of tax avoidance in order to better address the current tax gap; stresses that the European Parliament has adopted1a an increase of the Fiscalis programme (EUR 300 million (2018 prices) or 339 million (current prices) as well as the ECON committee; _________________ 1a in the Multiannual Financial Framework 2021-2027 – Parliament’s position with a view to an agreement and the REPORT of 4 December 2018 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the ‘Fiscalis’ programme for cooperation in the field of taxation
Amendment 870 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 131 a (new) 131 a. Takes note of the repeated calls from obliged entities, namely financial institutions, for proper channels of enhanced dialogue, communication and exchange of information between private bodies and public authorities, on one hand, and among obliged entities themselves, on the other, to provide less fragmented information to FIUs; calls on the Commission to draw up guidelines in accordance with the AMLD5, for Member States to implement at national level in this regard, namely using the mechanisms provided in the General Data Protection Regulation for secure and lawful exchange of data;
Amendment 871 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 131 a (new) 131 a. Calls for the harmonisation of CDD at EU level, in particular, enhanced checks and systematic reporting shall be carried by obliged entities when performing CDD relating to business relationships or transactions involving countries identified by the EU Commission as ‘high-risk third countries’; calls for provisions to be made for penalties in the event of negligence or conflict of interests in cases of outsourcing;
Amendment 872 #
131a. Reiterates its call for an assessment by the Commission of the consequences of money laundering and tax crimes involving e-gaming activities; considers such an assessment to be a priority;
Amendment 873 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 133 133. Notes that the Union’s AML legislation obliges Member States to establish central registers containing complete beneficial ownership data for companies and trusts, and that it also provides for their interconnection; welcomes the fact that AMLD5 obliges Member States to ensure that the information on beneficial ownership is accessible in all cases to any member of the general public; stresses that the interconnection of registers should be ensured by the Commission; considers that the Commission should closely monitor the functioning of this interconnected system and assess, within a reasonable timeframe, whether it is working properly
Amendment 874 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 133 133. Notes that the Union’s AML legislation obliges Member States to establish central registers containing complete beneficial ownership data for companies and trusts, and that it also provides for their interconnection; welcomes the fact that AMLD5 obliges Member States to ensure that the information on beneficial ownership is accessible in all cases to any member of the general public; stresses that the interconnection of registers should be ensured by the Commission; considers that the Commission should closely monitor the functioning of this interconnected system and assess within a reasonable time whether it is working properly, and
Amendment 875 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 133 133. Notes that the Union’s AML legislation obliges Member States to establish central registers containing complete beneficial ownership data for companies and trusts, and that it also provides for their interconnection; welcomes the fact that AMLD5 obliges Member States to ensure that the
Amendment 876 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 133 133. Notes that the Union’s AML legislation obliges Member States to establish central registers containing complete beneficial ownership data for companies and trusts, and that it also provides for their interconnection; welcomes the fact that AMLD5 obliges Member States to ensure that the information on beneficial ownership is accessible in all cases to any member of the general public;
Amendment 877 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 133 133. Notes that the Union’s AML legislation obliges Member States to establish central registers containing complete beneficial ownership data for companies and trusts, and that it also provides for their interconnection; welcomes the fact that AMLD5 obliges Member States to ensure that the information on beneficial ownership is accessible in all cases to any member of the general public; calls on Member States to establish freely accessible and open data registers; stresses that the interconnection of registers should be ensured by the Commission; calls on the Commission to develop and issue technical guidelines to facilitate convergence of format, interoperability and interconnection of Member States’ registers considers that the Commission should closely monitor the functioning of this interconnected system and assess within a reasonable time whether it is working properly and whether it should be supplemented by the establishment of an EU public register of beneficial ownership;
Amendment 878 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 133 133. Notes that the Union’s AML legislation obliges Member States to establish central registers containing complete beneficial ownership data for companies and trusts, and that it also provides for their interconnection; welcomes the fact that AMLD5 obliges Member States to ensure that the information on beneficial ownership is accessible in all cases to any member of the general public; calls on Member States to establish freely accessible and open data registers; stresses that the interconnection of registers should be ensured by the Commission; calls on the Commission to issue technical guidelines to facilitate convergence of format, interoperability and interconnection of Member States’ registers; considers that the Commission should closely monitor the functioning of this interconnected system and assess within a reasonable time whether it is working properly and whether it should be supplemented by the establishment of an EU public register of beneficial ownership;
Amendment 879 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 133 133. Notes that the Union’s AML legislation obliges Member States to establish central registers containing complete beneficial ownership data for companies and trusts, and that it also provides for their interconnection; welcomes the fact that AMLD5 obliges Member States to ensure that the information on beneficial ownership is accessible in all cases to any member of the general public except where, exceptionally, such information would expose the beneficial owner to a disproportionate risk of fraud, kidnapping, blackmail, extortion, harassment, violence or intimidation; stresses that the interconnection of registers should be ensured by the Commission; considers that the Commission should closely monitor the functioning of this interconnected system and assess within a reasonable time whether it is working properly and whether it should be supplemented by the establishment of an EU public register of beneficial ownership;
Amendment 88 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 a (new) 7 a. (new) Welcomes the recent estimates of the non-observed economy’ (NOE) –often called shadow economy – in the 2017 Survey Tax Policies in the European Union1a which provides an indirect broader indication of tax evasion; stresses that the value of the NOE measures economic activities, which may not be captured in the basic data sources used for compiling national accounts; _________________ 1a Tax Policies in the European Union 2017 Survey, ISBN 978-92-79-72282-0
Amendment 880 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 133 a (new) Amendment 881 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 133 a (new) 133 a. Calls on Member States to ensure that registers of beneficial owners contain verification mechanisms to ensure the accuracy of the data; calls on the Commission to make assessment of verification mechanisms and reliability of the data in its reviews;
Amendment 882 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 133 a (new) 133 a. (new) Calls on the Commission to lead a global initiative for the establishment of public central registers in all world jurisdictions; stresses in this regard the vital role of international organisations such as the OECD and the UN;
Amendment 883 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 133 a (new) 133 a. Is concerned of the poor quality of the beneficial ownership information collected in the national registers and calls on the EBA to monitor the correctness of the information;
Amendment 884 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 134 Amendment 885 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 134 134. Calls for
Amendment 886 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 135 a (new) 135 a. Takes notes that, in respect of trusts, national registers will only be accessible to those demonstrating a legitimate interest to access; stresses that Member States remain free to open the beneficial ownership registers for trust to the public;
Amendment 887 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 136 136. Underscores the problem of money laundering through investment in real
Amendment 888 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 136 136. Underscores the problem of money laundering through investment in real estate in European cities through foreign shell companies; recalls that the Commission should assess the necessity and proportionality of harmonising the information in the land and real estate registers and assess the need for the interconnection of those registers;
Amendment 889 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 136 136. Underscores the problem of money laundering through investment in real estate in European cities through foreign shell companies; recognises that these type of practices have serious externalities on house prices in local markets that negatively affect the access to affordable housing of the residents in those cities; recalls that the Commission should assess the necessity and proportionality of harmonising the information in the land and real estate registers and assess the need for the interconnection of those registers; calls on the Commission, if appropriate, to accompany the report with a legislative proposal; is concerned that money laundering is also done through life insurance contracts and financial instruments and is, therefore, of the opinion that beneficial ownership information on these assets should also be available to authorities; is of the opinion that also beneficial owner should be registered in real estate registers and not only mere legal owners possibly hiding the ultimate beneficial owner and calls on the Commission to put forward a legislative proposal to amend the AMLD5 in this regard;
Amendment 89 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Highlights that close to 40 % of MNEs’ profits are shifted to tax havens globally each year25
Amendment 890 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 136 136. Underscores the problem of money laundering through investment in real estate in European cities through foreign shell companies; recalls that the Commission should assess the necessity
Amendment 891 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 137 137. Notes that under AMLD5 the Commission must carry out an analysis of the feasibility of specific measures and mechanisms at Union and Member State level making it possible to collect and access the beneficial ownership information of corporate and other legal entities incorporated outside of the Union;
Amendment 892 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 138 Amendment 893 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 138 138. Underlines the positive potential of new distributed ledger technologies, such as blockchain technology; notes at the same time the increasing abuse of new payment and transfer methods based on these technologies to launder criminal proceeds or to commit other financial crimes; acknowledges the need to monitor technological developments to ensure that legislation addresses in an effective manner the abuse of new technologies and anonymity, which facilitates criminal activity, without curtailing its positive aspects; stresses that among the latter, there have been the emerging opportunities to develop a decentralised digitalised world, with notably the progress of crowdfunding, results in time and money savings for smaller enterprises and peer-to-peer cheap secure transactions;
Amendment 894 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 138 138. Underlines the positive potential of new distributed ledger technologies, such as blockchain technology; notes at the same time the increasing abuse of new payment and transfer methods based on these technologies to launder criminal proceeds or to commit other financial crimes; acknowledges the need to monitor technological developments to ensure that legislation addresses in an effective manner the abuse of new technologies and anonymity, which facilitates criminal activity; considers that money laundering risks of virtual currencies could be significantly reduced if virtual currencies were regulated as financial instruments;
Amendment 895 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 138 138. Underlines the positive potential of new distributed ledger technologies, such as blockchain technology; notes at the same time the increasing abuse of new payment and transfer methods based on these technologies, making use of anonymous transactions to launder criminal proceeds or to commit other financial crimes; acknowledges the need to monitor technological developments to ensure that
Amendment 896 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 138 138. Underlines the positive potential of new distributed ledger technologies, such as blockchain technology; notes at the same time the increasing abuse of new payment and transfer methods based on these technologies to launder criminal proceeds, to evade taxes or to commit other financial crimes; acknowledges the need to monitor technological developments to ensure that legislation addresses in an effective manner the abuse of new technologies and anonymity, which facilitates criminal activity;
Amendment 897 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 138 138. Underlines the positive potential of new distributed ledger technologies, such as blockchain technology; notes at the same time the increasing abuse of new
Amendment 898 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 138 138. Underlines the positive potential of new distributed ledger technologies, such as blockchain technology; notes at the same time the increasing abuse of new payment and transfer methods based on these technologies to launder criminal proceeds or to commit other financial crimes; acknowledges the need to monitor fast-changing technological developments to ensure that legislation addresses in an effective manner the abuse of new technologies and anonymity, which facilitates criminal activity;
Amendment 899 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 138 138. Underlines the positive potential of
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 8 a (new) 8a having regard to its resolution of 11 April 2018 on protection of investigative journalists in Europe: the case of Slovak journalist Jan Kuciak and Martina Kušnírová
Amendment 90 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Highlights that close to 40 % of MNEs’ profits are shifted to tax havens globally each year25
Amendment 900 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 138 a (new) 138a. Stresses that the development and use of ‘virtual currencies’ and, more generally, of cryptoassets is a long-term trend that is expected to continue and increase in the coming years, in particular through the use of coins for various purposes, such as corporate financing; calls on the Commission to develop an appropriate framework at European level to manage these developments, drawing inspiration from work at international level and from European bodies such as the ESMA; considers that this framework should both provide the necessary safeguards against the specific risks posed by cryptoassets and also allow for innovation; recalls that some Member States have already adopted various types of framework for specific segments of this sector, such as initial coin offerings, which should be a source of inspiration for future actions;
Amendment 901 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 138 a (new) 138 a. Calls on the Commission to closely monitor technological developments, assess technological risks and potential loopholes, support resilience to a cyberattack or a system breakdown, and promote data protection projects; encourages competent authorities and the Commission to develop stress testing for distributed ledger technologies applications;
Amendment 902 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 138 a (new) 138a. Recalls the importance of maintaining a balance between strong encryption for computer security, data protection and privacy protection and the need to offer guarantees for legitimate access to information for the purpose of criminal investigations by law enforcement bodies.
Amendment 903 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 138 a (new) 138 a. Notes that because of the anonymity provided to users by virtual currencies, transactions cannot be monitored by authorities, increasing the risk of money laundering and tax evasion; stresses in this regard that virtual currencies can be used to circumvent the exchange of information system;
Amendment 904 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 138 a (new) 138a. Calls, in this context, on the Member States to implement, as soon as possible, the fifth Anti-Money Laundering Directive, which imposes an obligation on virtual currency wallet and exchange services to identify their customers, making it difficult to use virtual currencies anonymously;
Amendment 905 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 138 b (new) 138 b. Acknowledges that the decentralised aspect of virtual currencies and the lack of clear intermediaries complicates regulation activities; welcomes the fact that AMLD5 includes some virtual currencies’ actors; regrets however that some important actors are not covered by anti-money laundering rules, like cryptocurrency exchanges, trading platforms, or software or hardware wallets;
Amendment 906 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 138 c (new) 138 c. Calls on the Commission to issue a proposal for a EU regulation of virtual currencies, including licensing requirements and uplifting anonymity;
Amendment 907 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 139 139. Stresses that the FATF has recently highlighted the urgent need for all countries to take coordinated action to prevent the use of virtual assets for crime and terrorism, urging all jurisdictions to
Amendment 908 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 139 139. Stresses that the FATF has recently highlighted the urgent need for all countries to take coordinated action to prevent the use of virtual assets for crime and terrorism, urging all jurisdictions to take legal and practical steps to prevent the misuse of virtual assets73
Amendment 909 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 139 139. Stresses that the FATF has recently highlighted the urgent need for all countries to take coordinated action to prevent the use of virtual
Amendment 91 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Highlights that close to 40 % of MNEs’ profits are shifted to tax havens globally each year and recognizes that certain jurisdictions within the EU, namely Luxemburg, Ireland and the Netherlands, are regular receivers of financial flows and reported profits generated elsewhere in the Union due to their very low or zero corporate, dividend and capital gains tax rates, and special tax provisions25
Amendment 910 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 139 139. Stresses that the FATF has recently highlighted the urgent need for all countries to take coordinated action to prevent the use of virtual
Amendment 911 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 139 a (new) 139 a. Stresses the rise of the e-gaming (internet gambling) sector on the Isle of Man, which already accounts for 18% of Manx national income; reiterates its call for an urgent assessment by the Commission of the implications for money laundering and tax crimes involving e- gaming activities;
Amendment 912 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 139 a (new) 139a. Reiterates its call for a rapid assessment by the Commission of the consequences of money laundering and tax crimes involving e-gaming activities;
Amendment 913 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 139 b (new) 139 b. Urges the Commission to give clear guidance under which conditions virtual currencies can be classified as financial instruments and under which circumstances existing EU regulation is applicable for initial coin offerings;
Amendment 914 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 139 c (new) 139 c. Stresses that FIUs should be able to associate virtual currency addresses to the identity of the owner of virtual currencies, and that mandatory registration of users by designated authorities should be further assessed by the Commission;
Amendment 915 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 139 d (new) 139 d. Stresses that both Europol and individual Member States have informally engaged with the virtual currency industry to ensure cooperation in acting against illicit finance; urges to formalise this interaction through the establishment of public-private partnerships on virtual currencies;
Amendment 916 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 140 140. Takes note of the expert-level work on electronic identification and remote KYC processes, which explores issues such as the possibility of financial institutions using electronic identification (e-ID) and of KYC portability to identify customers digitally; points out the advantages of having a European system of e-ID;
Amendment 917 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 140 140. Takes note of the expert-level work on electronic identification and remote KYC processes, which explores issues such as the possibility of financial institutions using electronic identification (e-ID) and of KYC portability to identify customers digitally; calls on the Commission to come forward swiftly with proposals to this effect;
Amendment 918 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 140 140. Takes note of the expert-level work on electronic identification and remote KYC processes, which explores issues such as the possibility of financial institutions using electronic identification (e-ID) and of KYC portability to identify customers digitally, and calls for this work to be presented swiftly;
Amendment 919 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 140 a (new) 140a. Considers that action should be developed at European level to manage cryptoassets; considers that existing regulatory frameworks have not been developed to be applied to emerging activities or technologies such as virtual currencies, cryptoassets or initial coin offerings, and could therefore have a negative impact on innovation; considers that the application of all or part of the MiFID2/R regime could have its advantages, but that the cumbersome nature of the framework, which does not allow the issues raised by cryptoassets to be adequately addressed, means it could have a dissuasive effect on the development of these activities and technologies and the competitiveness of the European Union; considers passporting to be one of the main issues, once cryptoassets are classified as a financial instrument or in another category; calls on the European supervisory authorities to develop recommendations for future Commission proposals on this subject;
Amendment 92 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Highlights that close to 40 % of MNEs’ profits are shifted to tax havens globally each year25; points out that MNEs in high-tax countries pay some 30 % less tax than comparable domestic firms and that aggressive tax planning distorts competition between, on the one hand, tax-avoiding firms and, on the other, SMEs with no comparable access to cross-border tax planning arrangements; _________________ 25 Tørsløv, Wier and Zucman ‘The missing profits of nations’, National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper 24701, 2018.
Amendment 920 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 140 a (new) 140 a. Urges the Commission to lead on creating a global framework regulating virtual currencies which takes into consideration the risks of these new technologies; recalls the dangers posed to consumers by Initial Coin Offerings (ICO’s) and urges the Commission to enact a proposal for their regulation as financial operations; notes in particular that cryptocurrencies' opacity can be used to facilitate money laundering and tax evasion; calls on the Commission to draft legislative proposals to ban certain anonymity measures on specific cryptocurrencies, on a case-by-case basis;
Amendment 921 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 140 a (new) 140 a. Notes that virtual currencies are used by retail investors as substitutes for other assets and that, unlike other financial instruments, virtual currencies are largely unregulated at present;
Amendment 922 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 141 141.
Amendment 923 #
141. Recalls that EU AML legislation requires Member States to lay down sanctions for breaches of anti-money laundering rules against banks and intermediaries that are knowingly, wilfully and systematically involved in illegal tax or money laundering schemes; stresses that these sanctions must be effective, proportionate and dissuasive;
Amendment 924 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 141 141. Recalls that EU AML legislation requires Member States to lay down sanctions for breaches of anti-money laundering rules; stresses that these sanctions must be effective, proportionate and dissuasive; recalls that EU anti-money laundering legislation obliges Member States to publish information and statistics on the implementation of anti- money laundering measures, in particular that decisions on administrative measures or sanctions for breaches of anti-money laundering provisions must be published on the official websites of the competent authorities immediately when the person to be penalised has been informed of the decision, and that the publication should include at least information on the type and nature of the breach and the identity of those responsible; calls on the Member States, in addition, to publish information on the nature and level of sanctions imposed; calls on the Member States to apply sanctions and other measures also to members of executive bodies and other natural persons who under national law are responsible for breaches of anti- money laundering rules;
Amendment 925 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 141 141. Recalls that EU AML legislation requires Member States to lay down sanctions for breaches of anti-money laundering rules; stresses that these sanctions must be effective, proportionate and dissuasive; recalls that EU AML legislation requires Member States to publish information and statistics on AML enforcement actions, and in particular that a decision imposing an administrative sanction or measure for breach of EU AML legislation shall be published by the competent authorities on their official website immediately after the person sanctioned is informed of that decision and that the publication shall include at least information on the type and nature of the breach and the identity of the persons responsible; urges Member States to also publish the nature and value of the sanctions imposed; calls on Member States to also apply sanctions and measures to the members of the management body and to other natural persons who under national law are responsible for a breach of anti-money laundering rules;
Amendment 926 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 141 141. Recalls that EU AML legislation requires Member States to lay down sanctions for breaches of anti-money laundering rules; stresses that these sanctions must be effective, proportionate and dissuasive; recalls that EU AML legislation requires Member States to publish information and statistics on AML enforcement actions, and in particular that a decision imposing an administrative sanction or measure for breach of EU AML legislation shall be published by the competent authorities on their official website immediately after the person sanctioned is informed of that decision and that the publication shall include at least information on the type and nature of the breach and the identity of the persons responsible; urges Member States to also publish the nature and value of the sanctions imposed; calls on Member States to also apply sanctions and measures to the members of the management body and to other natural persons who under national law are responsible for a breach of anti-money laundering rules;
Amendment 927 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 141 141. Recalls that EU AML legislation requires Member States to lay down sanctions for breaches of anti-money laundering rules; stresses that these sanctions must be clear, effective, proportionate and dissuasive;
Amendment 928 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 141 141. Recalls that EU AML legislation requires Member States to lay down sanctions for breaches of anti-money laundering rules; stresses that these sanctions must be effective, proportionate and dissuasive; calls for a speedy implementation in EU Member States on the enforcement of fines for money laundering and sanctions violations;
Amendment 929 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 141 a (new) 141 a. Asks the EBA to monitor national investigations and the corresponding sanctions, and to submit an annual report to the European Commission.
Amendment 93 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Highlights that close to 40 % of MNEs’ profits are shifted to tax havens globally each year25 without states having developed an effective strategy; _________________ 25 Tørsløv, Wier and Zucman ‘The missing profits of nations’, National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper 24701, 2018.
Amendment 930 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 143 a (new) 143 a. Regrets that, concerning third countries, sanctions are not always applied or sufficiently deterrent in relevant cases; deplores the fact, in this context, that Member States, in spite of the recommendations put forward by the PANA committee, continue to oppose the imposition by the EU of sanctions on third countries whose tax systems are regarded as damaging to the Union; considers that, concerning the European Union, the Commission shall forward, every two years, to the European Parliament and the Council a report on national practices as regards the imposition of administrative and criminal penalties on legal and natural persons found guilty of fraud and financial crimes with a view to analyse whether different national regimes lead to regulatory arbitrage, whether they have a deterrent effect and are appropriate, taking into account the nature of the infractions and the good faith or not of the taxpayer; the Commission should accompany this report with proposals where relevant;
Amendment 931 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 143 a (new) 143 a. Recalls the position of the European Parliament in the PANA recommendations regarding the application of sanctions to enablers and promoters involved in illegal, harmful proven to have facilitated illegal, harmful or wrongful corporate tax arrangements; that the sanctions should be targeted towards the companies themselves as well as the management-level employees and board members responsible for the schemes; calling for the stringent application of effective sanctions on banks, providing for the suspension or withdrawal of the banking licence of financial institutions that are proven to be involved in promoting or enabling money laundering, tax evasion or aggressive tax planning; and encouraging Member States to ensure that the fines and pecuniary sanctions imposed on tax evaders and intermediaries are not tax- base deductible; 1a _________________ 1a European Parliament recommendation of 13 December 2017 to the Council and the Commission following the inquiry into money laundering, tax avoidance and tax evasion (Texts adopted, P8_TA- (2017)0491).
Amendment 932 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 143 a (new) 143 a. Calls for EU wide sanctions on human rights abuses inspired by the US Global Magnitsky Act, which allows for the imposition of visa bans and targeted sanctions such as blocking property and interests in property within EU jurisdiction on individual public officials, or persons acting in an official capacity, who are responsible for acts of corruption or serious human rights violations;
Amendment 933 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 143 b (new) 143 b. Reiterates previous calls by the European Parliament to impose a European Magnitsky Act, as well as the political consent given by the Foreign Affairs Council on 10 December 2018;stresses the importance of an immediate sanctions list in order to secure an effective implementation of a European Magnitsky Act, enabling the blocking of property and interests in property from being transferred, exported or withdrawn;
Amendment 934 #
Motion for a resolution Subheading 5.7 a (new) An EU anti-money laundering list of high-risk third countries
Amendment 935 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 145 145. Takes note of the Methodology for identifying high-risk third countries under Directive (EU) 2015/849 published on 22 June 2018 (SWD(2018)0362) and calls on the Commission to make the blacklisting process fully transparent to the public;
Amendment 936 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 145 a (new) 145 a. (new) Believes that consistency and complementarity of the anti-money laundering list of high-risk third countries with the European list of non-cooperative jurisdictions need to be ensured; reiterates its call to entrust the Commission with a central role for the management of both lists;
Amendment 937 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 145 a (new) 145 a. Notes that EU Member States are not treated in the same way as third countries, when they should be according to the Financial Action Task Force, and that this represents a problem when aiming at having common standards in respect of AML; calls for Member States to be peer reviewed in the same way third countries are in FATF; calls the Commission, as a founding member in 1989 of the Financial Action Task Force, to be peer reviewed by FATF as well1a _________________ 1a TAX3 PUBLIC HEARING“RELATIONS WITH SWITZERLAND IN TAX MATTERS AND THE FIGHT AGAINST MONEYLAUNDERING” held on October 1, 2018.
Amendment 938 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 145 b (new) Amendment 939 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 146 146.
Amendment 94 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 a (new) 8 a. Notes the tendency of corporations to produce their own estimates of ETRs - often based on bogus methods - which are then used to influence policy in a way that diminishes their tax liabilities;
Amendment 940 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 146 146. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to ensure that the EU speaks with
Amendment 941 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 146 146. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to
Amendment 942 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 146 a (new) 146a. Calls on the Commission to provide technical assistance to third countries with the aim of developing effective systems for combating money laundering and the continuous improvement thereof;
Amendment 943 #
Motion for a resolution Subheading 6 a (new) (new para) Points out that a European fair tax system requires a fairer global tax environment; reiterates its call to monitor ongoing tax reforms of third countries;
Amendment 944 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 147 Amendment 945 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 147 Amendment 946 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 147 147.
Amendment 947 #
147. Is worried about the accelerating corporate, dividend or capital gains tax race to the bottom worldwide in terms of nominal tax rate76 77 ; _________________ 76 The average corporate income tax rate across the OECD dropped from 32.5 % in 2000 to 23.9 % in 2018. Overall, 22 of the 38 countries surveyed in the latest tax policy reform 2018 report from the OECD now have combined statutory corporate income tax rates equal to or below 25 %, compared with only six in 2000. Source: OECD and Selected Partner Economies, Tax Policy Reforms 2018. 77 It is also worth noting that the EU 28 are already well below this level, with an average corporate income tax rate in 2018 of 21.9 %, down from 32 % in 2000, according to the Commission: Taxation Trends in the European Union - Data for the EU Member States, Iceland and Norward, 2018 Edition (page 36) and Taxation Trends in the European Union - Data for the EU Member States, Iceland and Norward, 2015 Edition (page 147).
Amendment 948 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 147 147. Is worried about the accelerating corporate tax race to the bottom worldwide and within the EU in terms of nominal tax rate76 77 ;
Amendment 949 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 148 148. Recognises the effort made by some third countries to act decisively against BEPS; stresses, however, that such reforms should remain in line with existing WTO rules; considers the information gathered during the committee visit to Washington DC about the US tax reforms and their possible impact on international cooperation to be of particular importance; finds that some of the provisions of the US Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 would be incompatible with existing WTO rules
Amendment 95 #
Motion for a resolution Subheading 1.3 Tax fraud, tax evasion and
Amendment 950 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 148 148.
Amendment 951 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 149 149. Calls on the Commission to conduct a mapping exercise to analyse the extent of reciprocity in the exchange of information between the US and Member States; calls on the Council to give a mandate to the Commission to negotiate an agreement with the US to ensure reciprocity in the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA); calls on the Commission and Council to consider sanctions, like withholding tax on payments of EU-source income or the introduction on the list of non-cooperative jurisdictions for tax purposes, if the US does not ensure reciprocity in the FATCA;
Amendment 952 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 149 a (new) 149 a. Notes that two FATCA Intergovernmental Agreements (IGAs) were developed to help FATCA fit with international laws: an IGA Model 1 by which foreign financial institutions report relevant information to their home authorities, which then passes this on to the US IRS, and an IGA Model 2 by which foreign financial institutions do not report to their home governments but directly to the IRS; notes that under Model 1 there are 2 versions, one of which is reciprocal and is the most common one; deplores that reciprocity is highly unbalanced with the US getting far more information from overseas than foreign governments; deplores that even in the best scenario of a reciprocal FATCA, the information compiled by the US institutions is full of loopholes, as it allows for senior managers to be registered if there is no person owning more than 25% of the bank's corporate client1a; calls on the EU Member States, to ensure that they are receiving reliable information when they get into a reciprocal FATCA with the US; _________________ 1a https://financialsecrecyindex.com/PDF/U SA.pdf
Amendment 953 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 149 a (new) 149 a. Calls on the Commission and Member States to monitor new corporate tax provisions of countries which cooperate with the EU on the basis of an international agreement1d; _________________ 1d As mentioned in the public hearing held by TAX 3 committee on 1st of October: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/committee s/en/tax3/publications.html?id=20181018 CPU21161
Amendment 954 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 149 a (new) 149 a. Reiterates the proposals contained in its Resolution of 5 July 2018 “on the adverse effects of the US Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA) on EU citizens and in particular ‘accidental Americans’” which calls on the Commission to take action to ensure that the fundamental rights of all citizens, in particular those of ‘accidental Americans’, are guaranteed, and calls on the Commission and the Council to present a joint EU approach to FATCA in order to adequately protect the rights of European citizens (in particular ‘accidental Americans’) and improve equal reciprocity in the automatic exchange of information by the US;
Amendment 955 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 149 b (new) 149 b. Calls on the Commission and EU Member States to demand that the US enters into the CRS instead of following with the exchange of information under FATCA;
Amendment 957 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 150 150. Recalls the importance of a common EU list of non-cooperati
Amendment 958 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 150 150. Recalls the importance of a common credible EU list of non- cooperative non-EU jurisdictions for tax purposes (hereinafter ‘EU list’) based on comprehensive, transparent, robust, objectively verifiable and commonly accepted criteria that is regularly updated;
Amendment 959 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 150 150. Recalls the importance of a common EU list of non-cooperative third country jurisdictions for tax purposes (hereinafter ‘EU list’) based on comprehensive, transparent, robust, objectively verifiable and commonly accepted criteria that is regularly updated;
Amendment 96 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Recalls that the fight against tax evasion and fraud tackles illegal acts, whereas the fight against tax avoidance addresses situations that are a priori within the limits of the law but against its spirit; notes however that it is completely legitimate within a globally liberalised financial system for corporations (and individuals) to seek to minimise their tax dues over their global commitments, so long as they fully observe all relevant laws and regulations, which clearly can and should be amended progressively by relevant authorities to ensure that all tax dues are fully identified and really being paid and not evaded;
Amendment 960 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 150 150. Recalls the importance of a common EU list of non-cooperative jurisdictions for tax purposes (hereinafter ‘EU list’) based on comprehensive, transparent, robust, objectively verifiable and commonly accepted criteria that is regularly updated, accompanied by appropriate and dissuasive countermeasures;
Amendment 961 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 150 150. Recalls the importance of a common EU list of non-cooperative jurisdictions for tax purposes (hereinafter ‘EU list’) based on comprehensive, transparent, robust, objectively verifiable and commonly accepted criteria that is regularly updated and includes tax havens inside and outside the EU;
Amendment 962 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 150 a (new) 150 a. Considers that tax havens, tax evasion and tax avoidance have been contributing to the rise in inequalities, by depriving countries of the revenue needed to provide public, quality and free education and healthcare services, social security, and affordable housing and transportation, and to build essential infrastructure for achieving social development and economic growth;
Amendment 963 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 151 151. Welcomes the adoption by the Council of the first EU list on 5 December 2017 and the ongoing monitoring of the commitments made by third countries; notes that the list has been updated several times on the basis of the assessment of those commitments; underlines that this assessment is based on criteria deriving from a technical scoreboard and that Parliament had no legal involvement in this process; calls in this context on the Commission and the Council to inform Parliament in detail ahead of any proposed change to the list; calls on the Council to publish a regular progress report regarding black- and grey-listed jurisdictions as part of the regular update from the CoC Group to the Council; wonders whether a common list of non-cooperating EU Member States and territories should be drawn up;
Amendment 964 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 151 151. Welcomes the adoption by the Council of the first EU list on 5 December 2017 and the ongoing monitoring of the commitments made by third countries; notes that the list has been updated several times on the basis of the assessment of those commitments and points out that the black list by now only consists of a handful of countries; underlines that this assessment is based on criteria deriving from a technical scoreboard and that Parliament had no legal involvement in this process
Amendment 965 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 151 151. Welcomes the adoption by the Council of the first EU list on 5 December 2017 and the ongoing monitoring of the commitments made by third countries; notes that the list has been updated several times on the basis of the assessment of those commitments;
Amendment 966 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 151 151. Welcomes the adoption by the Council of the first EU list on 5 December 2017 and the ongoing monitoring of the commitments made by third countries; is of the opinion that also EU countries should be included in the screening of non- cooperative jurisdictions for tax purposes; notes that the list has been updated several times on the basis of the assessment of those commitments;
Amendment 967 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 151 151. Welcomes the adoption by the Council of the first EU list on 5 December 2017 and the ongoing monitoring of the commitments made by third countries; notes that the list has been updated several times on the basis of the assessment of those commitments and that various countries have been deleted from the EU list; underlines that this assessment is based on criteria deriving from a technical scoreboard and that Parliament had no legal involvement in this process; calls in this context on the Commission and the Council to inform Parliament in detail ahead of any proposed change to the list; calls on the Council to publish a regular progress report regarding black- and grey- listed jurisdictions as part of the regular update from the CoC Group to the Council;
Amendment 968 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 151 151.
Amendment 969 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 151 a (new) 151 a. Regrets that given that 2 out of the 3 criteria used by the Council refer to the OECD, the blacklist process seems more an extortive means of getting developing countries to implement standards that they have not participated in setting; than a serious effort to tackle tax evasion and tax avoidance;
Amendment 97 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Recalls that the fight against tax evasion and fraud tackles illegal acts, whereas the fight against tax avoidance addresses situations that are a priori within the limits of the law but against its spirit; calls therefore on simplification of the tax framework as soon as possible thereby avoiding debates about morality versus legality;
Amendment 970 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 151 a (new) 151 a. Recalls that on 9 November 2018, the EU list of non-cooperative jurisdictions for tax purposes was composed of only five tax jurisdictions: American Samoa, Guam, Samoa, Trinidad and Tobago, and the US Virgin Island;
Amendment 971 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 151 a (new) 151a. Regrets the fact that the blacklist contains only five countries and is therefore of no use in combating money laundering, financial crime, tax evasion and tax avoidance;
Amendment 972 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 151 a (new) 151 a. Deplores that the Commissioner in charge of taxation denies that there are also tax havens within the European Union;
Amendment 973 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 151 b (new) 151 b. Deeply regrets the use of criterion 3 in the EU list, requiring countries to commit to and implement the OECD BEPS actions. Over 100 developing countries were excluded from the negotiations of the OECD BEPS action plan, the outcomes of which reflect the priorities of OECD members and have raised concerns amongst developing countries. The EU listing process has pressured developing countries and heavily-indebted island states to implement rules they were not part of negotiating; Notes that this strongly goes against principles of democratic ownership and policy coherence for development; Deplores the threat of sanctions against Third Countries on the basis of non-transparent criteria that impose endorsement and implementation of the OECD BEPS actions;
Amendment 974 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 151 b (new) 151b. Calls therefore for a deletion from the published list to be made not simply whenever a commitment to reform has been undertaken but only when the changes can actually be verified;
Amendment 975 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 151 c (new) 151 c. Notes that the exclusion of EU Member States from the EU list is politically driven, may exacerbate tax competition and ATP within the EU and is viewed as political1a; _________________ 1a Eurodad et. al.,Tax Games: the Race to the Bottom, Europe’s role in supporting an unjust tax system 2017, December 2017, p37; and Oxfam, Blacklist or whitewash? What a real EU blacklist of tax havens should look like,2017.
Amendment 976 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 151 c (new) 151c. Regrets the fact that these lists are compiled only for non-EU countries and objects to the lack of a similar instrument for abuse in Member States;
Amendment 977 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 152 152. Deeply regrets the lack of transparency during the initial listing process by failing to ensure an objective application of the listing criteria laid down by ECOFIN, free from any political interference; welcomes, however, the improvement in transparency made by the disclosure of letters sent to jurisdictions screened by the CoC Group, as well as the set of commitment letters received; calls for all remaining undisclosed letters to be made publicly available to ensure scrutiny and proper implementation of commitments;
Amendment 978 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 152 152. Deeply regrets the lack of transparency during the initial listing process; welcomes, however, the improvement in transparency made by the disclosure of letters sent to jurisdictions screened by the CoC Group, as well as the set of commitment letters received; calls for all remaining undisclosed letters to be made publicly available to ensure scrutiny and proper implementation of commitments; recommends to put countries that refuse to disclose their commitment letter on the blacklist;
Amendment 979 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 152 a (new) 152 a. Calls on the Council to provide clear information on the specific criteria used to clear 20jurisdictions from the 92 that were originally assessed, as at the moment only the names of such jurisdictions1a and the letters of comfort are available, but those do not allow for a clear understanding on why jurisdictions that are such relevant trade partners of the EU, such as the US who was identified to have a lack of transparency and preferential Corporate Income Tax regimes, were so rapidly cleared and not listed; _________________ 1a Council of the EU.2018, June 8. Code of Conduct Group (Business Taxation): Report to the Council/Endorsement. 9637/18
Amendment 98 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Recalls that the fight against tax evasion and fraud tackles illegal acts, whereas the fight against tax avoidance addresses situations that are a priori within the limits of the law but against its spirit and could be considered illegal; however, recalls with concern that this strict distinction ignores the existence of grey areas and fails to take sufficient account of the ability of powerful players to change tax law to suit themselves;
Amendment 980 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 152 a (new) 152 a. Recommends that the blacklisting process be made by a panel of independent experts rather than by the CoC group, so as to increase the objectivity and transparency of the EU list and to make it free from any political interference; believes that a more transparent and objective EU list will improve the credibility of the EU in its fight against tax havens;
Amendment 981 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 153 Amendment 982 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 153 153. Welcomes the recent clarifications from the CoC Group on fair taxation criteria, especially regarding the lack of economic substance for jurisdictions having no corporate income tax rate or a rate close to 0 %; calls on the Member States to work towards the gradual improvement of the EU listing criteria to cover all harmful tax practices79 by determining a minimum level of effective taxation and by reviewing all potential harmful practices granting large tax exemptions or deductions which are disconnected from the domestic economy; regrets that the same criteria used to include the jurisdictions of third countries on the European list do not apply internally to Member States and that the EU consequently loses credibility to call on other countries to comply with standards of tax good governance; _________________ 79 Work on fair taxation criteria 2.1 and 2.2 of Council conclusions 14166/16 of 8 November 2016.
Amendment 983 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 153 153. Welcomes the recent clarifications from the CoC Group on fair taxation criteria, especially regarding the lack of economic substance for jurisdictions having no corporate income tax rate or a rate close to 0 %; calls on the Member States to work towards the gradual improvement of the EU listing criteria to cover all harmful tax practices79
Amendment 984 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 153 a (new) 153 a. Welcomes the new OECD global standard on substantial activities factor to no or only nominal tax jurisdictions1a, largely inspired by the EU work on the EU listing process (Fair criterion 2.2 of the EU list); calls on EU Member States to push for a more ambitious global standard including a minimum level of effective taxation; _________________ 1a OECD, “Resumption of Application of Substantial Activities Factor to No or only Nominal Tax Jurisdictions Inclusive Framework on BEPS: Action 5”, http://www.oecd.org/tax/beps/resumption- of-application-of-substantial-activities- factors.pdf, 2018
Amendment 985 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 153 a (new) 153 a. Calls on Member states to push the G20 to reform the OECD blacklist criteria to go beyond pure tax transparency and tackle tax evasion and aggressive tax planning as well;
Amendment 986 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 153 b (new) 153 b. Reminds that, in order to improve the Union and Member States fight against money laundering, all available data, including macroeconomic ones, must be used effectively1e; _________________ 1e “The missing profits of nations” by T. Torslov, L. Wier and G. Zucman indicates in its first part that using modern macroeconomic models and data from published Balance of Payments, the tax revenue globally per year amounts to around 200 billion $ and Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) channelled through a tax haven jurisdiction amounts to a range between 10 to 30% of total FDI. These figures are quite higher than the estimations so far using other methods.
Amendment 987 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 154 Amendment 988 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 154 Amendment 989 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 154 154. Calls, in the specific case of Switzerland (currently on the grey list), for which no precise deadline is envisaged due to a previous agreement between Switzerland and the EU, for the country to be put on Annex I by the end of 2019, provided that, following the proper escalation process, Switzerland does not repeal its non-compliant tax regimes, which allow unequal treatment of foreign and domestic income as well as tax benefits for certain types of companies, by then;
Amendment 99 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Recalls that the fight against tax evasion and fraud tackles illegal acts, whereas the fight against tax avoidance addresses situations that are a priori within the limits of the law
Amendment 990 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 154 a (new) 154 a. Recalls a research study showing that tax avoidance via six EU Member States results in a loss of 42.8 billion in tax revenue in the other 22 Member States1a, which means that the net payment position of these countries can be offset against the losses they inflict on the tax base of other Member States; notes for instance, that the Netherlands impose a net cost on the Union as a whole of 11.2 billion euro, which means the country is in fact not a net contributor but a net recipient; _________________ 1a http://gabriel- zucman.eu/files/TWZ2018.pdf
Amendment 991 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 154 a (new) 154 a. Deeply regrets that EU countries were fully excluded from the screening process of the EU list, although several Member States fail to comply with the EU's own criteria; recalls that according to NGO's assessments, at least four or six EU Member States should be included in the list of non-cooperative jurisdictions if screened against the same criteria set by the EU to screen third countries1a; points out that such ex ante exemption undermines the legitimacy, credibility and effectiveness of the blacklisting tool; _________________ 1a According to the assessment conducted by Oxfam, the four countries are Ireland, Luxembourg, Malta and the Netherlands. Tax Justice Network adds Cyprus and the United Kingdom. Source: Oxfam, Blacklist or whitewash? What a real EU blacklist of tax havens should look like, November 2017; Tax Justice Network, Paradise lost, Who will feature on the common EU blacklist of non-cooperative tax jurisdictions?, November 2017
Amendment 992 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 154 a (new) 154 a. Calls in the specific case of non- cooperative tax jurisdictions inside the EU for measures, such as the suspension of budgetary commitments concerning Union funds, until the national tax legislation complies with regulatory standards (including automatic exchange of information and BEPS implementation);
Amendment 993 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 154 a (new) 154 a. Is concerned with the fact that even when Switzerland does repeal its non-compliant tax regimes, it may create new ones -as noted by some organizations and experts-, and that in that case the Council would still remove Switzerland from the grey list of non-cooperative tax jurisdictions1a;calls for the Council to re- consider their assessment on Switzerland and on any other third country that could be having a similar legislative change; _________________ 1a TAX3 PUBLIC HEARING“RELATIONS WITH SWITZERLAND IN TAX MATTERS AND THE FIGHT AGAINST MONEY LAUNDERING” held on October 1, 2018; and TAX3 Exchange of views with Fabrizia Lapecorella, Chair of the Code of Conduct Group on Business Taxation, held on October 10,2018.
Amendment 994 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 154 b (new) 154 b. Welcomes the statement made by the Chair of the Code of Conduct Group during the TAX3 committee hearing of 10 October 2018, which reported that the possibility of screening Member States against the same criteria set for the EU list is under discussion in the context of the revision of the mandate of the Code Group;
Amendment 995 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 154 b (new) 154 b. Notes that as of December 2018 there are only 5 countries remaining in the list; is concerned by what seems to soon end up in an empty listing process similar to that of the OECD which resulted in only Trinidad and Tobago remaining in the list; calls for the European Commission and the Council of the European Union to work on a more serious, and objective methodology,which does not rely in commitments but rather on an assessment of the effects of effectively implemented legislation;
Amendment 996 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 154 b (new) 154 b. Notes that the negotiations between the EU and Switzerland on the revision of the bilateral approach to reciprocal market access are still ongoing; calls on the Commission to ensure that the final agreement between the EU and Switzerland contains a tax good governance clause including specific rules on State aid under the form of a tax advantage, transparency requirements regarding the automatic exchange of information on taxation and beneficial ownership as well as anti-money laundering provisions;
Amendment 997 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 154 b (new) 154 b. Welcomes the expected review of the EU list in the first quarter of 2019; asks the Council to release a detailed assessment of commitments from jurisdictions which committed to reform and were listed on Annex II when the first EU list was released on December 5th2017; demands that jurisdictions listed on Annex II thanks to commitments made in 2017 are listed on Annex I if the due reforms have not been implemented by the end of 2018 or the agreed timeline;
Amendment 998 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 154 a (new) 154 a. Is concerned that Austrian residents who hold bank accounts with credit institutions in Liechtenstein are not affected by the Act on Common Reporting Standards if their capital incomes are yielded from asset structures (private foundations, establishments, trusts and the like), and the credit institution in Liechtenstein takes care of the taxation in accordance with bilateral treaties; calls on Austria to change its law in this regard so as to close the loophole of the CRS;
Amendment 999 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 154 c (new) 154 c. Recalls the European Parliament’s position on the EU list of non-cooperative tax jurisdictions regretting that the EU list of non-cooperative tax jurisdictions approved and published by the Council focuses only on jurisdictions outside the EU, omitting countries within the EU that have played a systematic role in promoting and enabling harmful tax practices and that do not meet the fair taxation criterion1a;and calls for the Commission and the Council to come up with an EU list of EU tax havens; _________________ 1a European Parliament recommendation of 13 December 2017 to the Council and the Commission following the inquiry into money laundering, tax avoidance and tax evasion (Texts adopted, P8_TA- (2017)0491).
source: 632.134
|
History
(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)
2019-07-06Show (14) Changes | Timetravel
| activities |
|
| commission |
|
| committees/0 |
|
| committees/0 |
|
| docs |
|
| events |
|
| links |
|
| other |
|
| procedure/Modified legal basis |
Rules of Procedure EP 159
|
| procedure/dossier_of_the_committee |
Old
TAX3/8/13409New
|
| procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure EP 207
|
| procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure EP 197
|
| procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Awaiting committee decisionNew
Procedure completed |
| procedure/subject |
Old
New
|
2018-06-19Show (5) Changes
| activities |
|
| committees |
|
| links |
|
| other |
|
| procedure |
|