Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-04-02-Speech-1-089"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010402.7.1-089"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I am very pleased that we are having this debate today, because there is of course a need to clarify a number of points in connection with the report on occupational retirement provision, the second pillar. Some say that this is a directive which, in the first instance, needs to be seen as part of the financial services sector. Others think that we ought to use the directive straight away to cover conclusively the whole second-pillar package, from taxation issues to social security, therefore including biometric risks. You have now explained that this is just one step in the process and that others will have to follow so that the directive – and here we are of the same mind – does not perpetuate existing distortions of competition. The tax issue is fundamental here, but the social aspects, the issue of supervisory regimes, the issues of labour law and social law – which after all are not the same thing – of course also have their part to play.
Commissioner, I must also repeat that for us, and for me as rapporteur, this directive represents a step forward, a considerable one, which sets the ball rolling. Further Commission initiatives will have to follow, which we will address in our report very clearly and in ever greater detail, because we will not have transferable pensions and mobility within the EU until the Member States agree on common taxation principles. We know that setting the tax rate is part of income tax and thus falls within the purview of the Member States. Nevertheless, in my view, a general shift to downstream taxation is necessary to avoid contributions and benefits being taxed twice or not at all.
A second point is very important to us, putting an end to the discriminatory tax treatment of service providers established in another Member State and pension contributions made by EU citizens resident in another Member State. This system is practised in many Member States and is tantamount to cordoning off the pension market. Although our views may coincide here, in many respects we are sceptical about whether this really will be achieved. On the one hand you are now announcing a communication rather than a directive – you will have your reasons for this. A second point, however, makes me even more sceptical: at the last plenary sitting of the European Parliament, the President of the Commission, Mr Prodi, announced the demands that he was going to make at the summit in Stockholm with respect to occupational retirement provision and the tax issue. There is a difference between the demands which were expressed here in the last Strasbourg week and the final document from Stockholm. In the final Stockholm document, the pensions issue is, in fact, reduced to the labour market of the over 55s and is no longer worded, as announced here, as a call to reform the pensions system and remove all tax obstacles.
That is why we would ask you to ensure that the initiatives, which you have again mentioned today as being necessary to follow up on the directive, quickly become part of actual Commission proposals, so that we do not encounter possible difficulties with the application of this directive on occupational retirement provision on account of the many unresolved issues."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples