Progress: Awaiting final decision
Role | Committee | Rapporteur | Shadows |
---|---|---|---|
Lead | ECON | NIEDERMAYER Luděk ( EPP) | REGNER Evelyn ( S&D), BOYER Gilles ( Renew), GRUFFAT Claude ( Verts/ALE), HOOGEVEEN Michiel ( ECR), BECK Gunnar ( ID), GUSMÃO José ( GUE/NGL) |
Lead committee dossier:
Legal Basis:
TFEU 115
Legal Basis:
TFEU 115Subjects
Events
The European Parliament adopted by 324 votes to 132 with 155 abstentions, following a special legislative procedure (Parliament’s consultation), a legislative resolution on the proposal for a Council directive on laying down rules on a debt-equity bias reduction allowance and on limiting the deductibility of interest for corporate income tax purposes.
The proposed directive lays down rules on the deduction, for corporation tax purposes, of an allowance on increases in equity capital and on limiting the tax deductibility of additional borrowing costs.
Parliament approved the Commission's proposal with amendments to assist SMEs.
Allowances on equity
According to Members, an allowance on equity should be deductible, for:
- 10 consecutive tax periods, from the taxable base of an SME or medium-sized group for corporate income tax purposes up to 30% of the taxpayer’s earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortisation (“EBITDA”);
- 7 consecutive tax periods, from the taxable base of any large undertaking or large group for corporate income tax purposes up to 30% of the taxpayer's EBITDA.
Member States should ensure that taxpayers are able to carry forward, for a maximum of 3 tax periods, the part of the allowance on equity which exceeds the percentages of EBITDA laid down in a tax period.
If the deductible allowance on equity is higher than the taxpayer’s net taxable income in a tax period, Member States should ensure that the taxpayer may carry forward the excess of allowance on equity as follows:
- for a maximum of 3 tax periods, where the taxpayer is a large undertaking or a large group;
- without time limitation, where the taxpayer is an SME or a medium-sized group.
The proposal stated that the base of the allowance on equity should be calculated as the difference between the level of net equity at the end of the tax period and the level of net equity at the end of the previous tax period, in other words, the year-on-year increase in net equity. According to Members, the allowance on equity should be equal to the base of the allowance multiplied by the 10-year risk-free interest rate for the relevant currency, increased by a risk premium of 1% for SMEs .
Limiting the deductibility of exceeding borrowing costs
To effectively address the tax-related debt-equity bias in a manner sustainable for the Union’s public finances, Members considered that an allowance for equity financing should be accompanied by a rule limiting the deductibility of exceeding borrowing costs for groups that are not medium-sized groups and undertakings that are not SMEs. However, given the adverse economic conditions stemming from the COVID-19 crisis and from the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine, that limitation rule should only be introduced as of 2027.
Report and review
By 31 December 2028, the Commission should present a report to the European Parliament and to the Council on the implementation and impact of this Directive accompanied, if appropriate, by a legislative proposal to amend this Directive.
That report should pay special attention to SMEs, in particular assessing whether the special conditions available to SMEs have proven to be sufficient to increase the attractiveness of equity financing to them.
Transposition
Each Member State should, before it transposes this Directive into national law, make public an assessment of the estimated fiscal costs of the measures to be adopted and the resulting decrease in the effective tax rate for companies, and take proper measures to protect tax revenues if needed.
Member States should ensure that the measures they adopt to transpose this Article into national law comply with the guidance provided by the Code of Conduct Group (business taxation) on notional interest deduction regimes.
PURPOSE: to provide tax incentives for equity to help companies grow, become stronger and more resilient.
PROPOSED ACT: Council Directive.
ROLE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT: the Council adopts the act after consulting the European Parliament but without being obliged to follow its opinion.
BACKGROUND: the current pro-debt bias of tax rules can incentivise companies to take on debt rather than increase equity to finance their growth.
Tax debt-equity bias arises from the different treatment of debt and equity financing costs for tax purposes and is a problem common to business across EU Member States. Despite this, only 6 Member States have taken tax measures to approximate the tax treatment of debt and equity.
The complete lack of relevant tax debt bias mitigating measures in 21 Member States along with the existence of significantly different measures in another six Member States may create distortions to the function of the internal market and can affect the location of investment in a significant manner.
An EU initiative would add value and ensure legal certainty and allow reducing compliance costs for business as taxpayers. It is also expected to boost competition in the single market by ensuring that all businesses, regardless of where they are located, have similar incentives towards appropriate financing.
This proposal is a follow-up to the Commission's Communication on Business Taxation for the 21st Century towards a strong, efficient and fair business tax system in the EU. It also contributes to the Capital Markets Union (CMU) Action Plan which aims to help companies raise the capital they need and improve their capital position, particularly during a period of recovery which involves higher levels of deficit and debt, as well as an increased need for equity investment.
This proposal also replies to the European Parliament’s expectation that the Commission would put forth a proposal for a debt-equity bias reduction allowance, including effective anti-avoidance provisions to avoid any allowance on equity being used as a new tool for base erosion.
CONTENT: with a view to addressing the tax-induced debt-equity bias across the single market in a coordinated way, this directive lays down rules to provide, under certain conditions, for the deductibility for tax purposes of notional interest on increases in equity and to limit the tax deductibility of exceeding borrowing costs . It applies to all taxpayers that are subject to corporate tax in one or more Member State, except for financial undertakings. Since small and medium enterprises (SMEs) usually face a higher burden to obtain financing, it is proposed to grant a higher notional interest rate to SMEs.
This measure will support businesses by introducing an allowance that will grant to equity the same tax treatment as debt . The proposal stipulates that increases in a taxpayer's equity from one tax year to the next will be deductible from its taxable base, similarly to what happens to debt.
By eliminating the tax distortion in favour of debt, the proposal aims to avoid over-reliance on debt and encouraging the re-equitisation of businesses.
The Commission considers that the preferred option should have a positive economic impact. Its main direct benefit is that it will promote higher capital ratios and thus reduce insolvency risks.
By increasing equity investments across the EU, this option is expected to indirectly promote the development of innovative technology. Equity is particularly important for fast-growing innovative companies in their early stages and scale-ups willing to compete globally. The green and digital transition requires new and innovative investments that will benefit from the measure.
Documents
- Commission response to text adopted in plenary: SP(2024)81
- Results of vote in Parliament: Results of vote in Parliament
- Decision by Parliament: T9-0006/2024
- Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading: A9-0387/2023
- Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading: A9-0387/2023
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE739.748
- Committee draft report: PE738.463
- Economic and Social Committee: opinion, report: CES2917/2022
- Document attached to the procedure: EUR-Lex
- Document attached to the procedure: SEC(2022)0204
- Document attached to the procedure: EUR-Lex
- Document attached to the procedure: SWD(2022)0144
- Document attached to the procedure: EUR-Lex
- Document attached to the procedure: SWD(2022)0145
- Document attached to the procedure: EUR-Lex
- Document attached to the procedure: SWD(2022)0146
- Legislative proposal published: COM(2022)0216
- Legislative proposal published: EUR-Lex
- Document attached to the procedure: EUR-Lex SEC(2022)0204
- Document attached to the procedure: EUR-Lex SWD(2022)0144
- Document attached to the procedure: EUR-Lex SWD(2022)0145
- Document attached to the procedure: EUR-Lex SWD(2022)0146
- Economic and Social Committee: opinion, report: CES2917/2022
- Committee draft report: PE738.463
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE739.748
- Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading: A9-0387/2023
- Commission response to text adopted in plenary: SP(2024)81
Votes
A9-0387/2023 – Luděk Niedermayer – Chapter II – title – Am 29 #
A9-0387/2023 – Luděk Niedermayer – Article 4 – Am 30D #
A9-0387/2023 – Luděk Niedermayer – Commission proposal #
Amendments | Dossier |
95 |
2022/0154(CNS)
2023/01/19
ECON
95 amendments...
Amendment 100 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 1 1. By 31 December 2027, the Commission shall present a report to the European Parliament and to the Council on the implementation of this Directive.
Amendment 101 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 1 1. By 31 December 2027, the Commission shall present a report to the European Parliament and to the Council on the implementation of this Directive. The report shall pay special attention to the link with other company tax legislation, namely a Directive ensuring a minimum effective tax rate for the global activities of large multinational groups and a Directive on Framework for Income Taxation in Europe (BEFIT).
Amendment 102 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 2 2.
Amendment 103 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 3 3. The Commission shall publish the report on its website. The report shall be accompanied by a legislative proposal where appropriate.
Amendment 104 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 Amendment 105 #
Proposal for a directive Article 10 Amendment 106 #
Proposal for a directive Article 10 a (new) Article 10 a Cost Assessment Before transposing this Directive in accordance with article 11, Member States shall make public an assessment of the foreseen costs of the measures and the resulting decrease in the effective tax rate for corporates. In case of an expected decrease in the effective tax rate of more than 5%, the Member State shall accompany the transposition of this Directive with measures to maintain the effective tax rate at the existing level.
Amendment 107 #
Proposal for a directive Article 11 – paragraph 2 Amendment 108 #
Proposal for a directive Article 11 – paragraph 2 Amendment 109 #
Proposal for a directive Article 11 – paragraph 2 2. Member States may defer the application of the provisions of this Directive to taxpayers that on [1 January 2024] benefit from an allowance on equity under national law for a period up to
Amendment 15 #
Proposal for a directive Title 1 Proposal for a COUNCIL DIRECTIVE on
Amendment 16 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 1 Amendment 17 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 1 (1) Promoting a fair and sustainable business environment, including through targeted tax measures that incentivise investment and growth, is a high political priority of the Union. To support sustainable and long-term corporate financing, the tax system should reduce the tax burden to a maximum and to minimise unintended distortions of business decisions, for example towards debt rather than equity financing. While the Commission’s Capital Markets Union 2020 Action Plan14 includes important actions to support such financing, for example Action 4 - Encouraging more long-term and equity financing from institutional investors,
Amendment 18 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 1 a (new) (1 a) The promotion of a competitive and resilient Capital Markets Union, having a strong equity market as one of its pillars, is essential for the promotion of jobs, economic growth and investment. This is particularly important in a context of foreseened economic downturn and after a succession of economic crisis that led many companies to rely on debt instruments. Private investment through equity is pivotal to tackle the economic challenges that lie ahead. Therefore, a legal instrument to harmonize the legislative solutions for the debt-equity bias, without prejudice to the legitimate and effective use of debt instruments, is necessary.
Amendment 19 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 1 a (new) (1 a) Whereas the burden of the promotion of capital markets should not be bared by governmental budget.
Amendment 20 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 2 (2) Member States’ tax systems allow too leniently the taxpayers to deduct interest payments on debt financing, and thereby reduce the corporate income tax liability
Amendment 21 #
(2) Member States’ tax systems allow the taxpayers to deduct interest payments on debt financing, and thereby reduce the corporate income tax liability, while costs related to equity financing are non-tax deductible in most Member States. The asymmetric tax treatment of debt and equity financing across the Union induces a bias towards debt in investment decisions. Moreover, where Member States provide for a tax allowance on equity financing in their domestic law, such national measures differ significantly in terms of policy design. It is therefore essential to safeguard a level playing field for equity solutions and debt instruments, having in regard the need to guarantee minimum levels of systematic coherence between national tax frameworks, namely at the tax benefits level.
Amendment 22 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 2 (2) Member States’ tax systems allow the taxpayers to deduct interest payments on debt financing, and thereby reduce the corporate income tax liability, while costs related to equity financing are non-tax deductible in most Member States. The asymmetric tax treatment of debt and equity financing across the Union induces a bias towards debt in investment decisions. Moreover, where Member States provide for a tax allowance on equity financing in their domestic law, such national measures differ significantly in
Amendment 23 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 2 (2) Member States’ tax systems allow the taxpayers to deduct interest payments on debt financing, and thereby reduce the corporate income tax liability, while costs related to equity financing are non-tax deductible in most Member States. The asymmetric tax treatment of debt and equity financing across the Union induces a bias towards debt in investment decisions. Moreover, where Member States provide for a tax allowance on equity financing in their domestic law, such national measures differ significantly in terms of policy design. By adopting this Directive, the Union answers the call by Parliament to address the tax-related debt-equity bias, including by reducing the interest deduction possibilities. 14a _________________ 14a Resolution of the European Parliament of 15 February 2022 on the impact of national tax reforms on the EU economy (2021/2074(INI)) (OJ C 342, 6.9.2022, p. 14).
Amendment 24 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 3 (3) In order to remove possible tax related distortions among Member States, it is necessary to lay down a common framework of rules to address the tax related debt-equity bias across the Union in a coordinated manner. Such rules should ensure that
Amendment 25 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 3 (3) In order to remove possible tax related distortions among Member States, it is necessary to lay down a common framework of rules to address the tax related debt-equity bias across the Union in a coordinated manner. Such rules should ensure that equity and debt financing are treated in a similar way for tax purposes across the single market. At the same time,
Amendment 26 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 3 (3) In order to remove possible tax related distortions among Member States, it is necessary to lay down a common framework of rules to address the tax related debt-equity bias across the Union in a coordinated manner, in full respect of the EU institutional framewok on tax matters established by the treaties. Such rules should ensure that equity and debt financing are treated in a similar way for tax purposes across the single market. At the same time, a common Union legislative framework should be sustainable also in the short term for Member States’ budgets. Such framework should therefore include rules, on the one hand, for the tax deductibility of equity financing costs and, on the other, for limiting the tax deductibility of debt financing costs.
Amendment 27 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 3 a (new) (3 a) In order to further develop the European Capital Markets Union, this proposal should aim at diversifying funding sources for European companies, with a particular focus on SMEs; therefore, it should avoid creating new costs and barriers to access financing for those companies that do not have easy access to capital markets; thus, limiting the deductability of their interest costs could hamper investment across Europe and should be limited.
Amendment 28 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 3 a (new) (3 a) Whereas tax avoidance and evasion have a transformative nature and creating new tax benefits increase the risk of potential new forms of harmful tax practices; whereas additional corporate tax benefits decrease the revenues of Member States and pressure public services.
Amendment 29 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 3 b (new) (3 b) The Directive should take into account the challenges related to the sustainability of Member States’ public finances in the short term and therefore, avoid leading to substantial losses in Member States’ revenues.
Amendment 30 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 4 (4) To ensure a simple and comprehensive legislative framework, the common framework of rules should apply to all undertakings in the Union that are subject to corporate income tax in a Member State.
Amendment 31 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 4 (4) To ensure a simple and comprehensive legislative framework, the
Amendment 32 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 5 Amendment 33 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 5 (5) To neutralise the bias against equity financing, an allowance should be envisaged so that increases in a taxpayer's equity from one tax period to the next are deductible from its taxable base, subject to certain conditions. The allowance should be calculated by multiplying half of the increase in equity with a notional interest rate based on risk-free interest rate as laid down in the implementing acts adopted pursuant to Article 77e(2) of Directive 2009/138/EC.
Amendment 34 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 5 (5) To neutralise the bias against equity financing, an allowance should be envisaged so that increases in a taxpayer's equity from one tax period to the next are deductible from its taxable base, subject to certain conditions. The allowance should be calculated by multiplying half of the increase in equity with a notional interest rate based on risk-free interest rate as laid down in the implementing acts adopted pursuant to Article 77e(2) of Directive 2009/138/EC. Such risk-free interest rates are already part of EU law and have been practically and effectively applied as such. Any part of the allowance that cannot be deducted in a tax period due to insufficient taxable profits may be carried forward. Taking into account the specific challenges that small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) face in accessing capital markets, an increased allowance on equity should be envisaged for taxpayers that are SMEs. In order for the deduction of an allowance on equity to be sustainable for public finances in the short term, it should be limited in time. To safeguard the system from abuses, it is necessary to exclude the tax value of a taxpayer's own shares as well as that of its participation in associated enterprises from the calculation of changes in equity. In the same vein, it is necessary to provide for the taxation of a decrease in a taxpayer’s equity from one tax period to the following one, to prevent an equity increase from being effected in an abusive manner. Such a rule would also encourage the retention of a level of equity. It would apply so that where there is a decrease in equity of a taxpayer that has benefitted from an allowance on equity increase, an amount calculated in the same way as the allowance would become taxable for 10 tax periods; unless the taxpayer provides evidence that this decrease is exclusively due to losses incurred during the tax period or due to a legal obligation.
Amendment 35 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 5 (5) To neutralise the bias against equity financing, an allowance should be envisaged so that increases in a taxpayer's equity from one tax period to the next are deductible from its taxable base, subject to certain conditions. Once this right has been granted, it should become irrevocable. The allowance should be calculated by multiplying the increase in equity with a notional interest rate based on risk-free interest rate as laid down in the implementing acts adopted pursuant to Article 77e(2) of Directive 2009/138/EC. Such risk-free interest rates are already part of EU law and have been practically and effectively applied as such. Any part of the allowance that cannot be deducted in a tax period due to insufficient taxable profits may be carried forward. Taking into account the specific challenges that small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) face in accessing capital markets, an increased allowance on equity should be envisaged for taxpayers that are SMEs. In order for the deduction of an allowance on equity to be sustainable for public finances in the short term, it should be limited in time. Their disadvantaged situation with smaller and more complicated financing possibilities and their exposure to longer loss periods leads to the need for longer tax deductibility periods than for larger companies. To safeguard the system from abuses, it is necessary to exclude the tax value of a taxpayer's own shares as well as that of its participation in associated enterprises from the calculation of changes in equity. In the same vein, it is necessary to provide for the taxation of a decrease in a taxpayer’s equity from one tax period to the following one, to prevent an equity increase from being effected in an abusive manner. Such a rule would also encourage the retention of a level of equity. It would apply so that where there is a decrease in equity of a taxpayer that has benefitted from an allowance on equity increase, an amount
Amendment 36 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 5 (5) To neutralise the bias against equity financing, an allowance should be envisaged so that increases in a taxpayer's equity from one tax period to the next are deductible from its taxable base, subject to certain conditions. The allowance should be calculated by multiplying the increase in equity with a notional interest rate based on risk-free interest rate as laid down in the implementing acts adopted pursuant to Article 77e(2) of Directive 2009/138/EC. Such risk-free interest rates are already part of EU law and have been practically and effectively applied as such. Any part of the allowance that cannot be deducted in a tax period due to insufficient taxable profits may be carried forward. Taking into account the specific challenges that small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) face in accessing capital markets, an increased allowance on equity should be envisaged for taxpayers that are SMEs. In order for the deduction of an allowance on equity to be sustainable for public finances in the
Amendment 37 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 6 Amendment 38 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 6 (6) In order to avoid a misuse of the deduction of the allowance on equity, it is necessary to lay down specific anti-tax avoidance rules. Such rules should target, in particular, schemes put in place to circumvent the conditions on which an equity increase qualifies for an allowance under this Directive, for instance, through the intra-group transfer of participations in associated enterprises. Such rules should also target schemes put in place to claim an allowance in the absence of any equity increase at group level. For example, intra- group debt financing or contributions in
Amendment 39 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 7 Amendment 40 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 7 (7) To effectively address the tax- related debt-equity bias in a manner beneficial, and not further harming the sustainab
Amendment 41 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 7 (7) To effectively address the tax- related debt-equity bias in a manner sustainable for the Union’s public finances, an allowance for equity financing should be accompanied by a limitation on the deductibility of debt financing costs. An interest limitation rule should therefore limit the deductibility of exceeding borrowing costs and apply independently from the allowance. Given the different objectives between such a rule and the existing anti-tax avoidance rule on interest limitation of Article 4 of Directive (EU) 2016/1164, both rules should be maintained. Taxpayers should first calculate the deductibility of exceeding borrowing costs under this Directive and then under ATAD.
Amendment 42 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 7 (7) To effectively address the tax- related debt-equity bias in a manner sustainable for the Union’s public finances, an allowance for equity financing should be accompanied by a limitation on the deductibility of debt financing costs for groups that are not medium- size groups and undertakings that are not SMEs. An interest limitation rule should therefore limit the deductibility of exceeding borrowing costs and apply independently from the allowance. Given the different objectives between such a rule and the existing anti-tax avoidance rule on interest limitation of Article 4 of Directive (EU) 2016/1164, both rules should be maintained. Taxpayers should first calculate the deductibility of exceeding borrowing costs under this Directive and then under ATAD. In the event that the latter results in a lower amount of deductible exceeding borrowing costs, the taxpayer should deduct this lower amount and carry forward or back any difference between the two amounts in accordance with Article 4 of ATAD.
Amendment 43 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 7 (7) To effectively address the tax- related debt-equity bias in a manner sustainable for the Union’s public finances, an allowance for equity financing should be accompanied by a limitation on the deductibility of debt financing costs, except for micro, small and medium-sized enterprises. An interest limitation rule should therefore limit the deductibility of exceeding
Amendment 44 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 7 (7) To effectively address the tax- related debt-equity bias in a manner sustainable for the Union’s public finances, an allowance for equity financing should be accompanied by a limitation on the deductibility of debt financing costs. An interest limitation rule should therefore limit the deductibility of exceeding borrowing costs and apply independently from the allowance, excluding from this to the SMEs and their loans, as they are more vulnerable. Given the different objectives between such a rule and the existing anti-tax avoidance rule on interest limitation of Article 4 of Directive (EU) 2016/1164, both rules should be maintained. Taxpayers should first calculate the deductibility of exceeding
Amendment 45 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 9 (9) In order to evaluate the effectiveness of this Directive, the Commission should prepare and publish an evaluation report on the basis of the information provided by Member States and of other available data. In its report, the Commission should assess in particular the suitability and effectiveness of the provisions in this Directive for SMEs and whether to extend the regime to a company's entire equity rather than its incremental equity increase. The report should be accompanied by a legislative proposal where appropriate.
Amendment 46 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 9 (9) In order to evaluate the effectiveness of this Directive, the Commission should prepare and publish an evaluation report on the basis of the information provided by Member States and of other available data. The Commission’s report should be published and, if appropriate, accompanied by a review with a view to increasing the effectiveness of this Directive and by a legislative proposal amending this Directive.
Amendment 47 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 9 (9) In order to evaluate the effectiveness of this Directive, the Commission should prepare and publish an evaluation report on the basis of the information provided by Member States and of other available data. The evaluation should include a section dedicated exclusively to SMEs and the impact on them. In the case of poor results, the Commission should present a proposal to remedy the problems identified.
Amendment 48 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 9 (9) In order to evaluate the
Amendment 49 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 10 Amendment 50 #
Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 This Directive lays down rules on the
Amendment 51 #
Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 This Directive lays down rules on the deduction, for corporate income tax purposes, of an allowance on increases in equity for SMEs and medium-size groups and on the limitation of the tax deductibility of exceeding borrowing costs large undertakings and large groups.
Amendment 52 #
Amendment 54 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 5 a (new) (5 a) ‘large undertaking’ means all undertakings which exceed the threshold for large undertakings, as laid down in Article 3(4) of Directive 2013/34/EU;
Amendment 55 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 5 a (new) (5 a) a 'large undertaking' means all undertakings which exceed the threshold for large undertakings, as laid down in in Article 3(4) of Directive 2013/34/EU;
Amendment 56 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 5 b (new) (5 b) ‘Medium-sized group’ means all groups which do not exceed the threshold for medium-sized groups, as laid down in Article 3(6) of Directive 2013/34/EU;
Amendment 57 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 5 b (new) (5 b) a 'large group' means all groups which exceed the threshold for large groups, as laid down in in Article 3(7) of Directive 2013/34/EU;
Amendment 58 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 5 c (new) (5 c) ‘Large group’ means all groups which exceed the threshold for large groups, as laid down in Article 3(7) of Directive 2013/34/EU;
Amendment 59 #
Proposal for a directive Chapter II – title II
Amendment 61 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 An allowance on equity shall be deductible, for
Amendment 62 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 An allowance on equity shall be deductible, for
Amendment 63 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 An allowance on equity shall be deductible, for 1
Amendment 64 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 An allowance on equity shall be deductible, for 1
Amendment 65 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 An allowance on equity shall be deductible, for 1
Amendment 66 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 Amendment 67 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 If the deductible allowance on equity, in accordance with the first subparagraph, is higher than the taxpayer’s net taxable income in a tax period, Member States shall ensure that the taxpayer may carry forward,
Amendment 68 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3 Amendment 69 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3 Amendment 70 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3 Member States shall ensure that the taxpayers may carry forward, for a maximum of 10 tax periods for larger companies and a maximum of 15 tax periods for SMEs, the part of the allowance on equity which exceeds 30% of EBITDA in a tax period.
Amendment 71 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3 Member States shall ensure that the taxpayers may carry forward, for a maximum of
Amendment 72 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3 Member States shall ensure that the taxpayers may carry forward, for a maximum of 5 tax periods, the part of the allowance on equity which exceeds
Amendment 73 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 Subject to Article 5, the base of the allowance on equity shall be calculated as the difference between the level of net equity at the end of the tax period and the level of net equity at the end of the previous tax period, in other words, the year-on-year increase in own funds.
Amendment 74 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 The allowance on equity shall be equal to half of the base of the allowance multiplied by the 10-year risk-free interest rate for the relevant currency and increased by a risk premium of 1% or, where the taxpayer is an SME, a risk premium of 1.5%.
Amendment 75 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 The allowance on equity shall be equal to half of the base of the allowance multiplied by the 10-year risk-free interest rate for the relevant currency and increased by a risk premium of 1% or, where the taxpayer is an SME, a risk premium of 1.5%.
Amendment 76 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 The allowance on equity shall be equal to the base of the allowance multiplied by the 10-year risk-free interest rate for the relevant currency
Amendment 77 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 The allowance on equity shall be equal to the base of the allowance multiplied by the 10-year risk-free interest rate for the relevant currency and increased by a risk premium of 1.5% or, where the taxpayer is an SME, a risk premium of
Amendment 78 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 The allowance on equity shall be equal to the base of the allowance multiplied by the 10-year risk-free interest rate for the relevant currency and increased by a risk premium of 1,5% or, where the taxpayer is an SME, a risk premium of
Amendment 79 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3 Amendment 80 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 3 3. If, after having obtained an allowance on equity, the base of the allowance on equity is negative in a tax period, an amount equal to the negative allowance on equity shall become taxable
Amendment 81 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 3 3. If, after having obtained an allowance on equity, the base of the allowance on equity is negative in a tax period, an amount equal to the negative allowance on equity shall become taxable for 1
Amendment 82 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 3 3. If, after having obtained an allowance on equity, the base of the
Amendment 83 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 4 Amendment 84 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 4 a (new) 4 a. The provisions of this Article shall not apply to large undertakings and large groups.
Amendment 85 #
Proposal for a directive Article 5 Amendment 86 #
Proposal for a directive Article 5 – paragraph 3 3. Where an increase in equity is the result of a reorganisation of a medium- sized group, such increase shall only be taken into account for the calculation of the base of the allowance on equity for the taxpayer in accordance with Article 4 to the extent that it does not result in converting into new equity the equity (or part thereof) that already existed in the medium- sized group before the re- organisation.
Amendment 87 #
Proposal for a directive Article 5 – paragraph 3 a (new) 3 a. When implementing this Directive, Member States shall make sure the measures adopted are compliant with the guidance provided by the Code of Conduct Group (Business Taxation) on notional interest deduction regimes.
Amendment 88 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 Amendment 89 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 1. Member States shall ensure that a taxpayer is able to deduct from its taxable base for corporate income tax purposes exceeding borrowing costs as defined in Article 1, point (2), of Council Directive (EU) 2016/116435 up to an amount (a) corresponding to
Amendment 90 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 1. Member States shall ensure that a taxpayer, who is a large undertaking or a large group, is able to deduct from its taxable base for corporate income tax purposes exceeding borrowing costs as defined in Article 1, point (2), of Council Directive (EU) 2016/116435 up to an amount (a) corresponding to
Amendment 91 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 1. Member States shall ensure that a taxpayer is able to deduct from its taxable base for corporate income tax purposes exceeding borrowing costs as defined in Article 1, point (2), of Council Directive (EU) 2016/116435 up to an amount (a) corresponding to
Amendment 92 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 1. Member States shall ensure that a taxpayer, except for micro, small and medium-sized enterprises as defined in the Commission’s recommendation of 6 May 2003, is able to deduct from its taxable base for corporate income tax purposes exceeding borrowing costs as defined in Article 1, point (2), of Council Directive (EU) 2016/116435 up to an amount (a) corresponding to 85% of such costs incurred during the tax period. If such amount is higher than the amount (b) determined in accordance with Article 4 of Directive (EU) 2016/1164, Member States shall ensure that the taxpayer be entitled to deduct only the lower of the two amounts in the tax period. The difference between the two amounts (a) and (b) shall be carried forward or back in accordance with Article 4 of Directive (EU) 2016/1164. _________________ 35 Council Directive (EU) 2016/1164 of 12
Amendment 93 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point a Amendment 94 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point b Amendment 95 #
(b) the number of SMEs and medium- size groups that have benefitted from the allowance in the tax period, including as a percentage of the total number of SMEs and medium-sized groups falling within the scope of this Directive and the number of SMEs that have benefitted from the allowance, which are part of large groups within the meaning of Article 3(7) of Directive 2013/34/EU;
Amendment 96 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point c Amendment 97 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point f source: 739.748
|
History
(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)
docs/8/docs/0/url |
Old
/oeil/spdoc.do?i=60996&j=0&l=enNew
https://data.europarl.europa.eu/distribution/doc/SP-2024-81-TA-9-2024-0006_en.docx |
docs/8/docs/0/url |
Old
/oeil/spdoc.do?i=60996&j=0&l=enNew
https://data.europarl.europa.eu/distribution/doc/SP-2024-81-TA-9-2024-0006_en.docx |
docs/8/docs/0/url |
Old
/oeil/spdoc.do?i=60996&j=0&l=enNew
https://data.europarl.europa.eu/distribution/doc/SP-2024-81-TA-9-2024-0006_en.docx |
docs/8/docs/0/url |
Old
/oeil/spdoc.do?i=60996&j=0&l=enNew
https://data.europarl.europa.eu/distribution/doc/SP-2024-81-TA-9-2024-0006_en.docx |
docs/8/docs/0/url |
Old
/oeil/spdoc.do?i=60996&j=0&l=enNew
https://data.europarl.europa.eu/distribution/doc/SP-2024-81-TA-9-2024-0006_en.docx |
docs/8/docs/0/url |
Old
/oeil/spdoc.do?i=60996&j=0&l=enNew
https://data.europarl.europa.eu/distribution/doc/SP-2024-81-TA-9-2024-0006_en.docx |
docs/8/docs/0/url |
Old
/oeil/spdoc.do?i=60996&j=0&l=enNew
https://data.europarl.europa.eu/distribution/doc/SP-2024-81-TA-9-2024-0006_en.docx |
docs/8/docs/0/url |
Old
/oeil/spdoc.do?i=60996&j=0&l=enNew
https://data.europarl.europa.eu/distribution/doc/SP-2024-81-TA-9-2024-0006_en.docx |
docs/8/docs/0/url |
Old
/oeil/spdoc.do?i=60996&j=0&l=enNew
https://data.europarl.europa.eu/distribution/doc/SP-2024-81-TA-9-2024-0006_en.docx |
docs/8/docs/0/url |
Old
/oeil/spdoc.do?i=60996&j=0&l=enNew
https://data.europarl.europa.eu/distribution/doc/SP-2024-81-TA-9-2024-0006_en.docx |
docs/8/docs/0/url |
Old
/oeil/spdoc.do?i=60996&j=0&l=enNew
https://data.europarl.europa.eu/distribution/doc/SP-2024-81-TA-9-2024-0006_en.docx |
docs/8/docs/0/url |
Old
/oeil/spdoc.do?i=60996&j=0&l=enNew
https://data.europarl.europa.eu/distribution/doc/SP-2024-81-TA-9-2024-0006_en.docx |
docs/8/docs/0/url |
Old
/oeil/spdoc.do?i=60996&j=0&l=enNew
https://data.europarl.europa.eu/distribution/doc/SP-2024-81-TA-9-2024-0006_en.docx |
docs/8/docs/0/url |
Old
/oeil/spdoc.do?i=60996&j=0&l=enNew
nulldistribution/doc/SP-2024-81-TA-9-2024-0006_en.docx |
docs/8 |
|
events/4 |
|
docs/8 |
|
events/4/summary |
|
docs/8 |
|
events/4 |
|
forecasts |
|
procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Awaiting Parliament's voteNew
Awaiting final decision |
docs/7 |
|
events/3/docs |
|
events/2 |
|
events/3 |
|
procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Awaiting committee decisionNew
Awaiting Parliament's vote |
forecasts/0 |
|
forecasts |
|