Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2007-10-23-Speech-2-016"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
rdf:type
dcterms:Date
dcterms:Is Part Of
dcterms:Language
lpv:document identification number
"en.20071023.6.2-016"2
lpv:hasSubsequent
lpv:speaker
lpv:spoken text
"Mr President, sometimes, in this Chamber, we cannot really see the political differences between groups, but, on this issue, the difference is very visible, because I could not disagree more with the rapporteur on some of the points she just mentioned. I respect the work she has done on this report, but on this issue we have totally different views on what should be done by the Commission. First of all, this report is about the Lisbon Strategy and what we should do to restore Europe’s global competitiveness. This is really the only way to guarantee European welfare and the welfare of our citizens. Without taxation, this is impossible. Taxation has a crucial role to play in this respect, in bringing competitiveness to Europe. We must remember that overall tax levels in Europe are still above the OECD average. In order to achieve a lower level of taxation in Europe, we need to create an environment conducive to investment. We need more investments, more growth, and more, flourishing businesses in Europe. Healthy tax competition has a beneficial role in this respect. This is an economic, market-based control mechanism against rampant political decisions. If we have fruitful tax competition in Europe, governments cannot put obstacles in the way of the single market. That is what we want: a genuine single market without tax-made obstacles. On the other hand, there is no evidence that fruitful tax competition would erode tax bases. The total tax revenue has remained remarkably stable, thanks to increased economic activity. However, the existence of 27 different tax regimes creates problems, particularly for European SMEs, which are so important to this growth. According to a 2004 EC taxation survey, compliance for small SMEs costs about 2.6% of their sales and 31% of taxes paid. So, one third of all the tax goes to compliance. The high proportionate amount of tax compliance for small companies is a big obstacle, and that is why we need to do our best to call for cross-border loss relief, simplified customs procedures, one-stop-shop schemes for VAT, home states taxation pilot projects and so on. We support everything that the Commission has done in this respect. Finally, industry wishes to see a well-managed and simple tax administration system. We need to resolve the problems of transfer pricing, loss offsetting EU-wide and avoiding double taxation, and to lower our compliance costs. We welcome the Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base (CCCTB) proposal, and the fact that the Commission is stable and brings us the proposal on CCCTB, because loss-relief is only a temporary thing. In the end, we need a consolidated corporate tax base."@en1
lpv:spokenAs
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata

Named graphs describing this resource:

1http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/English.ttl.gz
2http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Events_and_structure.ttl.gz
3http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/spokenAs.ttl.gz

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph