188 Amendments of Molly SCOTT CATO related to 2018/2121(INI)
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 8 a (new)
Citation 8 a (new)
8a having regard to its resolution of 11 April 2018 on protection of investigative journalists in Europe: the case of Slovak journalist Jan Kuciak and Martina Kušnírová
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 8 a (new)
Citation 8 a (new)
- having regard to its resolution of 29 November 2018 on The Cum Ex Scandal: financial crime and the loopholes in the current legal framework;
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 19 a (new)
Citation 19 a (new)
- having regard to the infringement procedures against 21 Member States for having not or only partially transposed AMLD4 into national law of which three are currently at the stage of court referrals (Romania, Ireland and now Luxembourg), with one on hold (Greece), nine at the stage of Reasoned Opinions, and eight at the stage of Letters of Formal Notice,
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 20 a (new)
Citation 20 a (new)
- having regard to the Commission Communication on strengthening the Union framework for prudential and anti- money laundering supervision,
Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 21 a (new)
Citation 21 a (new)
- having regard to the Recommendation of the EBA to the Maltese FIAU,
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 21 b (new)
Citation 21 b (new)
- having regard to the Formal Opinion to the Maltese FIAU of the Commission,
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 25 a (new)
Citation 25 a (new)
- having regard to reports on tax avoidance and tax evasion as challenges for governance, social protection and development in developing countries1a, and gender equality and taxation policies in the EU1b; _________________ 1a Report on tax avoidance and tax evasion as challenges for governance, social protection and development in developing countries (2015/2058(INI)) (http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/get Doc.do?pubRef=- //EP//TEXT+REPORT+A8-2015- 0184+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN) 1b Gender equality and taxation policies in the EU (2018/2095(INI)) (https://oeil.secure.europarl.europa.eu/oei l/popups/ficheprocedure.do?lang=&refere nce=2018/2095(INI)
Amendment 41 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Notes that money laundering, tax evasion and tax avoidance have important economic, political, and social impacts, including loss of tax revenue, productivity loss, unfair competition and inequality, and incentivise certain economic outcomes that undermine both the countries’ political stability and social contract; stresses that the negative effects on public resources also impact the realisation of the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs);
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1 b. Notes with regret that tax fraud, tax evasion and aggressive tax planning are important factors causing income and wealth inequality, and have shifted the tax burden from rich individuals to poorer citizens, from capital income to labour income and consumption, from MNEs to SMEs and from the financial sector to the real economy; notes that this has resulted in weaker and less efficient tax-and- transfer systems that are essential to finance public goods and stabilise the economy;
Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 c (new)
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1 c. Notes that tax evasion and tax avoidance are major contributors to gender inequality in the Union and globally as they limit the resources available to governments to increase equality at national and international level; calls on the Commission, the Council and the Member States to include a gender perspective in the formulation of its proposal to tackle tax evasion;
Amendment 51 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Stresses that during the work of the TAX3 Special Committee more revelations concerning financial crimes, tax evasion and tax avoidance have come to light, particularly connected to cases such as those of the ABLV Bank in Latvia, the murder of investigative journalists Ján Kuciak and Martina Kušnírová, the Danske Bank in Denmark and Estonia or the Cum Ex scandal involving at least 11 EU countries; stresses that as a result of the Panama Papers scandal, four people have been charged in the US;
Amendment 60 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Welcomes the fact that during its current term the Commission has put forward 22 legislative proposals aimed at closing some of the loopholes, improving the fight against financial crimes and aggressive tax planning, and enhancing tax collection efficiency and tax fairness; calls for the swift adoption of initiatives that have not yet been finalised before the end of this legislature, particularly the key legislative proposals for public Country by Country reporting, Common Corporate tax Base and Common Consolidated Corporate tax base and digital taxation; and for careful monitoring of the implementation to ensure efficiency and proper enforcement, in order to keep pace with the versatility of tax fraud, tax evasion and aggressive tax planning;
Amendment 63 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Regrets that the Council has repeatedly failed to pass the measures that are necessary to require transnational corporations to fulfil their part of the social contract; notes that such failure undermines faith in the ability of democratic politicians to solve issues of injustice that are deeply troubling for our citizens;
Amendment 70 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3 b. Regrets that due to resistance of Member States, several legislative proposals in the field of tax justice have not been adopted yet to the detriment of European citizens.
Amendment 75 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Deplores again ‘the lack of reliable and unbiased statistics on the magnitude of tax avoidance and tax evasion [and] stresses the importance of developing appropriate and transparent methodologies to quantify the scale of these phenomena, as well as their impact on countries’ public finances, economic activities and public investments’; notes that transparency in general is central to the fight against money laundering, tax evasion and tax avoidance, and that some jurisdictions have interest in keeping the secrecy at place;
Amendment 84 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. 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; urges the Commission and Member States to analyse their tax gaps in the EU and Member States including VAT gaps in order to design tax policies in an effective manner.
Amendment 86 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Calls on the Member States to estimate their tax gaps, and publish the results annually;
Amendment 91 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Highlights that close to 40 % of MNEs’ profits are shifted to tax havens globally each year and recognizes that certain jurisdictions within the EU, namely Luxemburg, Ireland and the Netherlands, are regular receivers of financial flows and reported profits generated elsewhere in the Union due to their very low or zero corporate, dividend and capital gains tax rates, and special tax provisions25 ; _________________ 25 Tørsløv, Wier and Zucman ‘The missing profits of nations’, National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper 24701, 2018.
Amendment 94 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8 a. Notes the tendency of corporations to produce their own estimates of ETRs - often based on bogus methods - which are then used to influence policy in a way that diminishes their tax liabilities;
Amendment 98 #
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 and could be considered illegal; however, recalls with concern that this strict distinction ignores the existence of grey areas and fails to take sufficient account of the ability of powerful players to change tax law to suit themselves;
Amendment 107 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Recalls that ATP describes the setting of a tax design aimed at reducing tax liability by using the technicalities of a tax system or of mismatches between two or more tax systems that go against the spirit of the law and could be considered illegal;
Amendment 111 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10 a. Notes that the growing role of intangible assets in the MNE value chain and harmful R&D tax incentives are conducive to aggressive tax planning.;
Amendment 123 #
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 intermedia, in this regard, that for the wealthy most of their income arrives in setting up such schemethe form of capital gains rather than earnings;
Amendment 128 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Welcomes the Commission’s assessment and inclusion of ATP indicators in its 2018 European Semester country reports; calls for such assessment to become a regular feature in order to ensure a level playing field in the EU internal market with a clear follow-up, as well as the greater stability of public revenue in the long run; regrets that so far no recommendations to end harmful tax practices have been put forward by the Commission in the course of the European Semester country reports, calls on the Commission to ensure full transparency of this exercise, including the follow-up, and to give countries concrete recommendations regarding the fight against aggressive tax planning strategies;
Amendment 143 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Reiterates its call on companies, as taxpayers, to fully comply with their tax obligations and refrain fromstop any forms of aggressive tax planning leading to BEPS, and to consider fair taxation strategy as an important part of their corporate social responsibilityto recognise their business is enabled by tax-funded social, legal and physical infrastructure and public services, and to embrace fair taxation strategy as an important part of their corporate social responsibility; reminds them that rising inequality and the gap between the wealthy and corporate elites is undermining the cohesion of societies and faith in democratic politics;
Amendment 149 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14 a. Urges Member States to review and update bilateral taxation agreements between Member States and with third countries to close loopholes that incentivise tax-driven trading practices with the purpose of tax avoidance;
Amendment 156 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Recalls that taxes must be paid in the jurisdictions where the actual economic activity and value creation takes place or, in case of indirect taxation, where consumption takes place; especially since it is required to fund the public services that the corporations themselves depend on;
Amendment 157 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15 a. Deplores the drop in nominal corporate tax rates all over Europe in recent years and the proliferation of incentives to lower the effective tax rate (ETR) compared to the statutory corporate tax rate; notes with concern that, regarding effective tax rates in the EU, in addition to Luxembourg (2.2%), the lowest ETRs are to be found in Hungary (7.5%), Bulgaria (9.5%), Cyprus (9.6%) as well as in the Netherlands (10.4%) and Latvia (10.6%) and that most countries appear to tax MNEs regressively: the larger the MNE, the lower the ETR;
Amendment 159 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 b (new)
Paragraph 15 b (new)
15 b. Acknowledges the harmful consequences that tax competition between jurisdictions and the resulting "race to the bottom" have on public revenues and the progressivity of taxation; underlines that the further lowering of corporate taxes will eventually put the sustainability of the Union's public finances at stake; calls on the European Commission to propose a Directive that ensures minimum effective corporate tax rates of at least 20% in the European Union;
Amendment 173 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16 a. Acknowledges that special tax and deduction regimes, including those in non-EU countries like Switzerland, bear substantial responsibility for the global downward spiral of corporate taxes rates; notes that the effective tax rate is much lower than nominal rates in most EU countries, and important disparities and pressure on lower tax rates lead to a race to the bottom;
Amendment 175 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 b (new)
Paragraph 16 b (new)
16 b. Regrets that profit shifting is often used by companies to put pressure on governments and employees, demanding weaker regulation and labour standards with the excuse of low profit margins, even though the company is operating successfully;
Amendment 192 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Acknowledges that the G20/OECD- led BEPS project was meant to tackle in a coordinated manner the causes and circumstances creating BEPS practices, by improving the coherence of tax rules across borders, reinforcing substance requirements and enhancing transparency and certainty; regrets that OECD BEPS Action Plan concerns only tax base competition and does not address tax rate competition;
Amendment 196 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Notes that the G20/OECD 15-point BEPS action plan 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; notes with regret however that BEPS so far failed to deliver on the most effective solution against the base erosion and profit shifting, deplores the fact that OECD still remain rather an exclusive club of countries rather that an open global platform that could keep up with the pace and deliver the solutions to minimise the negative impacts and risks of globalisation; 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 204 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Points out that some countries have recently adopted unilateral countermeasures against harmful tax practices (such as the UK’s Diverted Profits Tax and the Global Intangible Low- Taxed Income (GILTI) provisions of the US tax reform) to ensure that the foreign income of MNEs is duly taxed at a minimum effective tax rate in the parent’s country of residence; calls for an EU assessment of these measures and a legislative proposal, if appropriate, considering the negative potential tax base and strategic spillovers the US reform can have on the EU;
Amendment 225 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Reiterates its call for a clear definition of permanent establishment, including the concept of a ‘significant digital presence’, so that companies cannot artificially avoid having a taxable presence in a Member State in which they have economic activity;
Amendment 239 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Emphasises that the EU actions aimed at addressing BEPS and ATP have equipped tax authorities with an updated toolbox to ensure fair tax collection; stresses that tax authorities should be responsible for making effective use of the tools without imposing an additional significant burden on responsible taxpayers, particularly SMEs;
Amendment 245 #
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 gap; notes that there are continuing loopholes in the DAC regime that need to be closed1; __________________________ [1] Greens/EFA Report Reporting taxation: Analysing loopholes in the EU’s automatic exchange of information and how to close them, October 15 2018
Amendment 247 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28 a (new)
Paragraph 28 a (new)
28 a. Is concerned by the trend amongst some Member States of facilitating onshoring of IP from low tax Third Countries to EU Member States, through the provision of amortisation relief on IP acquirement, the proliferation of ‘patent boxes’ providing reduced taxation rates on certain IP profits, high or complete capital allowances for intellectual property and the introduction or extension of research and development credits1; notes that this while may conform with the BEPS actions’ substance requirements, it is in contrast with the spirit of BEPS; reiterates concerns expressed by the European Parliament2 and European Commission in relation to revenue losses associated with such measures3; _______________________ [1] Eurodad et. al., Tax Games: the Race to the Bottom, Europe’s role in supporting an unjust tax system 2017, December 2017, pp. 22 – 24; and IMF, Fiscal Monitor: Acting Now, Acting Together, April 2016, p 44. [2] 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. 26, paragraph 117. [3] European Commission, DG TAXUD, Tax Policies in the European Union. 2016 Survey, 26 October 2016, 2.1.3 R&D tax incentives, p 2.
Amendment 250 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28 c (new)
Paragraph 28 c (new)
28 c. Calls on EU Institutions and Member States to support a global tax reform based on the principles of formulary apportionment as included in the CCCTB proposal;
Amendment 254 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Welcomes the fact that Member States’ tax systems and overall tax environment have become part of 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; calls on the Commission to make full use of this information and give concerned countries precise recommendations in its Specific Country Recommendations’ (SCRs) reports; urges Member States to swiftly follow the Commission's recommendations to fight ATP; _________________ 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 268 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
32. Calls on the Commission to issue a proposal aimed at repealoutlawing 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 269 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 a (new)
Paragraph 32 a (new)
32 a. Calls on both the EU institutions and Member States to ensure public procurement contracts do not facilitate tax avoidance or benefit ATP by suppliers. Member States should monitor and ensure that companies or other legal entities involved in tenders and procurement contracts do not participate in tax evasion and avoidance by interacting with financial intermediaries established in offshore centres and tax havens, or by facilitating illicit capital flows, and to increase their transparency policies by requiring annual public country-by-country reporting, tracing beneficial ownership and controlling transfer pricing in order to ensure the transparencyof investments and prevent tax evasion and tax avoidance; calls on the Commission to clarify existing procurement practice under the EU procurement directive, and if necessary, propose an update to it that does not prohibit the application of tax related considerations as criteria for exclusion or even as selection criteria in public procurement1. ______________ [1] Initiatives such as www.tenderhaven.eu have attempted to introduce more transparency.
Amendment 286 #
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 digitalisationdeplores the continued refusal of certain Member States to support this proposal and the failure of EU solidarity that this refusal represents;
Amendment 289 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 a (new)
Paragraph 33 a (new)
33 a. Urges the Council to adopt these legislative proposals as soon as possible and before the end of this legislature, taking into consideration Parliament’s opinion that already includes the concept of virtual permanent establishment; considers that the deployment of this legislation would significantly contribute to closing the remaining loopholes and level the playing field in light of digitalisation and the growing role of intangible assets in the MNE value chain, which have exacerbated the problems with transfer pricing systems; however, expresses concern about the inclusion of a super-deduction for research and development1; ________________ [1] Council of the European Union, Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee, ECO/419,5.4 (http://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/docu ment/ST-12848-2017-INIT/EN/pdf)
Amendment 315 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
Paragraph 35
35. Welcomes the digital tax package adopted by the Commission on 21 March 2018; calls on the Council to swiftly adopt these proposalsdeplores the slow approach by the Council and its inability to come to an agreement on this package yet; points out that this already led to the distortion of the Single Market as national solutions have been put in place in different Member States and warns that the distortion risks worsening as other Member States consider to put in place national digital taxes; calls on the Council to adopt these proposals as soon as possible and before the end of this legislature, taking into account Parliament’s opinion on them;
Amendment 320 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35 a (new)
Paragraph 35 a (new)
35 a. Recalls that the digital services under the scope of the digital tax package should be the processing and sale of data, online advertisement, digital interfaces and the provision of digital content; deplores that the Council is currently considering a proposal that is much less ambitious in scope than the Commission’s proposal and than the Parliament’s position;
Amendment 328 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36
Paragraph 36
36. Understands that the so-called interim solution is not optimal; believnotes that it will help speed up the search for a better solution at global level, while levelling the playing field in local markets to some extent and preventing further distortion of EU Single Market; insists on the need to take a more optimal and long-term approach by adopting the Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Basis (CCCTB) with a digital factor in the formula apportionment, as voted by the Parliament in March 2018, together with the new definition of a Significant Digital Presence (SDP); strongly believes that it is the best way to tackle tax evasion of digital multinationals and deplores that these files are not progressing in the Council;
Amendment 335 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 a (new)
Paragraph 36 a (new)
36a. Reiterates its call on the Commission to use the power vested in the article 116 TFEU and to make proposals in the area of taxation under this article, in particular for the adoption of the Digital Services Tax (DST) and the CCCTB; believes that the conditions set out in Article 116 are met since there is a clear evidence that competition in the internal market between digital and traditional firms is distorted and that the Council failed to come to an agreement to eliminate the distortion;
Amendment 347 #
38a. Calls on the Commission to tackle existing loopholes in automatic exchange of information, particularly coming from the DAC3 revision; stresses in this regard that this should cover national rulings and rulings with natural persons, that information should be made public, and that information on rulings should be better exchanged with third countries;
Amendment 350 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39
Paragraph 39
39. Reiterates, furthermore, its call to ensure simultaneous tax audits of persons of common or complementary interests (including parent companies and their subsidiaries), and its calcalls on the Commission to present a legislative proposal to further enhance tax cooperation between Member States through an obligation to answer group requests on tax matters;
Amendment 355 #
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 the Commission and the Member States to give priority to the sharing of best practices among tax authorities;
Amendment 360 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42
Paragraph 42
42. Welcomes the automatic exchange of financial account information based on the global standard which has been developed by the OECD with Andorra, Liechtenstein, Monaco, San Marino and Switzerland; calls on the Commission and the Member States to upgrade the Treaty provisions so as to match the DAC as amended; regrets that Andorra, Liechtenstein, San Marino and Switzerland are moving from secrecy jurisdictions to low taxation jurisdictions, and still have harmful regimes according to the Council assessment on the EU list;
Amendment 370 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44 a (new)
Paragraph 44 a (new)
Amendment 378 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44 b (new)
Paragraph 44 b (new)
44b. Calls on the Commission to assess the state of play of all potentially harmful taxation agreements and any possible loophole in the EU rules on common taxation of parent companies and their subsidiaries, to come up with new upgraded policy measures to tackle dividend arbitrage practices and to take the necessary steps to prevent traders from exploiting loopholes in the law;
Amendment 383 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44 c (new)
Paragraph 44 c (new)
44c. Calls on the Commission to make a proposal to strengthen the DAC6 in order to require the mandatory disclosure of dividend arbitrage schemes and all information on capital gains, including the granting of dividend and capital gains tax refunds;
Amendment 398 #
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 Council so that it enters immediately into negotiations with Parliament as soon as possible and find agreement before the end of this legislature;
Amendment 406 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45 a (new)
Paragraph 45 a (new)
45a. Notes that transparency is still lacking in numerous areas of taxation in the EU not limited to the corporate taxation; calls on the Commission and on Member States to collect and publish data on non-doms and CBI/RBI schemes; calls on the Commission to present a proposal to make the publication of tax rulings mandatory;
Amendment 408 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45 b (new)
Paragraph 45 b (new)
45b. Calls on the Commission to issue a proposal that would oblige Member States to ensure that economic operators participating in public procurement procedures comply with a minimum level of transparency regarding tax, particularly public CBCR and transparent ownership structures;
Amendment 409 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45 c (new)
Paragraph 45 c (new)
45c. Reminds Member States of the legal base of the proposal for public CBCR as found in the impact assessment of the Commission published 12 April 2016; recalls that the measures on corporate tax transparency cannot be regarded as relating to fiscal provisions affecting the establishment or functioning of the internal market in the sense of Article 115 TFEU;
Amendment 413 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 47
Paragraph 47
47. Calls on the Commission to assess possible measures to discourage Member States from granting such State aid in the form of a tax advantage, and to develop a robust method for measuring such indirect state aid;
Amendment 419 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 48 a (new)
Paragraph 48 a (new)
48a. Is concerned by the lack of transparency of tax rulings and notes that the tax rulings investigated by the Commission were only available to them because of revelations by investigative journalists, civil society organisations and trade unions.
Amendment 424 #
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 certain of its profits in the EU, 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 the Commission to put forward a legislative proposal to harmonise double taxation treaties of Member States and terminate existing mismatches in the qualification of profits and expenses; _________________ 38 http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP- 18-5831_en.htm
Amendment 433 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 51
Paragraph 51
51. Reiterates its calls to the European Commission for guidelines clarifying what constitutes tax-related State aid and ‘appropriate’ transfer pricing, with a view to removing legal uncertainties for both compliant taxpayers and tax administrations, and providing a framework for Member States’ tax practices accordingly;
Amendment 436 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 51 a (new)
Paragraph 51 a (new)
51a. Points out that the scope of state aide cases proves the urgent need to for a systemic change and approval of EU-wide reforms to curb tax avoidance including mandatory public Country-by-Country Reporting, Common Corporate Tax Base and Common Consolidate Corporate Tax Base or digital taxation; calls for a reform of the European State Aid framework in order to make tackling tax avoidance schemes between multinationals and Member States faster and more effective;
Amendment 441 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 2.6
Subheading 2.6
Amendment 445 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 52
Paragraph 52
52. Notes that there is no single definition of letterbox companiesshell companies; notes, however, that they are characterised by the absence of real economic activity in the Member State of registration, and are a means for treaty abuse or treaty shopping, usually used with the purpose of circumventing labour laws and social contributions, aggressive tax planning and tax evasion, money laundering and/or terrorist financing;
Amendment 448 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 52 a (new)
Paragraph 52 a (new)
52a. Notes that shell companies offer anonymity to its ultimate beneficiaries and allow them to abuse tax treaties; notes in this regard that the central register on the beneficial ownership foreseen in AMLD4 covers shell companies but regrets that the threshold for disclosure (25% of shareholding) will not prevent owners from remaining hidden; highlights that shell companies can be used as a vehicle for money laundering, tax evasion and tax avoidance; calls on the Commission to propose an amendment to the AMLD5 requiring obliged entities to file a suspicious transaction report whenever they enter into business or help setting up a shell company;
Amendment 452 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 53
Paragraph 53
53. Points out national measures to specifically ban commercial relationships with letterboxshell companies; highlights, in particular, the Latvian legislation which defines a letterboxshell 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 454 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 53 a (new)
Paragraph 53 a (new)
53a. Notes that Latvia adopted in May 2018 a law banning financial institutions, as well as intermediaries, from cooperating and doing business with shell companies; calls on the Commission to put forward a legislative proposal to introduce the Latvian legislation in EU legislation and to encourage all EU Member States to follow this example;
Amendment 468 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 55
Paragraph 55
55. Underlines that a high share of foreign direct investment held by special purpose entities (SPEs) exists in several Member States, particularly in Malta, Luxembourg and the Netherlands;41 highlights that foreign direct investments through SPEs can be considerably affected by small legislative changes, whether domestically or abroad, affecting tax revenues and financial stability of the concerned countries and of the EU as a whole; _________________ 41 Kiendl Kristo I. and Thirion E., op. cit., p.23.
Amendment 486 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 58
Paragraph 58
58. Urges the Commission and the Member States to establish coordinated, binding, enforceable and substantial economic activity requirements as well as expenditure tests;
Amendment 490 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 59
Paragraph 59
59. Calls on the Commission to carry out, within two years, fitness checks of the interconnected legislative and policy initiatives aimed at addressing the use of letterboxshell companies in the context of tax fraud, tax evasion, aggressive tax planning and money laundering; calls on the Commission to make a proposal to ban shell companies in the EU, regarding that their use is associated with aggressive tax planning indicators;
Amendment 495 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 59 a (new)
Paragraph 59 a (new)
Amendment 502 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 61
Paragraph 61
61. Regrets, however, that every year, large amounts of the expected VAT revenue are lost because of fraud; highlights that according to the Commission’s statistics, the VAT gap in 2016 amounted to EUR 147 billion, which represents more than 12 % of the total expected VAT revenue43 ; notes that the Commission estimates that around EUR 50 billion – or EUR 100 per EU citizen each year – is lost to cross-border VAT fraud44 ; while the Europol estimates around 60 billion EUR of the VAT gap is connected to VAT fraud, partly used also organised crime and terrorism financing; _________________ 43 Study and Reports on the VAT Gap in the EU-28 Member States: 2018 Final Report / TAXUD/2015/CC/131. 44 See Commission press release: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-17- 3443_en.htm
Amendment 504 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 61 a (new)
Paragraph 61 a (new)
61a. Highlights with concern that the VAT gap in 2016 amounted to EUR 147 billion; notes that the Commission estimates that around EUR 50 billion each year is lost to cross-border VAT fraud and that the proceeds from criminal activity in the EU are estimated to amount to EUR 110 billion per year; notes that the UNODC estimates that between 2 and 5% of global GDP is laundered each year;
Amendment 506 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 62
Paragraph 62
62. Calls for additional statistics to estimate the VAT gap; stresses that there is no common approach to data collection and sharing within the EU; urges the Commission to ensure that harmonised statistics are collected and published regularly in Member States;
Amendment 510 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 63
Paragraph 63
63. Underlines that the feature of the current VAT (transitional) regime of applying an exemption to intracommunity supplies and exports within the EU has been abused by fraudsters, in particular in the VAT carousel fraud; stresses that cash transactions still remain a very high risk regarding VAT fraud;
Amendment 535 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 70 a (new)
Paragraph 70 a (new)
70a. Regards with concern the Council's adoption of a Proposal to amend the common system of value added tax as regards the temporary application of a generalised reverse charge mechanism (GRCM) in relation to supplies of goods and services above a certain threshold of 2 October 2018, which allows for a GRCM with much weaker criteria than those approved by the European Parliament; acknowledges that a generalised application of the RCM shifts the tax liability to the retail stage, transforming the VAT system into a Sales Tax, jeopardising the in-built faithful reporting incentives of the VAT fractional payments system by concentrating the risk of fraud at the end of the value chain; notes that this creates risks for other types of fraud to arise, through underreporting of sales volumes and the exploitation of the variability of VAT rates across Member States, and that VAT fraud can be passed on to neighbouring countries, creating market disruptions in those borders where some Member States apply GRCM and others do not; calls on the Commission to closely monitor the application and consequences of this new legislation;
Amendment 560 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 76
Paragraph 76
76. Calls on the Commission and Member States to ensure that EPPO towill 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 568 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 78 a (new)
Paragraph 78 a (new)
78a. Highlights the importance of the implementation of a register of beneficial owners as an important tool to tackle VAT fraud; stresses the need and calls on Member States to create specialised units of police and tax services as well as to appoint specialised prosecutors and judges to deal with this type of fraud;
Amendment 583 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 81
Paragraph 81
81. Emphasises that natural persons do not generally exercise their freedom of movement for the purposes of tax fraud, tax evasion and aggressive tax planning; underlines, however, that some natural persons have a tax base large enough to span several tax jurisdictions; with high income and/or high wealth use inconsistent definitions of tax residence, special regimes and insufficient enforcement within or beyond the EU to achieve double non-taxation of their income
Amendment 588 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 82
Paragraph 82
82. Regrets that even without shifting tax residence high net worth individuals (HNWI) and ultra HNWI (UHNWI) continue to have the possibility to shift their earnings and funds or their purchases through different tax jurisdictions to obtain substantially reduced or zero liability by using the services of wealth managers and other intermediaries; deplores that some EU Member States have implemented tax schemed to attract high net worth individuals and create space for double non-taxation;
Amendment 592 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 83
Paragraph 83
83. Notes with regret that corporate tax fraud, tax evasion and aggressive tax planning contribute to shifting the tax burden on to honest and fair taxpayers, undermining the social contract and requiring law-abiding citizens to contribute a higher proportion of their earnings to the exchequer, as well as increasing inequality between those benefiting from the schemes and those who do not;
Amendment 594 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 83 a (new)
Paragraph 83 a (new)
83a. Notes that the threat of tax evasion and avoidance has created a race to the bottom regarding taxation of wealth, inheritance and capital incomes visible in the fact that – even without all the loopholes and avoidance strategies – the headline rates for labour income are usually higher than for effortless income from wealth and capital throughout the EU;
Amendment 595 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 83 b (new)
Paragraph 83 b (new)
83b. Recognizes that low top marginal rates, whether on labour income or on capital income, incentivise certain behaviour from Chief Executive Officers that result in poorer corporate economic governance and increased income inequality;
Amendment 601 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 84
Paragraph 84
84. Deplores the fact that some Member States, such as Portugal, have created tax regimes allowing non-nationals to obtain income tax benefits, hereby undermining other Member States’ tax base and fostering harmful policies which discriminate against their own citizens; these regimes offer benefits such as such as non-taxation of foreign possessions and income, lump-sum tax on foreign income, tax-free allowances on a part of incomes earn in the country, lower tax rate on pensions remitted to the country;
Amendment 605 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 84 a (new)
Paragraph 84 a (new)
84a. Reminds that the Commission in its communication of 2001 suggested to include special regimes for expatriates in its list of harmful tax practices1 but has not provided any data on the scope of the problem since; calls on the Commission to reactivate its work on this issue and to start by collecting information on the users and costs of existing regimes, including the costs of double non-taxation of cross-border capital income that is usually ignored by cost estimates of national tax agencies. __________________ [1] COM (2001) 260: Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament and the Economic and Social Committee Tax policy in the European Union - Priorities for the years ahead (https://eur- lex.europa.eu/procedure/EN/164839)
Amendment 615 #
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 visa or investor programmes, by which citizenship or residence is granted to non-EU citizens, whether they are from EU or non-EU countries, in exchange for financial investment; observes that these programmes do not necessarily require applicants to spend time on the territory in which the investment is made; _________________ 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. 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.
Amendment 623 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 86 a (new)
Paragraph 86 a (new)
86a. Notes that Citizenship by investment and residency by investment schemes in Member States such as Latvia, Austria or the UK have been used by a significant number of actors originating from Russia and countries under Russian influence; deplores that the secrecy surrounding these money flows has significantly increased the political, economic and security risks for European countries, particularly the risks of money laundering.
Amendment 624 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 86 b (new)
Paragraph 86 b (new)
86b. Notes that CBI and RBI schemes offered by third countries might pose EU security risks regarding visa issuing, and may increase the potential for tax evasion; highlights that, according to the OECD, CBI and RBI schemes are even more problematic when implemented by low or no-taxation jurisdiction and when no minimum presence is required;
Amendment 631 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 87
Paragraph 87
87. Stresses that CBI and RBI schemes carry significant risks, including a devaluation of EU citizenship and the potential for corruption, money laundering and tax evasion as well as security risks; reiterates its concern that citizenship or residence could be granted through these schemes without proper or indeed any customer due diligence (CDD) having been carried out by competent authorities; notes that the obligations contained in AMLD5 subjecting obliged entities to consider CBI or RBI applicants as a high-risk factor in the course of their due diligence process do not mitigate the risks associated with the schemes and should not constitute a way to absolve Member States from their responsibility to establish, abide by and monitor enhanced due diligence standards; notes that several formal investigations into corruption and money laundering have been launched at national and EU level directly related to CBI and RBI schemes; underlines that, at the same time, the economic sustainability and viability of the investments provided through these schemes remain uncertain; notes that one Member State’s decision to implement CBI and RBI schemes have spillover effects on other EU Member States;
Amendment 640 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 88 a (new)
Paragraph 88 a (new)
88a. Deplores that the financial benefits of such schemes accrue to a limited number of Member States whereas the potential costs of providing services to those who buy them may be borne by other states, creating an injustice across the Union;
Amendment 643 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 89
Paragraph 89
89. Worries that there is very little transparency in relation to the number and origin of applicants, the numbers of individuals granted citizenship or residency by these schemes and the amount invested through these schemes; appreciates the fact that somenotes that only a minority of Member States make explicit the name and nationalities of the individuals who are granted citizenship or residency under these schemes; calls on the Member States implementing these schemes to publish and share with other EU countries the names of all applicants, or at least the names of the politically exposed persons;
Amendment 653 #
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; notes with concern that Member States that offer this kind of schemes and refuse at the same time to receive information from other non-EU Member States via CRS create a loophole in automatic exchange of information systems; _________________ 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 659 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 91
Paragraph 91
91. Concludes that the potential economic benefits of CBI and RBI schemes do not offset the serious money laundering and tax evasion risks they present; calls on Member States to phase out allban existing CBI or RBI schemes as soon as possible; stresses that, in the meantime, Member States should properly ensure that enhanced CDD on applicants for citizenship or residence through these schemes is duly carried out, as required by AMLD5nd monitored by competent authorities; and urges the Commission to identify legislative instruments to set and impose EU – wide harmonised standards of these schemes; calls on Member States to ensure that competent authorities bear the ultimate responsibility for assessing due diligence findings and decision-making, and make explicit the name and the nationalities of the individuals who are granted citizenship or residency under these schemes; calls on the Commission to monitor rigorously and continuously the proper implementation and application of CDD within the framework of CBI and RBI schemes until they are repealed in each Member State and start infringement procedures;
Amendment 667 #
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; calls on Member States to require physical presence in the country as a condition for benefiting from CBI and RBI schemes before the phase out;
Amendment 675 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 93
Paragraph 93
93. Urges the Commission to finalise its study on CBI and RBI schemes in the Union; urges the Commission to examine whether, and, if so, which of these schemes posed a threat to EU legislation; calls on the Commission to assess the risks associated with the selling of citizenship and residence as part of its next Supranational Risk Assessment; urges the Commission to also assess the risks associated with the adoption of visa- waiver agreements with third countries that have CBI or RBI schemes in place; calls on the Commission to expand the scope of obliged entities covered by AMLD5 to include all agents or firms acting as intermediaries in the trade of citizenship and residency or acting as advisors in residence and citizenship planning; calls on the Commission to establish mechanisms for coordinating information sharing between Member States on rejected applications; calls on the Commission to assess the extent to which these schemes have been used by EU citizens;
Amendment 686 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 95
Paragraph 95
95. Notes that free ports within the EU can be established under the ‘free zone’ procedure; notes that free zones are enclosed areas within the customs territory of the Union where non-Union goods can be introduced free of import duty, other charges (i.e. taxes) and commercial policy measures; highlights with concern that free ports can be also used for the purpose of tax evasion;
Amendment 694 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 97
Paragraph 97
97. Notes that, apart from secure storage, the motivations for the use of free ports include a high degree of secrecy and the deferral of import duties and indirect taxes such as VAT or user tax; recognizes that the purpose of free ports is not to constitute a place for the safe and tax-free storage of value for the wealth of individuals while it has been found that they are frequently used as such;
Amendment 697 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 99
Paragraph 99
99. Observes that under the Union Customs Code, customs warehouses are on an almost identical legal footing with free ports; recommends, therefore, they be put on an equal footing with free ports under legal measures aimed at mitigating money laundering and tax evasion risks therein, such as AMLD5; considers that warehouses should be equipped with the adequate staff to be able to undertake the necessary scrutiny of the operations that they host;
Amendment 700 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 101
Paragraph 101
101. Notes that under DAC5, as of 1 January 2018, direct tax authorities have ‘access upon request’ to a broad information set with regard to ultimate beneficial ownership (UBO) information collected under the AMLD; notes that EU AML legislation is built on the trust in reliable CDD research and the diligent reporting of suspicious transactions by obliged entities, which will become AML gatekeepers; notes with concern that ‘access upon request’ to information held by free ports may only have very limited effect in specific cases63 ; takes the view that direct tax offices should be able to fish into UBO data as part of their surveillance tasks; _________________ 63 EPRS study entitled ‘Money Laundering and tax evasion risks in free ports’, October 2018, PE: 627.114; ISBN: 978-92- 846-3333-3.
Amendment 710 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 102 a (new)
Paragraph 102 a (new)
102 a. Calls on the Commission to begin the process and propose concrete steps for the phasing out of the system of free ports in Europe;
Amendment 712 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 103
Paragraph 103
Amendment 715 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 103 a (new)
Paragraph 103 a (new)
103 a. Points out that tax amnesties represent a high risk of decreased tax compliance in the long run and a threat to the rule of law and the fight against money laundering;
Amendment 716 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 103 b (new)
Paragraph 103 b (new)
103 b. Calls on the Member States to refrain from further using tax amnesties as this measure only represents a source of quick tax collection in the short run while has a significantly negative impact on the overall tax systems;
Amendment 726 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 106 a (new)
Paragraph 106 a (new)
106 a. Call on Member States to do group requests and to harmonise the definition of tax crimes; call on the Commission to eliminate any obstacles in administrative and legal cooperation;
Amendment 727 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 106 b (new)
Paragraph 106 b (new)
106 b. Calls on the Commission to assess and presents proposals to close loopholes in the DAC2, particularly by including hard assets and cryptocurrencies in the scope of the directive, by prescribing sanctions for non-compliance or false reporting from financial institutions, as well as by including more types of financial institutions and types of accounts that are not being reported at the moment, such as pension funds;
Amendment 728 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 106 c (new)
Paragraph 106 c (new)
106 c. Considers that coordinated on-site inspections and joint audits should be part of the European framework of cooperation between tax administrations;
Amendment 737 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 108 a (new)
Paragraph 108 a (new)
108 a. Notes that, according to AMLD4, the Commission shall identify high risk third countries presenting strategic deficiencies in their regime on anti-money laundering and countering terrorist financing; welcomes in this regard the adoption by the Commission in June 2018 of the methodology for identifying high risk third countries; urges the Commission to publish first results as soon as possible, and acknowledges that, in the meantime, the Commission uses the list from the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), however excluding Serbia, which is on the FATF list;
Amendment 741 #
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; reminds Member States of their legal obligation to respect the deadline of 10 January 2020 for the transposition of AMLD5 into their domestic legislation; and calls on the Commission to ensure that the AMLD5 is transposed fully in a timely manner or to consider using the legal tool of a regulation instead; _________________ 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. Moreover, on 8 November 2018, the Commission adopted a negative opinion on the Maltese Financial Intelligence Analysis Unit and required it to continue taking additional measures to fully comply with its obligations.
Amendment 746 #
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; notes that adequate resources within tax administrations are necessary for the effective implementation of this obligation;
Amendment 758 #
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; is concerned that AMLD5 continues to allow for managing directors to be registered as beneficial owners while the real beneficial owner of a company or trust is not known; calls on the Commission to present a legislative proposal to end the practice of accepting the ultimate beneficial owners to hide behind straw men and to urge other jurisdictions at international level to do the same; calls on the Member States when transposing AMLD5 into national law to ensure that obliged entities terminate the business relationship with another company whose ultimate beneficial owners are not known;
Amendment 782 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 116 a (new)
Paragraph 116 a (new)
116 a. Is aware that the 500 euro note, the issuing of which has been abandoned by the ECB, continues to be used for money laundering and criminal activities; notes that some Member States are considering banning it; recalls that for such a measure to be effective the ban needs to be extended to all countries where the euro is accepted as a currency;
Amendment 791 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 117
Paragraph 117
117. Is aware that the current AML legal framework has so far consisted of directives and is based on minimum harmonisation, which has led to different national supervisory and enforcement practices in the Member States; calls on the Commission to assess, in the context of a future revision of the AML legislation, in the required impact assessment, whether a regulation would be a more appropriate legal act than a directive; calls, in this context, for a swift transformation into a regulation of the AML legislation if the impact assessment so advises; calls on the Commission to make, in the meantime, full use of the instruments at hand to enforce AML legislation in the Member States, starting with formal opinions and ending with infringement procedures or to consider the legal tool of a regulation instead;
Amendment 796 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 117 a (new)
Paragraph 117 a (new)
117 a. Deplores cases such as the Russian Laundromat, the Danske Banks case, the ABLV case and the Azerbaijan Laundromat that have demonstrated how hundreds of billions of euros of dirty Russian money connected to Russian ruling elites and oligarchs have been laundered via EU banks and offshore jurisdictions;
Amendment 799 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 117 b (new)
Paragraph 117 b (new)
117 b. Notes with concern that undetected flow of Russian money to Europe can create political, economic and security risks that have become clearly visible in cases such as the Salisbury attacks or the case of Cambridge Analytica and other interference in the democratic process in Europe;
Amendment 800 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 117 c (new)
Paragraph 117 c (new)
117 c. Calls on the Commission and the Council to ensure that the issues of money laundering and illicit financial flows are given an adequate degree of attention in EU sanction programmes in order to cut oligarchs off from their funds; calls for an EU wide Magnitsky Act to freeze assets of human rights violators; considers that it is time to end the free flow of money from Russia to EU banks; calls on the European Commission to explore the option of reversing the burden of proof so that Russian-origin money is considered suspect until proven otherwise;
Amendment 805 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 121
Paragraph 121
121. Concludes that the current level of coordination of anti-money laundering and combating the financing of terrorism (AML/CFT) supervision of financial institutions, particularly in AML/CFT situations with cross-border effects, is not sufficient to address current challenges in this sector and that the Union’s ability to enforce coordinated AML rules and practices is currently inadequate; acknowledges that smaller EU Member States have been targeted for money laundering as a result of their lack of capacity to police illegal flows adequately; calls therefore for a new centralised system at EU level for AML/CFT supervision, with proper resources; calls on the Commission to develop specialized trainings for FIUs, particularly with respect to capacities in smaller Member States;
Amendment 810 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 122
Paragraph 122
122. Calls for an assessment of long- term objectives leading to an enhanced AML/CFT framework as mentioned in the ‘Reflection Paper on possible elements of a Roadmap for seamless cooperation between Anti Money Laundering and Prudential Supervisors in the European Union’, such as the establishment at EU level of a mechanism to better coordinate the activities of AML/CFT supervisors of financial sector entities, notably in situations where AML/CFT concerns are likely to have cross-border effects, and a possible centralisation of AML supervision via an existing or new Union body empowered to enforce harmonised rules and practices in EU Member States;
Amendment 817 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 124
Paragraph 124
124. Stresses that ESAs, and in particular the EBA, should be provided with sufficient resource capacity to carry out their oversight functions and improve AML supervision; notes the recommendation to the Maltese FIAU of the EBA pointing to uncertainties in the current banking legislation preventing the EBA from taking further actions to effectively enforce the Union law and calls on Member States to swiftly transpose the recently adopted changes to the Capital Requirements Directive into national law;
Amendment 828 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 126
Paragraph 126
126. Recalls that pursuant to AMLD5 Member States are obliged to set up automated centralised mechanisms enabling swift identification of holders of bank and payment accounts, and to ensure that any FIU is able to provide information held in those centralised mechanisms to any other FIU in a timely manner; calls on the Member States to speed up the establishment of these mechanisms so that Member States’ FIUs are able to cooperate effectively with each other in order to detect and counteract money-laundering activities; recalls that EU FIUs are strongly encouraged to use the FIU.net system; highlights that information sharing between FIUs and Law Enforcement Agencies, including with Europol, should be improved;
Amendment 843 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 127
Paragraph 127
127. Highlights that in order to fight effectively against money laundering activities, cooperation is essential not only between Member States’ FIUs but also between Member States’ FIUs and the FIUs of third countries; calls on the Commission to engage actively with Member States to find mechanisms to improve and enhance the cooperation of Member States’ FIUs with the FIUs of third countries; calls on the Commission to take opportune action in this regard at the relevant international forums, such as the OECD and the Financial Action Task Force (FATF); considers that in any resulting agreement proper consideration should be given to the protection of personal data in accordance with Directive (EU) 2016/680;
Amendment 850 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 128
Paragraph 128
128. Points out that the non- standardisation of suspicious transaction report formats and non-standardisation of suspicious transaction report thresholds 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 up standardised reporting formats for obliged entities in order to facilitate the exchange of information between FIUs in cases with a cross-border dimension; and to reflect on the standardisation of suspicious transaction thresholds
Amendment 857 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 129 a (new)
Paragraph 129 a (new)
129 a. Considers the established swift information exchange by the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) of the United States Department of the Treasury as a model for the EU and calls on the Commission to put forward a legislative proposal to set up a European Financial Intelligence Unit (EFIU) to facilitate coordination, including the exchange of information between FIUs within the Union; considers that this EFIU shall coordinate, assist and support Member Sates FIUs in cross-border cases, shall lend support to those Member States especially in maintaining and developing the technical infrastructure for ensuring the exchange of information, assisting them in joint analysis of cross-border cases and strategic analysis, and shall coordinate the work of Member States FIUs for cross-border cases; requires the Commission to provide the EFIU with adequate financial, human and technical resources in order to fulfil its tasks;
Amendment 865 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 130
Paragraph 130
130. Welcomes the fact that AMLD5 has broadened the list of obliged entities to include providers engaged in exchange services between virtual currencies and fiat currencies, custodian wallet providers, art traders and free ports; calls on the Commission to further broaden the list of obliged entities to include agents and service providers engaged in the trade of citizenship and residency or acting as advisors in residence and citizenship planning;
Amendment 875 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 133
Paragraph 133
133. Notes that the Union’s AML legislation obliges Member States to establish central registers containing complete beneficial ownership data for companies and trusts, and that it also provides for their interconnection; welcomes the fact that AMLD5 obliges Member States to ensure that the information on beneficial ownership of companies is accessible in all cases to any member of the general public; deplores that the information on beneficial ownership of trusts is, as a general rule, subject to legitimate interest and calls, therefore, on Member States to make use of the option in AMLD5 to grant open access also to information on trusts, and calls on the Commission to put forward a legislative proposal to amend AMLD5 to make open access to information of trusts compulsory; stresses that the interconnection of registers should be ensured by the Commission; considers that the Commission should closely monitor the functioning of this interconnected system and assess within a reasonable time whether it is working properly and whether it should be supplemented by the establishment of an EU public register of beneficial ownership;
Amendment 877 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 133
Paragraph 133
133. Notes that the Union’s AML legislation obliges Member States to establish central registers containing complete beneficial ownership data for companies and trusts, and that it also provides for their interconnection; welcomes the fact that AMLD5 obliges Member States to ensure that the information on beneficial ownership is accessible in all cases to any member of the general public; calls on Member States to establish freely accessible and open data registers; stresses that the interconnection of registers should be ensured by the Commission; calls on the Commission to develop and issue technical guidelines to facilitate convergence of format, interoperability and interconnection of Member States’ registers considers that the Commission should closely monitor the functioning of this interconnected system and assess within a reasonable time whether it is working properly and whether it should be supplemented by the establishment of an EU public register of beneficial ownership;
Amendment 883 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 133 a (new)
Paragraph 133 a (new)
133 a. Is concerned of the poor quality of the beneficial ownership information collected in the national registers and calls on the EBA to monitor the correctness of the information;
Amendment 889 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 136
Paragraph 136
136. Underscores the problem of money laundering through investment in real estate in European cities through foreign shell companies; recognises that these type of practices have serious externalities on house prices in local markets that negatively affect the access to affordable housing of the residents in those cities; recalls that the Commission should assess the necessity and proportionality of harmonising the information in the land and real estate registers and assess the need for the interconnection of those registers; calls on the Commission, if appropriate, to accompany the report with a legislative proposal; is concerned that money laundering is also done through life insurance contracts and financial instruments and is, therefore, of the opinion that beneficial ownership information on these assets should also be available to authorities; is of the opinion that also beneficial owner should be registered in real estate registers and not only mere legal owners possibly hiding the ultimate beneficial owner and calls on the Commission to put forward a legislative proposal to amend the AMLD5 in this regard;
Amendment 896 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 138
Paragraph 138
138. Underlines the positive potential of new distributed ledger technologies, such as blockchain technology; notes at the same time the increasing abuse of new payment and transfer methods based on these technologies to launder criminal proceeds, to evade taxes or to commit other financial crimes; acknowledges the need to monitor technological developments to ensure that legislation addresses in an effective manner the abuse of new technologies and anonymity, which facilitates criminal activity;
Amendment 903 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 138 a (new)
Paragraph 138 a (new)
138 a. Notes that because of the anonymity provided to users by virtual currencies, transactions cannot be monitored by authorities, increasing the risk of money laundering and tax evasion; stresses in this regard that virtual currencies can be used to circumvent the exchange of information system;
Amendment 905 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 138 b (new)
Paragraph 138 b (new)
138 b. Acknowledges that the decentralised aspect of virtual currencies and the lack of clear intermediaries complicates regulation activities; welcomes the fact that AMLD5 includes some virtual currencies’ actors; regrets however that some important actors are not covered by anti-money laundering rules, like cryptocurrency exchanges, trading platforms, or software or hardware wallets;
Amendment 906 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 138 c (new)
Paragraph 138 c (new)
138 c. Calls on the Commission to issue a proposal for a EU regulation of virtual currencies, including licensing requirements and uplifting anonymity;
Amendment 926 #
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; recalls that EU AML legislation requires Member States to publish information and statistics on AML enforcement actions, and in particular that a decision imposing an administrative sanction or measure for breach of EU AML legislation shall be published by the competent authorities on their official website immediately after the person sanctioned is informed of that decision and that the publication shall include at least information on the type and nature of the breach and the identity of the persons responsible; urges Member States to also publish the nature and value of the sanctions imposed; calls on Member States to also apply sanctions and measures to the members of the management body and to other natural persons who under national law are responsible for a breach of anti-money laundering rules;
Amendment 935 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 145
Paragraph 145
145. Takes note of the Methodology for identifying high-risk third countries under Directive (EU) 2015/849 published on 22 June 2018 (SWD(2018)0362) and calls on the Commission to make the blacklisting process fully transparent to the public;
Amendment 947 #
147. Is worried about the accelerating corporate, dividend or capital gains tax race to the bottom worldwide in terms of nominal tax rate76 77 ; _________________ 76 The average corporate income tax rate across the OECD dropped from 32.5 % in 2000 to 23.9 % in 2018. Overall, 22 of the 38 countries surveyed in the latest tax policy reform 2018 report from the OECD now have combined statutory corporate income tax rates equal to or below 25 %, compared with only six in 2000. Source: OECD and Selected Partner Economies, Tax Policy Reforms 2018. 77 It is also worth noting that the EU 28 are already well below this level, with an average corporate income tax rate in 2018 of 21.9 %, down from 32 % in 2000, according to the Commission: Taxation Trends in the European Union - Data for the EU Member States, Iceland and Norward, 2018 Edition (page 36) and Taxation Trends in the European Union - Data for the EU Member States, Iceland and Norward, 2015 Edition (page 147).
Amendment 951 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 149
Paragraph 149
149. Calls on the Commission to conduct a mapping exercise to analyse the extent of reciprocity in the exchange of information between the US and Member States; calls on the Council to give a mandate to the Commission to negotiate an agreement with the US to ensure reciprocity in the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA); calls on the Commission and Council to consider sanctions, like withholding tax on payments of EU-source income or the introduction on the list of non-cooperative jurisdictions for tax purposes, if the US does not ensure reciprocity in the FATCA;
Amendment 960 #
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, accompanied by appropriate and dissuasive countermeasures;
Amendment 966 #
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; is of the opinion that also EU countries should be included in the screening of non- cooperative jurisdictions for tax purposes; notes that the list has been updated several times on the basis of the assessment of those commitments; underlineregrets that this assessment is based on criteria deriving from a technical scoreboard and that Parliament had no legal involvement in this process; calls in this context on the Commission and the Council to inform Parliament in detail ahead of any proposed change to the list; 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 978 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 152
Paragraph 152
152. Deeply regrets the lack of transparency during the initial listing process; welcomes, however, the improvement in transparency made by the disclosure of letters sent to jurisdictions screened by the CoC Group, as well as the set of commitment letters received; calls for all remaining undisclosed letters to be made publicly available to ensure scrutiny and proper implementation of commitments; recommends to put countries that refuse to disclose their commitment letter on the blacklist;
Amendment 980 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 152 a (new)
Paragraph 152 a (new)
152 a. Recommends that the blacklisting process be made by a panel of independent experts rather than by the CoC group, so as to increase the objectivity and transparency of the EU list and to make it free from any political interference; believes that a more transparent and objective EU list will improve the credibility of the EU in its fight against tax havens;
Amendment 983 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 153
Paragraph 153
153. Welcomes the recent clarifications from the CoC Group on fair taxation criteria, especially regarding the lack of economic substance for jurisdictions having no corporate income tax rate or a rate close to 0 %; calls on the Member States to work towards the gradual improvement of the EU listing criteria to cover all harmful tax practices79 , including criteria like the advantages given to non- residents or the transparency of the tax ruling system; _________________ 79 Work on fair taxation criteria 2.1 and 2.2 of Council conclusions 14166/16 of 8 November 2016.
Amendment 996 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 154 b (new)
Paragraph 154 b (new)
154 b. Notes that the negotiations between the EU and Switzerland on the revision of the bilateral approach to reciprocal market access are still ongoing; calls on the Commission to ensure that the final agreement between the EU and Switzerland contains a tax good governance clause including specific rules on State aid under the form of a tax advantage, transparency requirements regarding the automatic exchange of information on taxation and beneficial ownership as well as anti-money laundering provisions;
Amendment 998 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 154 a (new)
Paragraph 154 a (new)
154 a. Is concerned that Austrian residents who hold bank accounts with credit institutions in Liechtenstein are not affected by the Act on Common Reporting Standards if their capital incomes are yielded from asset structures (private foundations, establishments, trusts and the like), and the credit institution in Liechtenstein takes care of the taxation in accordance with bilateral treaties; calls on Austria to change its law in this regard so as to close the loophole of the CRS;
Amendment 1009 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 155 a (new)
Paragraph 155 a (new)
155 a. Calls for the setting up of dissuasive and EU-wide harmonised sanctions for the blacklisted countries; recommends that the coordinated denunciation by Member States of bilateral tax treaties with those countries be considered as one of the last resort sanctions;
Amendment 1014 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 156 a (new)
Paragraph 156 a (new)
156 a. Notes that sanctions and countermeasures are essential to fight against money laundering, tax evasion and tax avoidance; notes in this regard that the economic weight of the European Union is a strength and can be a deterrent for tax havens and non-cooperative jurisdictions that would politically and economically suffer from such sanctions;
Amendment 1018 #
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; considers that the EU should also lead by example, and calls on the Commission to ensure that those with a commercial or vested interest in promoting tax avoidance and tax evasion should not have a role in guiding or advising the EU's policy- making on these matters;
Amendment 1032 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 159 a (new)
Paragraph 159 a (new)
159 a. Calls on the Commission to take a leading role in the global debate and to urgently explore the ways for the pricing of digital assets; encourages the EU institutions to take the lead in the taxing of Tech Giants to speed up the work at OECD and UN levels; recalls, however, that the EU shall not wait for a global solution and shall immediately act;
Amendment 1033 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 159 b (new)
Paragraph 159 b (new)
159 b. Asks Member States to delegate to the Commission the power to renegotiate on their behalf the tax treaties with third countries, so as to integrate the new definition of a significant digital presence in a harmonised way once it is adopted at EU level; strongly believes it is essential in order to avoid creating any loopholes in the international tax environment;
Amendment 1037 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 160
Paragraph 160
160. Calls for a global summit on remaining necessarythe urgently needed fundamental global tax reforms in order to enhance tax revenue collection, ensure an equitable tax system, strengthen international cooperation and put pressure on all countries, in particular their 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 1044 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 161
Paragraph 161
161. Believes that supporting developing countries in combating tax evasion and aggressive tax planning, as well as corruption and secrecy that facilitate illicit financial flows, is of the utmost importance for strengthening policy coherence for development in the EU and improving developing countries’ tax capacities and domestic resource mobilisationretain and mobilise their own resources for sustainable economic development;
Amendment 1050 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 161 a (new)
Paragraph 161 a (new)
161 a. Notes that the intensity of losses due to tax avoidance is substantially greater in low and middle-income countries, especially in sub-Saharan Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean, and in South Asia compared to other regions1; notes furthermore that bilateral tax treaties signed by developing countries with developed countries negatively impact their tax revenues2; ____________________ [1] Cobham, A and Petr Janský (2017) Global Distribution of Revenue Loss from Tax Avoidance https://www.wider.unu.edu/sites/default/fil es/wp2017-55.pdf [2] http://www.actionaid.org/publications/imp act-tax-treaties-revenue-collection-case- study-developing-and-least-developed
Amendment 1060 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 164
Paragraph 164
164. Welcomes the participation on an equal footing of all countries involved in the Inclusive Framework, which brings together over 115 countries and jurisdictions to collaborate on the implementation of the OECD/G20 BEPS Package; calls on the Member States to support a reform of both the mandate and functioning of the Inclusive Framework to ensure that developing countries’ interests are taken into consideration; recalls the exclusion of over 100 developing countries in negotiating the BEPS actions; recalls calls from the Group of 77 (G77) and developing countries for global reform and decision-making to take place within a global tax body under the auspices of the UN;
Amendment 1062 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 165
Paragraph 165
165. Recalls that public development aid should be directed to a greater extent towards the implementation of an appropriate regulatory framework and the bolstering of tax administrations and institutions responsible for fighting illicit financial flows; calls for this aid to be provided in the form of technical expertise in relation to resource management, financial information and anti-corruption rules; calls for this aid to also favour regional cooperation against tax fraud, tax evasion, aggressive tax planning and money laundering; stresses that this aid should include support to civil society and media in developing countries to ensure public scrutiny over domestic tax policies;
Amendment 1064 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 166
Paragraph 166
166. Expects the Commission to come up with adequate resources to implement the ‘Collect More – Spend Better’ approach, notably through its flagships programmes81 ; calls on the Commission to further develop the element of fairness of tax systems under the ‘Collect more’ pillar, focusing on progressive taxation in order to distribute tax contributions fairly and bridge economic and gender inequalities; _________________ 81 European Commission discussion paper: A Contribution to the Third Financing for Development Conference in Addis Ababa.
Amendment 1068 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 167
Paragraph 167
167. Recalls the need for fair treatment of developing countries when negotiating tax treaties, taking into account their particular situation and ensuring a fair allocation of tax rights according to genuine economic activity and value creation; calls, in this regard, for adherence to the UN model tax convention to be used as a minimum standard and for transparency around treaty negotiations to be ensured; acknowledges that the OECD model tax treaty grants more rights to the country of residence, favouring European and North-American multinational companies; calls on EU Member States to consider as well the Model Double Taxation Agreement developed by the African Tax Administration Forum (ATAF);
Amendment 1070 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 167 a (new)
Paragraph 167 a (new)
167 a. Calls on Member States to undertake spillover analyses when negotiating tax treaties with developing countries and when adopting its tax policies; urges the Commission to consider spillover effects of EU tax regulations, in line with the Policy Coherence for Development and produce an impact assessments of European tax policies on developing countries, in order to take better into account negative spillovers on developing countries and the special needs of those countries;
Amendment 1073 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 167 b (new)
Paragraph 167 b (new)
167 b. Notes the particular importance of transparency, including through public CBCR and public registers of beneficial owners, given the limited capacity of developing countries to meet requirements through existing exchange of information procedures; calls on the EU and its Member States to enforce the principle that listed or unlisted multinational companies of all countries and sectors, and especially those companies extracting natural resources, must adopt CBCR as a standard, requiring them to publish, as part of their annual reporting and on a country-by-country basis for each territory in which they operate, the names of all subsidiaries and their respective financial performance, relevant tax information, assets and number of employees, and to ensure that this information is made publicly available, while minimising administrative burdens by excluding micro-enterprises; calls on the European Union and its Member States to ensure that, when negotiating tax and investment treaties with developing countries, income or profits resulting from cross-border activities should be taxed in the source country where value is extracted or created;
Amendment 1088 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 170 a (new)
Paragraph 170 a (new)
170 a. Recalls the article 79 of the Political Declaration Setting Out The Framework For The Future Relationship Between the European Union and The United Kingdom and insists that the future relationship must ensure open and fair competition and that provisions to ensure this should cover State Aid, competition, social and employment standards, environmental standards, climate change, and relevant tax matters, building on the level playing field arrangements provided for in Withdrawal Agreement and commensurate with the overall economic relations;
Amendment 1094 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 170 b (new)
Paragraph 170 b (new)
170 b. Notes with concerns the fact the United Kingdom was ranked 2nd biggest conduit for tax havens after The Netherlands1, and ranked 23rd on the 2018 Financial Secrecy Index, accounting for 17% of the global market in off shorefinancial services; deplores the fact the UK remains in the centre of a largenetwork of British secrecy jurisdictions, notably the Crown Dependencies Jersey, Guernsey and the Isle of Man and to Overseas Territories including tax havens such as Cayman Islands, British Virgin Islands or Bermuda; underlines that the Cayman Islands ranked on the 3rd place, Guernsey on the 10th place, British Virgin Islands on 16th and Jersey on 18th place of the respective index; ________________ [1] Offshore Financial Centers and the five largest value conduits in the world, July 2017, University of Amsterdam. http://corpnet.uva.nl/ofcs/
Amendment 1095 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 170 c (new)
Paragraph 170 c (new)
170 c. Notes that 90 % of the biggest global companies have a presence in a UK tax haven; states that the very light regulation in the past in the area of tax and money laundering encouraged criminal around the globe to use the UK and the City of London for their illegal activities; underlined that according to the National Crime Agency GBP 90 billion – about 4% of UK’s GDP – is laundered into the UK annually, large number coming from Russia;
Amendment 1096 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 170 d (new)
Paragraph 170 d (new)
170 d. Demands that the future deal must include a tax good governance clause and that the UK abides by exiting and ongoing EU tax legislation in return to any access to Single Market for those offering financial, legal or accountancy services;
Amendment 1098 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 170 e (new)
Paragraph 170 e (new)
170 e. Notes that Brexit will create a divergence of policies against financial crimes, tax evasion and tax avoidance between the EU and the United Kingdom, which will constitute new economic, fiscal and security risks; stresses the urgency to approve the necessary reforms in these areas and the need to reassess the financial agreements with the UK that will become a third country vis-à-vis the EU in the event of Brexit, both regarding London as a global financial center as well as its Overseas territories;
Amendment 1099 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 170 f (new)
Paragraph 170 f (new)
170 f. Calls on the Council to promptly assess the situation of Gibraltar once the Brexit is effective to include the territory in the EU list of non-cooperative jurisdictions as it is obviously non- compliant with the Council’s criteria;
Amendment 1114 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 172 a (new)
Paragraph 172 a (new)
172 a. Notes that double taxation treaties between Member States and developing countries do not usually promote source taxation, therefore benefiting multinational corporations at the expense of mobilisation of domestic resources by developing countries; notes that the lack of domestic resource mobilisation prevents fully financed public services such as healthcare or education in these countries, which disproportionately impacts women and girls; urges the Member States to mandate the Commission to review existing double taxation treaties so as to examine and address these problems, and to ensure that future double taxation treaties include gender equality provisions in addition to general anti-abuse provisions;
Amendment 1128 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 177 a (new)
Paragraph 177 a (new)
177 a. Reiterates the need for enhanced cooperation between tax administrations and financial supervisors for a joint and effective surveillance of the role of financial intermediaries and in the light that some tax-driven financial instruments may pose a risk to financial market stability and market integrity;
Amendment 1131 #
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 ; calls on all Member States to deliberately apply the EU reporting obligation also to purely domestic cases; _________________ 83 OJ L 139, 5.6.2018, p. 1.
Amendment 1146 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 178 a (new)
Paragraph 178 a (new)
178 a. Recognizes that the divergent interests between the commercial interests of the tax avoidance industry and the public mandate of the EU to minimise tax avoidance can clash in situations where conflicts of interest arise, such as public procurement contracts that require the provision of paid advice, the provision of informal or unpaid advice via official advisory and expert groups, and via revolving doors;
Amendment 1151 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 178 b (new)
Paragraph 178 b (new)
178 b. Calls on the Commission and Member States to ensure that those with a commercial or vested interests in promoting tax avoidance and tax evasion, such as big accountancy firms like Deloitte, PWC, EY and KPMG, do not have an advising role in policies to fight tax avoidance and evasion; for instance, restricting their membership in advisory and expert groups, not commissioning tax-related studies and impact assessments to these actors, regulating revolving doors, and implementing full lobby transparency rules;
Amendment 1154 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 178 c (new)
Paragraph 178 c (new)
178 c. Stresses the role played by intermediaries as facilitators and beneficiaries of ATP schemes and deplores that such intermediaries develop bespoke schemes for customers in a way that undermines the cohesion of society and operate with a business model that runs counter to the social contract;
Amendment 1156 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 179
Paragraph 179
179. Reiterates that financial institutions, advisors and other intermediaries that knowingly, systematically and repeatedly facilitate, engage or participate in money laundering or tax evasion activities should face effective, proportional and dissuasive penalties, their licences to operate should undergo serious revision and, where applicable, be prestricvented from operating in the single marketSingle Market; re-iterates its request that self-regulating professions such as lawyers and auditors should be subject to an independent oversight and calls on the Commission to put forward a proposal to amend AMLD5 in this regard;
Amendment 1171 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 181
Paragraph 181
181. Worries that whistle-blowers are often discouraged from reporting their concerns for fear of retaliation; considers that the recognition in AMLD5 of the right of whistle-blowers to present a complaint in a safe manner to the respective competent authorities when exposed to a threat or retaliation and of their right to an effective remedy constitutes a significant improvement of the situation of individuals reporting suspicions of money laundering or terrorist financing internally within the company or to a FIU; calls on Member States to implement fully-fledged whistleblower protection when transposing the AMLD5 into national law;
Amendment 1178 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 182 a (new)
Paragraph 182 a (new)
182 a. Welcomes the European Commission’s April 2018 publication of a horizontal proposal on whistleblower protection; regrets that EU staff members were not incorporated in the scope; recognizes that EU staff members are not currently afforded the same level of protections as in the proposal; urges all EU institutions, agencies, and bodies to immediately address this situation by adapting their internal rules in line with international best practices for the protection of whistleblowers;
Amendment 1188 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 185
Paragraph 185
185. Strongly condemns acts of violence against journalists; recalls with dismay that in recent years journalists involved in the investigation of dubious activities with a money laundering component have been murdered in Malta and Slovakia85 ; underlines that according to the Council of Europe, abuses and crimes committed against journalists have a deeply chilling effect on freedom of expression and amplify the phenomenon of self- censorship; _________________ 85 Daphne Caruana Galizia, killed in Malta on 16.10.2017; Ján Kuciak, killed together with his partner Martina Kušnírová, in Slovakia on 21.2.2018.
Amendment 1193 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 186
Paragraph 186
186. Urges theCalls on Maltese authorities to deploy all available resources to make progress in identifying the instigator of the murder of Daphne Caruana Galizia;
Amendment 1197 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 187 a (new)
Paragraph 187 a (new)
187 a. Calls on Slovak authorities to fully investigate cases of large-scale tax evasion schemes, VAT frauds and money laundering cases brought to light by Jan Kuciak´s investigations;
Amendment 1199 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 187 b (new)
Paragraph 187 b (new)
187 b. Calls on the Commission and Bulgaria to ensure the protection of Bulgarian investigative journalists in the context of the scandal revealed by Bivol, related to the use of shell companies to misuse EU funds in the country;
Amendment 1201 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 188
Paragraph 188
188. Deplores the fact that investigative journalists are often victims of abusive lawsuits intended to censor, intimidate and silence them by burdening them with the costs of legal defence until they are forced to abandon their criticism or opposition; recalls that these abusive lawsuits constitute a threat to fundamental democratic rights, such as to freedom of expression, freedom of the press and freedom to disseminate and receive information; calls on the Commission and Member States to put in place mechanismslegislative and non- legislative proposals to protect journalists and to prevent strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPP); considers that these mechanisms should take duly into consideration the right to a good name and reputation; calls on the Commission to assess the possibility of taking legislative action in this area;
Amendment 1208 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 188 a (new)
Paragraph 188 a (new)
188 a. Calls on the European Commission to set up a financial support scheme for investigative journalism as soon as possible, including a permanent and dedicated budget line for the support of independent, quality media and investigative journalism in the post-2020 MFF;
Amendment 1210 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 188 b (new)
Paragraph 188 b (new)
188 b. Regrets that the Bulgarian Presidency of the Council of the EU refused to participate in a TAX3 committee hearing, failing to comply with the principle of sincere cooperation enshrined in the artcilec 4 of the TEU;
Amendment 1213 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 189
Paragraph 189
189. Welcomes the work done by the Platform for Tax Good Governance; notes that the mandate of the Platform applies until 16 June 2019; calls for it to be extended or renewed to ensure that civil society concerns and expertise are heard by Member States and the Commission, but considers that intermediaries with a commercial interest in tax avoidance should no longer be members; encourages the Commission to broaden the scope of the experts invited to the Expert Group on Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing (EGMLTF) to include experts from the private sector (business and NGOs) so long as they do not have a commercial interest in these issues;
Amendment 1222 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 192 a (new)
Paragraph 192 a (new)
192 a. Deplores that the Council failed to cooperate with the TAX3 Committee by not allowing the access to its documents or by doing so with a significant delay, and thus failed to comply with principle of sincere cooperation and breach of article 4 of TEU; deplores that the Bulgarian Presidency repeatedly refused to come to speak to the Committee about matters concerning the tax agenda;
Amendment 1223 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 193
Paragraph 193
193. Notes the increased communication from the CoC Group and welcomes in particular the biannual publication of its report to the Council, as well as the letters sent to jurisdictions and commitments received in the context of the EU listing process of the EU tax blacklist;
Amendment 1227 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 196 a (new)
Paragraph 196 a (new)
196 a. Calls on the CoC Group to take further measures to ensure transparency of its meetings particularly recording and publishing minutes of meetings including the positions of the different Member States on the discussed agenda;
Amendment 1229 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 197
Paragraph 197
197. Believes that the mandate of the CoC Group needs to be updated, since it addresses matters beyond the assessment of harmful EU tax practices, which is more than simply providing technical input to the decisions made by the Council; calls on the extension of the scope of the CoC Group, to enable it to deal with personal taxation issues, including CBI/RBI schemes, special schemes provided by Member States, and amnesties; calls, based on the nature of the work undertaken by the Group which is also of a political nature, for such tasks to be brought back under a framework which enables democratic control or supervision, starting by applying transparency; urges the CoC Group to apply transparency principles to its decision-making process, publishing not only the final position of the Group but also the positions of its members;
Amendment 1238 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 201
Paragraph 201
201. Takes note of the persons who refused to participate in TAX3 committee hearings as referred to in Annex XX; requests to deny non-cooperative parties the access to the European Parliament and calls on the Council and the Commission to do the same;
Amendment 1275 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 206
Paragraph 206
206. Stresses that all scenarios should be envisaged and not only shifting from unanimity to qualified majority voting through a passerelle clause, since the latter clause also requires unanimity in the Council to be triggered; calls on the Commission to issue its proposal before the end of its current mandate, early 2019;
Amendment 1283 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 208
Paragraph 208
208. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the European Council, the Council, the Commission, the ESAs, EPPO, the ECB, Moneyval, the Member States, the national parliaments, the UN, the G20, the FATF and the OECD.