Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-02-02-Speech-4-105-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20120202.10.4-105-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, it was with a high degree of humility that I took on the task as rapporteur for this report, the first annual tax report. I would like to thank the shadow rapporteurs from all groups for the constructive debate that we had on this difficult but important subject. I have tried to incorporate comments from all groups, and I think that we have been able to achieve a high level of agreement. I hope this report will receive broad support here in this Chamber today.
The subject of taxes and tax policy is one that affects people. Tax policy generates emotion – both positive and negative. There are conflicting aims within tax policy, and we always have to find a balance between them. We know that it is not the easiest thing to do. For decades, tax policy has been regarded as an exclusively national matter in which the EU has no part to play. That time is past, however. As a consequence of globalisation, tax issues also need to be discussed at EU level.
The report aims to examine the areas where further coordination of taxes – in certain areas perhaps even tax harmonisation – may be necessary, and where the EU can play an important role. Comprehensive and lasting budgetary consolidation is needed, because the ongoing debt crisis is also a tax crisis. The lack of coordination of tax policy is contributing to a deepening of the crisis. The necessary, but painful, reduction of debt requires expenditure restraints, increased cuts in public spending and also tax rises.
This report focuses on areas where the EU can do more to improve the functioning of the internal market and to make Europe more competitive. Unfortunately, companies and citizens within the EU are still encountering tax obstacles. We need to remove these obstacles in order to create economic growth and more jobs. In order to be able to do that, we need to reduce taxes on earnings and increase taxes on consumption, for example.
I also hope that the report will be able to put pressure on the Member States to adopt the tax proposals that the Commission has put forward, including the introduction of a common consolidated corporate tax base (CCCTB). We need to resolve the tax problems that people encounter in their day-to-day lives; for example, if they live in one country and work in another and are affected by double taxation. Tax treaties between Member States are, in themselves, not enough to eradicate double taxation. This is a consequence of the lack of a consistent interpretation of the treaties between the countries.
Several cases of double taxation are currently being examined in the Committee on Petitions. One example concerns an Italian lorry driver who works in Germany and was taxed in both Italy and Germany. He had to pay a total of 60% of his wages in tax, despite the fact that he should only have been taxed in Germany and should only have paid 25% in tax. This happened despite there being a tax treaty between Germany and Italy and despite the fact that the tax authorities have established that this is an error. As far as I know, this case is still not fully resolved, unfortunately. We need a common EU policy in this area and joint legislation that is able to make a distinction. I therefore welcome the fact that the Commission has recently adopted a communication on double taxation, which also presents practical measures.
Tax evasion, fraud and lack of transparency cost the EU and its Member States many billions of euro in lost tax revenue every year. I am particularly concerned about the exploitation of loopholes in European legislation, whereby international companies operating within the EU attempt to avoid paying tax within the Union. The aim must be for every euro in tax that is intentionally withheld from the state through clever tax arrangements to be paid to the tax authority in future.
In closing, I would just like to say that paragraph 11, which concerns fiscal federalism, has caused a certain amount of confusion. Allow me to read the original proposal in English, which came from my Basque and Catalan colleagues, among others:
‘Believes that fiscal federalism is the best tool in order to achieve self-responsibility in tax management at regional level and so entails higher economic efficiency’. That refers to paragraph 11."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples