The EU Parliament blasts the Council about the tax dealings of the wealthy

European Parliament. Joint meeting of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (ECON) and the Special Committee on Tax Rulings and Other Measures Similar in Nature or Effect (TAXE). Exchange of views between the TAXE Committee President Alain Lamassoure (on the left) with Commission President Jean- Claude Juncker and Commissioner for Economic and Financial Affairs, Taxation and Customs Pierre Moscovici (on the right). (European Parliament Audiovisual Services. Event Date: 17/09/2015. Copyright: © European Union 2015).

European Parliament. Joint meeting of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (ECON) and the Special Committee on Tax Rulings and Other Measures Similar in Nature or Effect (TAXE). Exchange of views between the TAXE Committee President Alain Lamassoure (on the left) with Commission President Jean- Claude Juncker and Commissioner for Economic and Financial Affairs, Taxation and Customs Pierre Moscovici (on the right). (European Parliament Audiovisual Services. Event Date: 17/09/2015. Copyright: © European Union 2015).

The European Parliament once more honored its role as the authentic exponent of the will of the European citizens. Last Tuesday it dismissed as a “missed opportunity” the EU Council’s decision to water down the mandatory exchange of the ‘tax rulings’ between member states. A ‘tax ruling’ is a special taxation arrangement accorded to a company or an individual by the tax authorities of a country. It’s accorded mainly to foreign taxpayers providing an actual tax haven bargain and an assurance about how certain aspects of taxation will be applied in each specific case.

The ‘tax rulings’ made headlines in November 2014 when the world learned that the authorities of Luxembourg had accorded special tax ‘treatment’ to hundreds of wealthy individuals and multinationals in order to park their money in the Grand Duchy. It also became known that more EU and other European countries offer similar ‘services’ facilitating wealthy individuals and companies to evade taxation.

It all started in Luxembourg

After the Luxembourg scandal broke out, Jean- Claude Juncker, the then newly elected President of the EU Commission felt obliged to do something in order to appease the anger of the public opinion. He himself must have been behind these Luxembourgish tax agreements. He had served a Prime Minister and Minister of Finance of the Grand Duchy for many years.

All that said, the Commission, under his instructions, prepared a proposal to make it mandatory for EU member states to exchange information on their tax rulings. However, this proposal was met with disappointment by the European Parliament for its ineffectiveness. Even worse, the powerful ECOFIN council, regrouping the 28 EU ministers of Finance, further watered it down obliging Markus Ferber (EPP, DE), the Parliament’s rapporteur, to voice his dismay at the “directive’s limited scope and late entry into force”. His report was approved by the Parliament’s Economic and Monetary Affairs Committee last Tuesday by 49 votes in favor, 0 against and 6 abstentions. Tax experts say that the more transparent and communicated those tax dealings are, the less will be used for tax evasion. Let’s see that in detail.

The member states are reluctant

When the draft text of the new directive on the ‘tax rulings’, as it was formulated by the 28 member states at the ECOFIN council became known, the European Sting commented that, “The EU (is about) to fight cross-border tax evasion with a toothless directive”. On 8 October the Sting’s first story concluded that the “text of this new EU directive aimed at improving transparency in assurances given to companies about how their taxes are calculated cannot cover the many possibilities the modern aggressive or active ‘tax planning’ offers”.

What the Parliament wants

In any case, the European Parliament has proposed very concrete amendments to the text that the ECOFIN council ministers agreed. The MEPs want the following changes:

*the directive should apply to all tax rulings, not just the cross border ones “given that purely national transactions can also have cross-border effects. The Council made the directive’s scope cross-border only”.

* The Parliament insists that the European Commission should be able to use the information exchanged between member states on the tax rulings for purposes other than just overseeing that the member states conform to the directive.

* The Parliament wants the automatic exchange of information to start as soon as possible, whereas the Commission proposes that it should start on 1 January 2016 and the Council agreed on 1 January 2017.

*The Commission says that the mandatory exchange mechanism should apply to tax rulings issued in the ten years before it enters into force, whereas MEPs say it should apply to all rulings that are still valid on the day the directive enters into force. From its side, the Council insists that the directive should apply only to rulings, amendments or renewals of rulings after 31 December 2016.

* The MEPs insist that the information should be communicated “promptly after the ruling is issued” rather than “within one month following the end of the quarter during which the ruling was issued” as the Commission proposes. The Council deal says that the information should be provided “within three months following the end of the half of the calendar year during which the ruling was issued”. This means that if a ruling is issued in January, the mandatory exchange of information can take place until 30 September.

Different visions

Obviously, there are key differences in the three texts. Initially, there was the one drafted by the Commission. Then the ECOFIN council agreed upon a drastically modified one, while the Parliament wants to change them both. It goes without saying that the parliamentarians are the strictest of them all concerning the effectiveness of the directive against tax evasion. What is at stake here relates to the ability of the member states to accord special tax treatments to wealthy individuals and probably help some companies to evade taxation.

Understandably those ‘rulings’ realized in one EU member state may damage the tax collection ability also of another country. The question is why so far the 28 governments tolerated such an abominable arrangement? And the equally obvious answer is that every country wants to safeguard its right to use tax allowances in order to attract money and investments. Unfortunately, those dealings have very rarely led to investments in the real economy and the creation of jobs. In most cases they have just facilitated the ‘parking services’ for capital a country chooses to offer.

Now the Parliament and the Council have to begin consultations in order to achieve a compromise on the final text. The directive is expected to be adopted at a forthcoming Council meeting but the European Parliament has to officially give its opinion first.

Advertising

Advertising

Advertising

Advertising

Featured Stings

Stopping antimicrobial resistance would cost just USD 2 per person a year

Our present and future tax payments usurped by banks

Why Italy will not follow the Greek road; Eurozone to change or unravel

Worldwide UN family celebrates enduring universal values of human rights

We are close yet so far…

China hopes EU Commissioner De Gucht drops super anti-dumping tariff on solar panels

Can the EU last long if it cuts Cyprus out?

Could Rwanda become Africa’s healthcare leader?

Do the EU policies on agro-food smell?

EU-UK: A deal synonymous to ‘remain’, England pays the Irish price

Court of Auditors: EU budget money is there to be spent not to create value

“BEUC cautions against TTIP that would seek to align EU and US chemicals management frameworks”

EU Top Jobs summit ended with no agreement: welcome to Europe’s quicksand!

A new bioeconomy strategy for a sustainable Europe

Window for a Brexit deal: Brussels to think again May’s proposal

MEPs react to breaches of human rights in Moldova, Burundi and Somalia

MWC 2016 LIVE: Telenor CEO calls on operators to embrace Mobile Connect initiative

European Commission recommends to the European Council (Article 50) to find that decisive progress has been made in Brexit negotiations

European Youth Capital 2019 announced: Novi Sad, Serbia

EU unveils plan to accelerate Capital Markets Union ahead of London’s departure from the bloc

7 key challenges for the future of ASEAN – and how to solve them

COP21 Breaking News_04 December: Launch of CREWS, climate risk & early warning systems

‘Dire consequences’ for a million children in the Middle East, North Africa, as funding dwindles

Dear China

Respect people’s peaceful assembly and fair trail rights, UN human rights wing urges Nicaragua

Despite funding crisis, Palestine refugee classrooms set to stay open, says UNRWA

How wealthy people transmit this advantage to their children and grand children

ECB should offer more and cheaper liquidity if Eurozone is to avoid recession

Aid teams respond to escalating southwest Syria conflict: 750,000 civilians are at risk

Social inclusion: how much should young people hope from the EU? 

Parliament adopts its position on digital copyright rules

To win combat against HIV worldwide, ‘knowledge is power’, says UNAIDS report

Africa’s inspiring innovators show what the future could hold

IMF: All you want to know about Argentina

EU’s Bank signs € 150 million loan to India as part of record investment in clean energy

Why Eurozone’s problems may end in a few months

Have central banks missed the exit train?

For how long will terror and economic stagnation be clouding the European skies?

Charlie’s tragedy energized deeper feelings amongst Europeans; back to basics?

Trump asked Merkel to pay NATO arrears and cut down exports ignoring the EU

We can’t tell if we’re closing the digital divide without more data

Erasmus+: an expected budget of €3 billion to be invested in young Europeans and to help create European Universities in 2019

UNICEF appeals for end to ‘war on children’ in Syria and Yemen

Economic sentiment and business climate stagnate in miserable euro area

UN chief condemns attack targeting international forces in northern Mali

Rule of law in Hungary: Parliament should ask Council to act, say committee MEPs

Budget MEPs approve €104.2 m in EU aid to Greece, Spain, France and Portugal

Lithuania vs Parliament over 2014 EU budget

Further reforms can foster more inclusive labour markets in The Netherlands

Banks suffocate the real economy by denying loans

EU’s new environmental policy on biofuels impacts both the environment and the European citizen

Northern Ireland: Parliament wants to secure post-Brexit regional funding

A Sting Exclusive: “Europe must be more ambitious in COP21 and lead on climate finance and sustainable development”, Green UK MEP Jean Lambert points out from Brussels

Russia and the West use the same tactics to dismember Ukraine

Campaign kicks off with High-level Event on #FairInternships

How dearly will Germany pay for the Volkswagen emissions rigging scandal

11 lessons the history of business can teach us about its future

IMF: How To Deal With Failed Banks

A Sting Exclusive: “Junior Enterprises themselves carry out projects focusing on the environment”, JADE President Daniela Runchi highlights from Brussels

Is Data Privacy really safe seen through Commissioner’s PRISM?

‘Passport to dignity’ that schools represent may expire fast, without emergency funding warns UN Palestine refugee agency

More Stings?

Speak your Mind Here

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s