97 Amendments of Nils TORVALDS related to 2018/2121(INI)
Amendment 52 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Recalls the analysis of the reports from these previous Special Committees and calls for the implementation of the recommendations outlined1a; _________________ 1a http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getD oc.do?pubRef=-//EP//TEXT+TA+P8-TA- 2015- 0408+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN uage=EN, http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getD oc.do?pubRef=-//EP//TEXT+TA+P8-TA- 2016- 0310+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN uage=EN, http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getD oc.do?pubRef=-//EP//TEXT+TA+P8-TA- 2017- 0491+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN uage=EN
Amendment 64 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Underlines however that much remains to be done in this field and urgent further action is required by the Commission and the Council in order to ensure that the required amount of tax contributions are paid to public budgets, as expected by the Europe’s citizens;
Amendment 68 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3 b. Considers that efforts need to be made by all EU institutions, including by this Parliament, as well as Member States to explain to citizens the work done in the field of taxation and actions taken to remedy existing problems and loopholes;
Amendment 69 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 c (new)
Paragraph 3 c (new)
3 c. Considers that open and transparent tax competition where Member States and regions compete in offering better conditions for doing business can contribute to stimulating entrepreneurship, for the benefit of both citizens and companies; stresses however that tax competition that deprives Member States of appropriate generating revenues is not fair; considers that in order to end unfair tax competition developed by some Member States, the EU needs to adopt a broad strategy whereby the EU supports, with relevant policies, those Member States to move from their current detrimental tax systems to a tax system compatible with the EU legal framework and the spirit of the EU treaties;
Amendment 71 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 d (new)
Paragraph 3 d (new)
3 d. Supports the use of digital tools; is aware however that the use of smart technologies is giving rise to new types of digital tax fraud such as fraudulent e- filings of tax returns across territories, use of software programs to automatically skim cash from electronic cash registers or point of sale systems (“zapping”) or the growing usage of third-party payroll processors enabling fraudsters to channel off legitimate taxes; calls therefore on the EU institutions and Member States to adopt a comprehensive, transformative and dynamic strategy with a long-term vision, roadmap and multifaceted solutions involving people, processes and technology;
Amendment 82 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
Amendment 87 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Calls on the Council and Member States to prioritise projects, notably with the support of the Fiscalis programme, aimed at quantifying the magnitude of tax avoidance in order to better address the current tax gap; stresses that the European Parliament has adopted1a an increase of the Fiscalis programme (EUR 300 million (2018 prices) or 339 million (current prices) as well as the ECON committee; _________________ 1a in the Multiannual Financial Framework 2021-2027 – Parliament’s position with a view to an agreement and the REPORT of 4 December 2018 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the ‘Fiscalis’ programme for cooperation in the field of taxation
Amendment 97 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Recalls that the fight against tax evasion and fraud tackles illegal acts, whereas the fight against tax avoidance addresses situations that are a priori within the limits of the law but against its spirit; calls therefore on simplification of the tax framework as soon as possible thereby avoiding debates about morality versus legality;
Amendment 114 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
Amendment 121 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Stresses the similarity between corporate tax payers and high-net-worth individuals in the use of corporate structures and similar structures such as trusts and offshore locations for the purpose of ATP; recalls the role of intermediaries in setting up such schemes; recalls the obligation of intermediaries under DAC6 to report structural loopholes in tax legislation to tax authorities, without having to reveal the identities of any potential clients taking advantage of these loopholes at the time; requests that intermediaries that are convicted for participation in and knowledge of fraudulent behaviour of clients are to have their licenses revoked and be banned from practising their occupation henceforth;
Amendment 131 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13 a. Calls on the Commission and the Council to propose and adopt a comprehensive definition of aggressive tax planning indicators, building on both the hallmarks identified in the fifth review of the Directive on administrative cooperation (DAC6)1a and the Commission’s relevant studies and recommendations2a; calls on Member States to use those indicators as a basis to repeal all harmful tax practices deriving from existing tax loopholes; _________________ 1a Council Directive (EU) 2018/822 of 25 May 2018 amending Directive 2011/16/EU as regards mandatory automatic exchange of information in the field of taxation in relation to reportable cross-border arrangements, OJ L 139, 5.6.2018, p. 1. 2a https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/site s/taxation/files/resources/documents/taxat ion/gen_info/economic_analysis/tax_pape rs/taxation_paper_61.pdf and https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/site s/taxation/files/tax_policies_survey_2017. pdf
Amendment 167 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Takes note of the statement made by the French Finance Minister at the TAX3 meeting of 23 October 2018 regarding the need to discuss the concept of minimum taxation; welcomes the readiness by France to include the debate on minimum taxation as one of the priorities of its G7 Presidency in 2019;
Amendment 189 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
Amendment 197 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Notes that the G20/OECD 15-point BEPS action plan, intended to tackle in a coordinated manner the causes and circumstances creating BEPS practices, is being implemented and monitored and further discussions are taking place, in a broader context than just the initial participating countries, through the Inclusive Framework; calls on Member States to support a reform of both the mandate and the functioning of the Inclusive Framework to ensure that remaining tax loopholes and unsolved tax questions such as the allocation of taxing rights among countries are covered by the current international framework to combat BEPS practices;
Amendment 200 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19 a. calls on the EU to work on reforming the OECD in order to equip it with enforcement powers so as to avoid a situation where OECD standards are only implemented by very few members, usually the EU; considers that contributing to work at the OECD level does not exclude or prevent work also being undertaken at the European level;
Amendment 207 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Welcomes the adoption by the EU of ATAD I and ATAD II;1a; _________________ 1a takes note that they provide a minimum level of protection against corporate tax avoidance throughout the EU, while ensuring a fairer and more stable environment for businesses, from both demand and supply perspectives; welcomes the provisions on hybrid mismatches to prevent double non- taxation in order to eliminate existing mismatches and refrain from creating further mismatches, between Member States and with third countries;
Amendment 216 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Welcomes the provisions on Controlled Foreign Corporation (CFC) included in ATAD I to ensure that profits made by related companies parked in low or no-tax countries are effectively taxed; acknowledges that theys called for repeatedly by Parliament, these provisions prevent the absence or diversity of national CFC rules within the Union from distorting the functioning of the internal market beyond situations of wholly artificial arrangements as called for repeatedly by Parliament; deplores the coexistence of two approaches to implement CFC rules in ATAD I and calls on Member States to implement only the simpler and most efficient CFC rules as in ATAD I Article 7(2)(a);
Amendment 223 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
Amendment 230 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
Amendment 240 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 a (new)
Paragraph 27 a (new)
27 a. Reiterates its call for a clear definition of permanent establishment so that companies cannot artificially avoid having a taxable presence in a Member State in which they have economic activity;
Amendment 241 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 b (new)
Paragraph 27 b (new)
27 b. Calls for the finalisation of the work being done within the EU Joint Transfer Pricing Forum (JTPF) on the development of good practices and monitoring of Member States’ implementation by the Commission;
Amendment 242 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Recognises that the new flow of information to tax authorities following the adoption of ATAD I and DAC4 creates the need for adequate resources to ensure the most efficient use of such information and to effectively reduce the current tax gapImplores Member States to provide their tax authorities with the necessary resources to ensure the most efficient use of such information and to effectively reduce the current tax gap, given the new flow of information to tax authorities following the adoption of ATAD I and DAC4; considers that sufficient budgetary resources should also be provided at the EU level;
Amendment 255 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Welcomes the fact thatinclusion of Member States’ tax systems and overall tax environment have become part ofwithin the European Semester in line with Parliament’s call to that effect29 ; welcomes the studies and data drawn up by the Commission30 that allow situations that provide economic ATP indicators to be better addressed, and give a clear indication of the exposure to tax planning as well as furnishing a rich data base for all Member States on the phenomenon; _________________ 29 European Parliament resolution of 25 November 2015 on tax rulings and other measures similar in nature or effect, OJ C 366, 27.10.2017, p. 51, paragraph 96. 30 Referred to above. The studies provide an overview of Member States’ exposure to ATP structures affecting their tax base (erosion or increase), although there is no stand-alone indicator of the phenomenon, a set of indicators seen as a ‘body of evidence’ nevertheless exists.
Amendment 259 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
Paragraph 31
31. Calls on the CoC Group to report yearly on the main arrangements reported in Member States to allow decision makers to keep up with the new tax schemes which are being elaborated and to take the necessary countermeasures that might potentially be needif required;
Amendment 265 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
32. Calls on the Commission to issue a proposal aimed at repealing patent boxes, and calls on Member States to favour non- harmful and, if appropriate, direct support for R&D; reiterates, in the meantime, its call to ensure that current patent boxes establish a genuine link to economic activity, such as expenditure tests, and that they do not distort competition; welcomes the improved definition of R&D costs in the common corporate tax base (CCTB) proposal;
Amendment 281 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
Paragraph 33
33. Welcomes the re-launch of the CCCTB project in a two-step approach, with the Commission’s adoption of interconnected proposals on CCTB and CCCTB; calls on the Council to swiftly adopt them, taking into consideration Parliament’s opinion that already includes the concept of virtual permanent establishment that would close the remaining loopholes allowing tax avoidance to take place and level the playing field in light of digitalisation;
Amendment 292 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 a (new)
Paragraph 33 a (new)
33 a. Calls on the Council to swiftly adopt them, taking into consideration Parliament’s opinion that already includes the concept of virtual permanent establishment that would close the remaining loopholes allowing tax avoidance to take place and level the playing field in light of digitalisation;
Amendment 294 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 b (new)
Paragraph 33 b (new)
33 b. Welcomes the improved definition of R&D costs in the common corporate tax base (CCTB) proposal;
Amendment 305 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
34. NoteHighlights that the phenomenon of digitalisation has created a new situation in the market, whereby digital and digitalised companies are able to take advantage of local markets without having a physical, and therefore taxable, presence in that market, creating a non-level playing field and putting traditional companies at a disadvantage; notes that digital businesses models in the EU face a lower effective average tax burden than traditional business models31 ; _________________ 31 As evidenced in the impact assessment of 21 March 2018 accompanying the digital tax package (SWD(2018)0081), according to which on average, digitalised businesses face an effective tax rate of only 9.5 %, compared to 23.2 % for traditional business models.
Amendment 331 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36
Paragraph 36
36. UnderstandBelieves that the so-called interim solution is not optimal; believes that it will help speed up the search for a better solution atmuch needed, given the speed and scope of digital development, as it will provide an important contribution to the comprehensive global level solution, while levelling the playing field in local markets to some extent;
Amendment 342 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37
Paragraph 37
37. Stresses that since June 2014 the DAC has been amended fourive times;
Amendment 353 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40
Paragraph 40
40. Emphasises that not only information exchanges between, but also the sharing of best practices among tax authorities contribute to more efficient tax collection; calls on Member States to give priority to the sharing of best practices among tax authmake this a prioritiesy;
Amendment 357 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41
Paragraph 41
41. Calls on the Commission to swiftly assess the implementation of DAC4 and whether national tax administrations effectively access country-by-country information held by another Member State; similarly, asks the Commission to assess how DAC4 relates to Action 13 of the G20/BEPS action plan on exchange of country-by- country information;
Amendment 365 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 43 a (new)
Paragraph 43 a (new)
43a. Notes that the form in which the information is provided between national tax authorities is key when such information coming from a Member States may be introduced as evidence in a judicial proceeding in another Member State; considers that the continuation of the progressive building-up of a common language and understanding in tax related matters is key for a more efficient EU framework as well as its enforcement; believes that it should encompass, inter alia, the type of information transmitted and its form, the automaticity of its transmission and the potential exemption to that principle, common IT tools;
Amendment 371 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44 a (new)
Paragraph 44 a (new)
44a. Underlines that national authorities play a key role in the supervision of financial and fiscal activities in the Member States; considers therefore that it should be established whether national competent authorities have duly fulfilled their supervision tasks in the framework of the cum-ex scandal; asks the Commission to assess whether certain financial techniques used in the cum-ex scandal, such as short-selling might have a disruptive impact on the financial markets; stresses that, should their negative effect on financial markets be proven that they should be banned or at least limited; requests the European Securities and Markets Authority and the European Banking Authority to conduct an inquiry into dividend arbitrage trading schemes such as cum-ex in order to assess potential threats to the integrity of financial markets and to national budgets; to establish the nature and magnitude of actors in these schemes; to assess whether there were breaches of either national or Union law; to assess the actions taken by financial supervisors in Member States; and to make appropriate recommendations for reform and for action to the competent authorities concerned;
Amendment 391 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45
Paragraph 45
45. Stresses that the proposal for public CBCR was submitted to the co- legislators just after the Panama papers scandal on 12 April 2016, and that Parliament adopted its position on it on 4 July 2017; recalls that the latter called for an enlargement of the scope of reporting and protection of commercially sensitive information; deplores the lack of progress and cooperation from the Council since 2016; urges for progress to be made in the CouncilDeplores the lack of progress and cooperation from the Council since 2016 concerning the public CBCR proposal; urges the Council to make urgent progress so that it can enters into negotiations with Parliament as soon as possible;
Amendment 418 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 48 a (new)
Paragraph 48 a (new)
48a. Recognises the Commission’s success in enforcing competition rules in the areas of antitrust, cartels, mergers and state aid; recognizes the Commission’s contribution towards promoting international cooperation in competition issues and contribution to the principle of tax fairness;
Amendment 423 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 49
Paragraph 49
49. Notes that despite the fact that the Commission found McDonald’s benefited from double non-taxation on certainsome of its profits in the EU, during its investigations into the tax ruling practices of Member States, no decision under EU State Aid rules could be issued, as the Commission concluded that the double non-taxation stemmed from a mismatch between Luxembourg and US tax laws and the Luxembourg-United States double taxation treaty38 ; calls on Luxembourg to investigate this matter and to revise its double taxation treaties to conform with international tax law; _________________ 38 http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP- 18-5831_en.htm
Amendment 430 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 50
Paragraph 50
50. Is gravely concerned by the magnitude of tax unpaid for all Member States over long periods39 ; recalls that the aim of the recovery of unlawful aid is to restore the position to the status quo, and that calculating the exact amount of aid to be repaid is part of the implementation obligation incumbent on the national authorities; calls on the Commission to assess and establish possible countermeasures, including fines, to prevent Member States from offering selective favourable tax treatment which constitutes State aid is non- compliant with EU rules; _________________ 39 As in the case of decision of 30 August 2016 (SA.38373) on State aid implemented by Ireland to Apple. The tax rulings in question were issued by Ireland on 29 January 1991 and 23 May 2007.
Amendment 434 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 51
Paragraph 51
51. Reiterates its calls for clear guidelines clarifying what constitutes tax- related State aid and ‘appropriate’ transfer pricing, with a view to removinge legal uncertainties for both compliant taxpayers and tax administrations, and providing ae a clear and comprehensive framework for Member States’ tax practices accordingly;
Amendment 442 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 51 a (new)
Paragraph 51 a (new)
51a. Points out that national measures to specifically ban commercial relationships with letterbox companies exist, for example in Latvia1a; _________________ 1a Latvian legislation defines a letterbox company as an entity having no actual economic activity and holding no documentary proof to the contrary, as being registered in a jurisdiction where companies are not required to submit financial statements, and/or as having no place of business in its country of residence;
Amendment 443 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 52
Paragraph 52
Amendment 449 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 53
Paragraph 53
Amendment 483 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 57 a (new)
Paragraph 57 a (new)
57a. Notes that there is no yet a single definition of letterbox companies; calls therefore for a single European definition of letterbox companies;
Amendment 508 #
62. Calls for additional statistics to estimate the VAT gap; and stresses that there is noe need for a common approach to data collection and sharing within the EU;
Amendment 514 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 64 a (new)
Paragraph 64 a (new)
64a. Is of the opinion that the participation of all Member States in Eurofisc shall be mandatory and conditional for receiving EU funds; echoes the preoccupation of the European Court of Auditors on VAT reimbursement in Cohesion spending1a and on the EU Anti-Fraud Programme1b; _________________ 1a ECA, Rapid case review, VAT reimbursement in Cohesion - an error- prone and, sub-optimal use of EU funds, November 2018 1b ECA Opinion No 9/2018 concerning the proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the EU Anti-Fraud Programme.
Amendment 524 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 68
Paragraph 68
68. Welcomes the definitive VAT system proposals adopted on 4 October 201745 and 24 May 201846 ; welcomes in particular the Commission’s proposal to apply the destination principle to taxation, which means that VAT would be paid in the country of the customer; notes however that tax authorities in the Member States of consumption's reactions will be slower and their means of action more limited, given that most of the relevant data and auditing powers will be in the hands of the Member State of identification; calls therefore on the Commission to set up a compensation mechanism in order to safeguard Member States’ VAT revenues and incentivise Member States of identification to act; _________________ 45 COM(2017)0569, COM(2017)0568 and COM(2017)0567. 46 COM/2018/329.
Amendment 532 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 70
Paragraph 70
70. Welcomes, furthermore, the revision of the special schemes for SMEs51 which is key to ensuring a level playing field, and can contribute to the reduction of VAT compliance costs; calls on the Council to take Parliament’s opinion of 11 September 201852 into account, particularly when it comes to further administrative simplification for SMEs; calls, therefore, on the Commission to set up an online portal through which SMEs willing to avail themselves of the exemption in another Member State are required to register, and to put in place a one-stop shop through which small enterprises can file VAT returns for the different Member States in which they operate; _________________ 51 Proposal for a Council Directive amending Directive 2006/112/EC on the common system of value added tax as regards the special scheme for small enterprises (COM(2018)0021). 52 European Parliament legislative resolution of 11 September 2018 on the proposal for a Council directive amending Directive 2006/112/EC on the common system of value added tax as regards the special scheme for small enterprises, Texts adopted, P8_TA(2018)0319.
Amendment 561 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 76
Paragraph 76
76. Calls on the Commission to ensure the EPPO tocan begin operating as soon as possible and by 2022 at the latest; calls for exemplary sanctions to be pronounced; considers that anyone engaged in an organised VAT fraud scheme should be severely sanctioned in order to avoid a perception of impunity;
Amendment 566 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 77 a (new)
Paragraph 77 a (new)
77a. Recalls that VAT competences lie in the hand of both the EU institutions and the Member States; considers that a comprehensive strategy of modernising the operational VAT framework is needed; calls on all relevant authorities to use various statistical and data-mining technologies to identify anomalies, suspicious relationships and patterns, enabling tax agencies to better address a wide spectrum of noncompliance behaviours in a proactive, targeted and cost-effective way; underlines that such digitalisation is a complement to professional experience in the field;
Amendment 573 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 80
Paragraph 80
80. Calls on the Commission to investigate seriously the possibility of new fraud risks in the definitive VAT system, notably the potentially missing supplier in cross-border transactions supplanting the missing customer type of carousel fraud; stresses in this regard that the custom transit system can certainly facilitate trade within the EU however, abuses are possible and criminal organisations, by avoiding the payment of taxes and duties, may cause a huge loss both to Member States (mainly through avoiding VAT and excises) and the EU (avoiding VAT); calls therefore on the Commission to monitor the custom transit system and come with proposals building on recommendations notably by OLAF, Europol and Eurofisc;
Amendment 578 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 80 a (new)
Paragraph 80 a (new)
80a. Believes that a large majority of European citizens expect clear European and national legislation that enables those who do not pay the tax which they are due to pay to be identified, sanctioned and for the missing tax to be recuperated in a timely manner;
Amendment 612 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 85
Paragraph 85
85. Observes that a majority of Member States have adopted citizenship by investment (CBI) or residency by investment (RBI) schemes57 , generally known as golden visa or investor programmes, by which citizenship or residence is granted to non-EU citizens in exchange for financial investment; observes that these programmes of state- facilitated corruption do not necessarily require applicants to spend time on the territory in which the investment is made57a; acknowledges, however, that there is a difference between those schemes run on a large commercial scale and those contributing to legitimate and legal value creation; _________________ 57 18 Member States have some form of RBI scheme in place, including four Member States that operate CBI schemes in addition to RBI schemes: Bulgaria, Cyprus, Malta, Romania. 10 Member States have no such schemes: Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Hungary, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia and Sweden. At least 5000 non-EU citizens have obtained EU citizenship through citizenship by investment schemes. Source: study entitled ‘Citizenship by investment (CBI) and residency by investment (RBI) schemes in the EU‘, EPRS, October 2018, PE: 627.128; ISBN: 978-92-846-3375-3. 57a In the OECD’s view, the visa schemes which are potentially high-risk for the integrity of the CRS are those that give a taxpayer access to a low personal income tax rate of less than 10 % on offshore financial assets, and do not require a significant physical presence of at least 90 days in the jurisdiction offering the golden visa scheme; is concerned that Malta and Cyprus have schemes among those that potentially pose a high risk to the integrity of CRS
Amendment 618 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 86
Paragraph 86
Amendment 650 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 90
Paragraph 90
90. Is concerned that according to the OECD, CBI and RBI schemes could be misused to undermine the common reporting standard (CRS) due diligence procedures, leading to inaccurate or incomplete reporting under the CRS, in particular when not all jurisdictions of tax residence are disclosed to the financial institution; notes that in the OECD’s view, the visa schemes which are potentially high-risk for the integrity of the CRS are those that give a taxpayer access to a low personal income tax rate of less than 10 % on offshore financial assets, and do not require a significant physical presence of at least 90 days in the jurisdiction offering the golden visa scheme; is concerned that Malta and Cyprus have schemes59 among those that potentially pose a high risk to the integrity of CRS; _________________ 59 The Cypriot Citizenship by Investment: Scheme for Naturalisation of Investors by Exception, the Cypriot Residence by Investment, the Maltese Individual Investor Programme, and the Maltese Residence and Visa programme.
Amendment 668 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 92
Paragraph 92
92. Calls on Member States to prevent conflicts of interest linked to CBI and RBI schemes, which might arise when private firms which assisted the government in the design, management and promotion of these schemes, also advised and supported individuals by screening them for suitability and filing their applications for citizenship or residence; emphasizes that customer due diligence (CDD) cannot be outsourced to these private companies since it must be assumed that a conflict of interest prevents them from choosing eligible over solvent candidates;
Amendment 729 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 107
Paragraph 107
107. Stresses that money laundering can assume various forms, and that the money laundered can have its origin in various illicit activities ranging from terrorism to tax evasion and fraud; notes with concern that the proceeds from criminal activity in the EU are estimated to amount to EUR 110 billion per year64 , corresponding to 1 % of the Union’s total GDP; highlights that the Commission estimates that in some Member States up to 70 % of money laundering cases have a cross-border dimension65 ; further notes that the scale of money laundering is estimated by the UN66 to be the equivalent of between 2 to 5 % of global GDP, or around EUR 715 billion and 1.87 trillion a year; whereas a more coordinated approach to tackling financing of terrorism, which includes closer collaboration between private and public-sector authorities in the area of information sharing, would help improve these figures; _________________ 64 From illegal markets to legitimate businesses: the portfolio of organised crime in Europe, Final report of Project OCP – Organised Crime Portfolio, March 2015. 65 http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/pre ss-room/20171211IPR90024/new-eu-wide- penalties-for-money-laundering; Commission proposal of 21 December 2016 for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on countering money laundering by criminal law (COM(2016)0826. 66 UNODC - https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/money- laundering/globalization.html
Amendment 743 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 109
Paragraph 109
109. Deplores the fact that a large number of Member States have failed to fully or partially transpose AMLD4 into their domestic legislation within the set deadline, and that for this reason, infringement procedures have had to be opened by the Commission against them, including referrals before the Court of Justice of the European Union67 ; calls on these Member States to swiftly remedy this situation; remindurges Member States ofto fulfil their legal obligation to respect the deadline of 10 January 2020 for the transposition of AMLD5 into their domestic legislation; _________________ 67 On 19 July 2018, the Commission referred Greece and Romania to the Court of Justice of the European Union for failing to transpose the fourth Anti-Money Laundering Directive into their national law. Ireland had transposed only a very limited part of the rules and was also referred to the Court of Justice.
Amendment 745 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 110
Paragraph 110
110. Recalls the crucial importance of CDD as part of the know-your-customer (KYC) obligation which consists of obliged entities having to properly identify their customers and the source of their funds as well as the ultimate beneficial owners of the assets, including the immobilisation of anonymous accounts; calls on the private sector to take an active role and to be at the front line of defence in combatting financing of terrorism and prevention of terrorist activity, where possible;
Amendment 757 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 112
Paragraph 112
112. Recalls that KYC and CDD continues throughout the business relationship, and that customers’ ’transactions have to be monitored for suspicious or unusual activities; recalls, in this context, the obligation for obliged entities to promptly inform national FIUs, on their own initiative, of transactions suspected of ML, associate predicate offences or terrorist financing; calls on public and private stakeholders to develop closer working relationships and to exchange best practices in how to combat financing of terrorism and how to mitigate against future incidences of ML inside the EU;
Amendment 795 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 117 a (new)
Paragraph 117 a (new)
117 a. Believes that any AML institutional set-up needs to be crystal clear on the distribution of responsibilities between the EU and national levels and accompanied by the corresponding accountability requirements; considers that granting AML powers to an EU agency can only be done if appropriate human and financial means are allocated to it;
Amendment 801 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 119
Paragraph 119
Amendment 807 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 121 a (new)
Paragraph 121 a (new)
121 a. Recalls that pursuant to AMLD5, the carrying out of AML/CFT investigations should be held at centralised automated mechanisms for banks and payment accounts such as registers and data retrieval systems, as to guarantee the highest levels of data protection and privacy standards;
Amendment 811 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 122 a (new)
Paragraph 122 a (new)
122 a. Calls for increased scrutiny and continuous supervision of the members of management boards and shareholders of credit institutions, investment firms and insurers in the EU, and stresses in particular the difficulty of revoking banking licences or equivalent specific authorisations;
Amendment 813 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 123
Paragraph 123
123. Recalls that the ECB has the competence and responsibility for withdrawing authorisation from credit institutions for serious breaches of AML/CFT rules; considers, therefore, that it is essential to guarantee its independence and give it the competences within the framework of the Single Supervisory Mechanism (SSM) to guarantee its functions in AML/ CFT matters, ensuring that the competent authorities exchange confidential information with it.
Amendment 816 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 124
Paragraph 124
124. Stresses that ESAs, and in particular the EBA, must urgently should be provided with sufficient resource capacity to carry out their oversight functions and improve AML supervision in order to respond to the expectations of Europe’s tax payers; points out that according to the PANA report the EBA has only 0.8 of an employee in charge of this issue;
Amendment 836 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 126 a (new)
Paragraph 126 a (new)
126 a. Calls on Member States to establish information sharing arrangements between public authorities, law enforcement and specific private sector stakeholders, such as data providers and credit institutions, who hold relevant financial information relating to financing of terrorism;
Amendment 851 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 128
Paragraph 128
128. Points out that the non- standardisation of suspicious transaction report formats among Member States and with respect to the different obliged entities leads to difficulties in the processing and exchange of information between FIUs; calls on the Commission to explore mechanisms to set upset up an EU benchmarking system as a tool to standardised the reporting formats for obliged entities in order to facilitate theand enhance the processing and exchangeing of information between FIUs in cases with a cross-border dimension;
Amendment 855 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 129
Paragraph 129
129. Encourages the competent authorities and FIUs to engage with financial institutions and other obliged entities to enhance suspicious activity reporting, ensuring that FIUs receive more useful, focused and complete information to properly perform their duties, while at the same time ensuring compliance with the General Data Protection Regulationch could include better information exchange between both the private and public sector, while at the same time ensuring compliance with the General Data Protection Regulation; calls on the European Data Protect Board(EDPB) to provide further clarification to market operators processing personal data as part of their due diligence obligations so as to enable them to comply with the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR);
Amendment 871 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 131 a (new)
Paragraph 131 a (new)
131 a. Calls for the harmonisation of CDD at EU level, in particular, enhanced checks and systematic reporting shall be carried by obliged entities when performing CDD relating to business relationships or transactions involving countries identified by the EU Commission as ‘high-risk third countries’; calls for provisions to be made for penalties in the event of negligence or conflict of interests in cases of outsourcing;
Amendment 901 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 138 a (new)
Paragraph 138 a (new)
138 a. Calls on the Commission to closely monitor technological developments, assess technological risks and potential loopholes, support resilience to a cyberattack or a system breakdown, and promote data protection projects; encourages competent authorities and the Commission to develop stress testing for distributed ledger technologies applications;
Amendment 922 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 141
Paragraph 141
141. Recalls that EU AML legislation requires Member States to lay down sanctions for breaches of anti-money laundering rules; stresses that these sanctions must be effective, proportionate and dissuasive;Stresses that sanctions for breaching anti-money laundering rules must be effective, proportionate and dissuasive, as required in EU AML legislation; said sanctions should be applied to, inter alia, companies that unjustifiably use non-cooperative jurisdictions for money laundering and tax evasion, intermediaries who resort to such jurisdictions and taxpayers (individuals or legal entities)who, to avoid or evade the payment of taxes in any Member State, carry out activities without economic substance in said jurisdictions
Amendment 929 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 141 a (new)
Paragraph 141 a (new)
141 a. Asks the EBA to monitor national investigations and the corresponding sanctions, and to submit an annual report to the European Commission.
Amendment 930 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 143 a (new)
Paragraph 143 a (new)
143 a. Regrets that, concerning third countries, sanctions are not always applied or sufficiently deterrent in relevant cases; deplores the fact, in this context, that Member States, in spite of the recommendations put forward by the PANA committee, continue to oppose the imposition by the EU of sanctions on third countries whose tax systems are regarded as damaging to the Union; considers that, concerning the European Union, the Commission shall forward, every two years, to the European Parliament and the Council a report on national practices as regards the imposition of administrative and criminal penalties on legal and natural persons found guilty of fraud and financial crimes with a view to analyse whether different national regimes lead to regulatory arbitrage, whether they have a deterrent effect and are appropriate, taking into account the nature of the infractions and the good faith or not of the taxpayer; the Commission should accompany this report with proposals where relevant;
Amendment 944 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 147
Paragraph 147
Amendment 956 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 6.1
Subheading 6.1
List of tax havens inside and outside the EU
Amendment 961 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 150
Paragraph 150
150. Recalls the importance of a common EU list of non-cooperative jurisdictions for tax purposes (hereinafter ‘EU list’) based on comprehensive, transparent, robust, objectively verifiable and commonly accepted criteria that is regularly updated and includes tax havens inside and outside the EU;
Amendment 965 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 151
Paragraph 151
151. Welcomes the adoption by the Council of the first EU list on 5 December 2017 and the ongoing monitoring of the commitments made by third countries; notes that the list has been updated several times on the basis of the assessment of those commitments; underlines that this assessment is based on criteria deriving from a technical scoreboard and that Parliament had no legal involvement in this process; criticises that this lack of transparency and democratic oversight delegitimizes the process; calls in this context on the Commission and the Council to inform Parliament in detail ahead of any proposed change to the list; considers that the current list is not exhaustive enough; calls on the Council to publish a regular progress report regarding black- and grey-listed jurisdictions as part of the regular update from the CoC Group to the Council;
Amendment 992 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 154 a (new)
Paragraph 154 a (new)
154 a. Calls in the specific case of non- cooperative tax jurisdictions inside the EU for measures, such as the suspension of budgetary commitments concerning Union funds, until the national tax legislation complies with regulatory standards (including automatic exchange of information and BEPS implementation);
Amendment 1023 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 158
Paragraph 158
158. Reiterates its call for the EU to have a leading role in the global fight against tax evasion, aggressive tax planning and money laundering, in particular through Commission initiatives in all related international forums; calls on the EU and Member States to prepare themselves ex ante in order to express a concerted position in those fora;
Amendment 1029 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 159
Paragraph 159
159. Recalls its position regardingBelieves that the creation of a global tax body within the UN framework, which should be well equipped and have sufficient resources to ensure thatonly makes sense if all countries can participate on an equal footing in the formulation and reform of global tax policies and which has sanctioning powers and does not function by unanimity voting ;
Amendment 1039 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 160
Paragraph 160
160. Calls for a global summit on remaining necessary global tax reforms in order to enhance international cooperation and put pressure on all countries, in particular their offshore financial centres, to comply with transparency and fair taxation standards; calls for the Commission to take the initiative for such a summit and for the summit to allow for the establishment of the abovementioned global tax body;
Amendment 1054 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 162 a (new)
Paragraph 162 a (new)
162 a. Acknowledges that tax havens also exist in developing countries and that their political leadership actively pursues such policies;
Amendment 1091 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 170 a (new)
Paragraph 170 a (new)
170 a. Calls for the Union negotiators to include the issues of, inter alia, financial crimes, tax evasion, tax avoidance, aggressive tax planning and corporate taxation rates when negotiating the details of the future relationship between the EU and the United Kingdom;
Amendment 1123 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 176
Paragraph 176
176. Notes that the Commission has opened an in-depth investigation of the application of the Madeira Free Zone regional aid scheme by Portugal1a; _________________ 1a An in-depth Commission investigation to examine whether Portugal has applied the Madeira Free Zone regional aid scheme in conformity with its 2007 and 2013 decisions approving it, namely by verifying whether tax exemptions granted by Portugal to companies established in the Madeira Free Zone are in line with the Commission decisions and EU State aid rules; highlights that the Commission is verifying whether Portugal complied with the requirements of the schemes, i.e. whether the company profits benefiting from the income tax reductions originated exclusively from activities carried out in Madeira and whether the beneficiary companies actually created and maintained jobs in Madeira;
Amendment 1134 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 177
Paragraph 177
177. Welcomes the broad definition of both ‘intermediary’ and ‘reportable cross- border arrangement’ in the recently adopted DAC683 ; recalls the obligation of intermediaries under DAC6 to report structural loopholes in tax legislation to tax authorities, without having to reveal the identities of any potential clients taking advantage of these loopholes at the time; requests that intermediaries that are convicted for participation in and knowledge of fraudulent behaviour of clients are to have their licenses revoked and be banned from practising their occupation henceforth; _________________ 83 OJ L 139, 5.6.2018, p. 1.
Amendment 1160 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 179 b (new)
Subheading 179 b (new)
Recalls the revelations of investigative journalists, which have become known as the LuxLeaks, Panama papers, Paradise papers and CumEx scandals;
Amendment 1163 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 180
Paragraph 180
180. Believes that the protection of whistle-blowers is of major importance to ensure that unlawful activities and abuse of law are prevented or do not prosper; according to fundamental right to freedom of expression and information; Recognises that whistle-blowers play a crucial role in the fight against corruption and other serious crimes or illegal activities and in the protection of the EU's financial interests; stresses that whistle- blowers are often a crucial source for investigative journalism and should therefore be protected against any form of harassment and retaliation; believes that it is necessary to protect the confidentiality of investigative journalism’s sources, including whistle- blowers, if the role of investigative journalism as a watchdog in democratic society is to be safeguarded;
Amendment 1168 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 180 a (new)
Paragraph 180 a (new)
180 a. Welcomes the proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the protection of persons reporting on breaches of Union law.
Amendment 1176 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 181 a (new)
Paragraph 181 a (new)
181 a. Highlights that the safeguarding of confidentiality and anonymity contributes to the creation of more effective channels for reporting fraud, corruption or other serious infringements.
Amendment 1216 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 192
Paragraph 192
192. NotDeplores that, despite requests to the Council, no relevant documents have been made available to the TAX3 Committee; calls into question, therefore, the political will of the Council to enhance transparency and cooperationis greatly concerned about the lack of political will of the Member States in the Council to take substantial steps in the fight against money laundering, tax fraud, tax evasion and aggressive tax planning or to comply with the TEU and the principle of sincere cooperation by ensuring sufficient transparency and cooperation with the other EU institutions;
Amendment 1221 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 192 a (new)
Paragraph 192 a (new)
192 a. Recalls that taxation is a national competence and that the European Parliament has very limited powers in these matters; points out that issues of tax fraud, tax evasion and aggressive tax planning cannot be effectively tackled without political will by Member States and the Council
Amendment 1232 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 199 a (new)
Paragraph 199 a (new)
199 a. Calls for the creation of a new Union Tax Policy Coherence and Coordination Centre (TPCCC)within the structure of the Commission that can assess and monitor Member States’ tax policies at Union level and ensure that no new harmful tax measures are implemented by Member States; such a TPCCC should be able to monitor Member States’ compliance with the common Union list of uncooperative jurisdictions in addition to ensuring and fostering cooperation between national tax administrations 1a; _________________ 1a According to recommendations made by the TAXE2 and PANA Committees.
Amendment 1239 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 201
Paragraph 201
201. Takes note of the persons whoStrongly regrets that the persons referred to in Annex XX refused to participate in TAX3 committee hearings as referred to in Annex XX;
Amendment 1241 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 202
Paragraph 202
202. Calls on the Council and the Commission to agree on the establishment of a publicly accessible and regularly updated list of non-cooperative non- institutional parties in the interinstitutional agreement on a mandatory transparency register for lobbyists; considers, in the meantime, that a record should be kept of those stakeholders who have notindividuals and organisations who without justifiable reason refused to attended the committee’s public meetingsTAXE, TAX2, PANA and TAX3 committee hearings and that their access badges to the European Parliament should be withdrawn;
Amendment 1265 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 205
Paragraph 205
205. WelcomUrges the Commission’ to go forward with its intention to propose qualified majority voting for specific and pressing tax policy issues where vital legislative files and initiatives aimed at combating tax fraud, tax evasion, aggressive tax planning or financial crimes have been blocked in the Council to the detriment of Member States and the Union as a whole;
Amendment 1281 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 207
Paragraph 207
207. Takes the view that the enforcement of the work of the TAXE, TAX2, PANA and TAX3 committees should be continued,followed up in the forthcoming parliamentary term, in a permanent structure within Parliament such as a subcommittee to by the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (ECON);