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.

the sting Milestones

Featured Stings

Can we feed everyone without unleashing disaster? Read on

These campaigners want to give a quarter of the UK back to nature

How to build a more resilient and inclusive global system

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

European Commission: the LED lights of your Audi A6 shall save our planet

A new approach to scaling-up renewable power in emerging markets

Ensure that widows are ‘not left out or left behind’, UN chief urges on International Day

COVID-19 wave III and the lessons learned

Threats from mammoth banks and Brussels fuel May’s poll rates

EU and Amazon cut deal to end antitrust investigation over e-books deals

MEPs urge EU countries to be transparent about their COVID-19 vaccine supplies

Here’s how private investors can turn plastic into gold

Still a long way to go to achieve gender equality in all EU countries

Africa is set to get its first vertical forest

‘Millions facing starvation’ – Global political and business leaders on the economic impact of COVID-19

How the gender commuting gap could be harming women’s careers

Will 2020 be the year blockchain overcomes its hype?

Progress in medical research: leading or lagging behind?

Bacteria vs. humans: how to fight in this world war?

The future of energy is being shaped in Asia

What we know and what we don’t know about universal basic income

The first new university in the UK for 40 years is taking a very different approach to education

OECD household income up 0.7% in first quarter of 2018, outpacing GDP growth

First seat projections for the next European Parliament

The energy industry is changing. Are governments switched on?

What is the IMF telling Eurozone about fiscal and banking unification?

Trump ‘used’ G20 to side with Putin and split climate and trade packs


Re-thinking citizenship education: bringing young people back to the ballot box

Commission issues guidance on the participation of third country bidders in the EU procurement market

Car rentals: EU action leads to clearer and more transparent pricing

What’s going on in Chernobyl today?

Here’s how we get businesses to harmonize on climate change

Why are the Balkans’ political leaders meeting in Geneva this week?

Support for EU remains at historically high level despite sceptics

US pardons for accused war criminals, contrary to international law: UN rights office

European Business Summit 2015: In search of a vision for the future

Brexit casts a shadow over the LSE – Deutsche Börse merger: a tracer of how or if brexit is to be implemented

Migrants and refugees face higher risk of developing ill-health, says UN report on displaced people in Europe

Autumn 2019 Standard Eurobarometer: immigration and climate change remain main concerns at EU level

Stop the waste: UN food agencies call for action to reduce global hunger

The term AI overpromises. Let’s make machine learning work better for humans instead

How blended finance helped to keep energy supplies flowing during COVID-19

What will a post-pandemic economy look like? Here’s what chief economists expect

Innovation is the key to the pay-TV industry’s long-term growth

Mergers: Commission approves GlaxoSmithKline’s acquisition of Pfizer’s Consumer Health Business, subject to conditions

Coronavirus: Commission launches call for innovative response and recovery partnerships between EU regions

Parliament names radio studio after journalists murdered in December attack

4 things to know about the state of conflict today

World-famous cultural institutions closed due to coronavirus are welcoming virtual visitors

As Houthi forces withdraw from key Yemeni ports, UN monitoring chief welcomes ‘first practical step on the ground’

Get out, stay out: how financial resilience helps end poverty

The ‘ASEAN way’: what it is, how it must change for the future

30 years of tissue engineering, what has been achieved?

Businesses are lacking moral leadership, according to employees

Mental health and suicide prevention

‘Perseverance is key’ to Iraq’s future, UN envoy tells Security Council

Belgium: Youth Forum takes legal step to ban unpaid internships

European Commission recommends common EU approach to the security of 5G networks

The Future of Balkans: Embracing Education

The European Parliament fails to really restrict the rating agencies

Gas pipeline in the European Union. (Copyright: EU, 2012 / Source: EC - Audiovisual Service / Photo: Ferenc Isza)

EU Investment Bank approves € 1.5bn loan for Trans Adriatic Pipeline (TAP)

Could Europe become the first climate-neutral continent?

Venezuela’s needs ‘significant and growing’ UN humanitarian chief warns Security Council, as ‘unparalleled’ exodus continues

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