21 Amendments of Jan Philipp ALBRECHT related to 2016/0414(COD)
Amendment 43 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) Tax crimes relating to direct and indirect taxes should be included in the definition of criminal activity, in line with the revised FATF Recommendations. Given that different tax offences may in each Member State constitute a criminal activity punishable by means of the sanctions referred to in this Directive, definitions of tax crimes may diverge in national law. However no harmonisation of the definitions of tax crimes in Member States’ national law is sought. tax crimes should be understood as including at least tax fraud, aggravated tax fraud and tax evasion offences and any fraudulent behaviour involving concealment of income or profits or the organisation of one’s insolvency which aims at reducing or suppressing tax liability. The definitions of tax crimes should not include thresholds requiring the existence of a significant amount of unpaid taxes or the systematic use of fraudulent manoeuvres in national law.
Amendment 47 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) Where money laundering activity does not simply amount to the mere possession or use, but also involves the transfer or the concealing and disguise of property through the financial system and results in further damage than that already caused by the predicate offence, such as damaging the integrity of the financial system, that activity should be punished separately. Member States should thus ensure that such conduct is also punishable when committed by the perpetrator of the criminal activity that generated that property (so-called self-laundering). Given the high risks that self-laundering may bring to the principle of ne bis in idem and the right not to incriminate oneself, Member States should punish self- laundering only if the two conditions are met: a) there is a previous conviction or the predicate offence is tried at the same time, and b) the actions have the clear intention to hide the illegal origin of the property.
Amendment 52 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) In order for money laundering to be an effective tool against organised crime, it should not be necessary to identify the specifics of and in order to safeguard the crime that generated the property, let alone requireght to presumption of innocence, a prior or simultaneous conviction for thate crime that generated the property is necessary. Prosecutions for money laundering should also not be impeded by the mere fact that the predicate offence was committed in another Member State or third country, provided it is a criminal offence in that Member State or third country. Member States may establish as a prerequisite the fact that the predicate offence would have been a crime in its national law, had it been committed there. The presumption that a predicate offence in a third country is a crime under national law should be based on factual and objective evidence, especially as regards terrorist offences.
Amendment 64 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 10 a (new)
Recital 10 a (new)
(10a) This Directive should not limit the right of suspects and accused persons to have access to a lawyer and the right to a fair trial, as enshrined in Articles 47 and 48 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. A lawyer should not run the risk of being prosecuted for money laundering for having accepted to defend a client accused of the same offence. Similarly, a suspect should not be obliged to confess that the payment of his or her legal fees originates from money laundering as this would constitute an obvious violation of the right not to incriminate oneself.
Amendment 88 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b
(b) terrorism, including any of thethe relevant offences set out in Directive 2017/XX/EU40 ; _________________ 40 Directive 2017/XX/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of X X 2017 on combating terrorism and replacing Council Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA on combating terrorism (OJ x L, xx.xx.2017, p. x.).
Amendment 94 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point p a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point p a (new)
(pa) tax crimes relating to direct taxes and indirect taxes, including evading taxes by concealing income, earned either legally or illegally, from detection and collection by the tax authorities;
Amendment 96 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point u
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point u
(u) cybercrimeattacks against information systems, including any of the offences set out in Directive 2013/40/EU52 ; _________________ 52 Directive 2013/40/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 August 2013 on attacks against information systems and replacing Council Framework Decision 2005/222/JHA (OJ L 218, 14.8.2013, p. 8).
Amendment 101 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point v
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point v
(v) all offences, including tax crimes relating to direct taxes and indirect taxes as defined in the national law of the Member States, which are punishable by deprivation of liberty or a detention order for a maximum of more than one year or, as regards Member States that have a minimum threshold for offences in their legal system, all offences punishable by deprivation of liberty or a detention order for a minimum of more than six months;
Amendment 113 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) the acquisition, possession or use of property, knowing at the time of receipt, that such property was derived from criminal activity or from an act of participation in such an activity.
Amendment 117 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point a
Amendment 127 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 3
Article 3 – paragraph 3
3. The offences referred to in points (a) and (b) of paragraph 1 shall also apply to persons who committed or participated in the criminal activity from which the property was derived if the following conditions apply: a) there is a previous conviction for the criminal activity from which the property was derived, or the criminal activity is tried at the same time as the offences referred to in points (a) and (b) of paragraph 1, and b) the actions have the clear intention to hide the illegal origin of the property.
Amendment 143 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2
Article 5 – paragraph 2
2. Each Member State shall ensure that the offences referred to in Article 3 shall be punishable by a maximum term of imprisonmentpenalty of at least four years, at least in serious cases of imprisonment.
Amendment 168 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Each Member State shall ensure that a legal person held liable for offences pursuant to Article 67 shall be punishable by effective, proportionate and dissuasive sanctions, which shall include criminal or non-criminal fines and may include other sanctions, such afines and may, at the judge’s discretion, also include the following temporary or permanent sanctions:
Amendment 172 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point 1 a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point 1 a (new)
(1a) the exclusion of that legal person from entitlement to European Union funds;
Amendment 176 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the offence is committed in whole or in part in its territory; or
Amendment 185 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 9 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. When an offence falls within the jurisdiction of more than one Member State and when any of the Member States concerned can validly prosecute on the basis of the same facts, Member States shall take into account the following factors, listed in order of priority, to decide which of them will prosecute the offenders: (a) the territory of the Member State where the offence was committed; (b) the nationality or residency of the offender; (c) the country of origin of the victims; (d) the territory of the Member State where the offender was found. Member States may have recourse to Eurojust in order to facilitate cooperation between their judicial authorities and the coordination of their action.
Amendment 192 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – title
Article 10 – title
Investigative tools and cooperation
Amendment 197 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 10 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Each Member State shall ensure that adequate and sufficient human and financial resources are allocated to investigate and prosecute the offences referred to in Articles 3 and 4.Persons, units or services responsible for investigating or prosecuting the offences referred to in Articles 3 and 4 shall receive specific and targeted training.
Amendment 199 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Article 10 – paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Each Member State shall ensure that their national authorities investigating or prosecuting offences referred to in Articles 3 and 4 are empowered to cooperate with other national authorities and their counterparts in other Member States.
Amendment 204 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive by [124 months after adoption] at the latest. They shall immediately communicate the text of those provisions to the Commission.
Amendment 209 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 1 a (new)
The Commission shall also, by 36 months after the deadline for implementation of this Directive, submit a report to the European Parliament and to the Council evaluating the added value and efficiency of this Directive on countering money laundering, as well as on the impact of this Directive on fundamental rights such as the right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial, the presumption of innocence and right of defence or the right not to be tried or punished twice in criminal proceedings for the same criminal offence. On the basis of this evaluation, the Commission shall, if necessary, decide on appropriate follow-up actions.