Activities of Marie-Christine VERGIAT related to 2012/0022(APP)
Shadow opinions (1)
OPINION on the Interim report on the Proposal for a Council regulation on the Statute for a European Foundation (FE)
Amendments (24)
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion
Recital A
Recital A
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas there are foundations working for the public good and to promote the interests of society operating in the Union, particularly in the fields of education, training, research, social and health provision, protection of the environment, youth and sport, as well as arts and culture, whichand many of their projects have an impact far beyond national borders;
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas, in civil law and tax law throughout the Union, there are more than 50 different pieces of legislation applicable to foundations, as well as a host of complicated administrative procedures, which give rise annually to consultancadvisory costs estimated to amount to as much as EUR 100 million – money that thus becomes unavailable for public-benefit purposes;
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas legal, tax-related and bureaucadministraticve barriers and, which give rise to expensive and lengthy administrative procedures, as well as a lack of appropriate legal instruments, constrain and deter foundations frommean that foundations refuse or find it difficult to embarking on or developing cross-border activities activities in another Member State;
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas, particularly when national budgets are tight, the financial and social commitment of foundations is essential, although they can only complement, and cannot replace, the state in the pursuit of public-benefit purpos fiscal austerity policies have drastically reduced public funding in sectors in which public-benefit foundations operate and in which they make a vital contribution to ensuring solidarity and social cohesion; and whereas such cuts result in not-for profit organisations placing ever greater demands on foundations, despite the fact that they should not be called on to assume the Member States’ responsibility to provide essential public services;
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion
Recital E a (new)
Recital E a (new)
Ea. whereas the meaning of the notion of ‘public benefit’ referred to in the proposal for a regulation (Article 5) can vary from one Member State to another; whereas the terms ‘public interest’ and ‘public benefit’ may be mixed up or interpreted very differently from Member State to Member State; whereas the notion of a ‘'public-benefit purpose entity’ (Article 2) is defined in terms that may give rise to differing interpretations and ambiguity; whereas an FE should be free to pursue one or more identifiable public-interest objectives and serve the interests of the wider common good of all or a part of the population; whereas a less restrictive notion of what constitutes the ‘ interests of society’, that is more in line with the purpose of foundations, should be defined;
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion
Recital E b (new)
Recital E b (new)
Eb. whereas this situation should not be merely an opportunity for donors to escape taxation in their country of origin;
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas, with regard to taxation, it is not tax-law harmonisation that is being proposed, but rather application of the rule of non-discrimination, automatically and as a matter of principle affording European foundations and donors to them tax advantages identical to those enjoyed by national entities with a public-benefit purpose in a manner in keeping with applicable European court of Justice case law;
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas the introduction of a common Statute for a European Foundation could make it much easier for foundations to package andor transfer resources, expertise and donations and to pursue their activities throughout the EUacross borders.
Amendment 17 #
Draft opinion
Recommendation ii
Recommendation ii
(ii) Encourages the Member States to use the momentum to work for the swift introduction of the Statute on a comprehensive basis, so that barriers to foundations’ cross-border work can be dismantled and new foundations can be set up for the benefit of European citizens generallyto meet the needs of the people living in the EU or to work in the public good or further the interests of society; stresses that establishing the Statute would contribute to the implementation of a genuine EU citizenship and pave the way for a statute for a European organisation;
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion
Recommendation iii
Recommendation iii
Amendment 24 #
Draft opinion
Recommendation iv
Recommendation iv
(iv) Welcomes the fact that the Statute lays down minimum standards in terms of transparency, accountability, supervision and use of funds, which can, in turn, serve both citizeall people living in the EU, and particularly those helped by European foundations and donors as a form of quality label;
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion
Recommendation iv a (new)
Recommendation iv a (new)
(iva) Stresses the need for further clarification of the notions of public benefit, public good and public interest, and to come up with a notion of ‘the interests of society’ that is more in line with what foundations seek to achieve;
Amendment 27 #
Draft opinion
Recommendation iv b (new)
Recommendation iv b (new)
(ivb) Takes the view that the concept of 'public benefit purpose entity' should be clearly defined by each Member State;
Amendment 28 #
Draft opinion
Recommendation v
Recommendation v
(v) Notes, however, that to underpin stakeholder confidence in the FE, the sustainability, seriouseffectiveness and viability of foundations, as well as the effectivenessproper monitoring of their suopervision,ations and the degree to which they meet their objectives must be core criteria, and suggests, in this regard, that:
Amendment 34 #
Draft opinion
Recommendation v – indent 1 a (new)
Recommendation v – indent 1 a (new)
– the bulk of its operating income should be reallocated to pursuing its objective, which is to serve the public interest or public good or to further the interests of society;
Amendment 35 #
Draft opinion
Recommendation v – indent 1 b (new)
Recommendation v – indent 1 b (new)
– account should be taken of the obstacles hindering the creation of a European cooperative society and the ongoing work to establish a statute for such a society with a view to enabling effective use to be made of the Statute for a European Foundation;
Amendment 38 #
Draft opinion
Recommendation v – indent 2
Recommendation v – indent 2
– only largerall foundations, with total assets above a set level, should be required to have their annual accounts audited and to be certified, exemptions must be duly provided for and fall within the scope of the Council Regulation and consider in particular the size of the foundation (e.g. the number of staff and the level of assets and donations);
Amendment 41 #
Draft opinion
Recommendation v – indent 3
Recommendation v – indent 3
Amendment 44 #
Draft opinion
Recommendation v – indent 3 a (new)
Recommendation v – indent 3 a (new)
– compliance with national corporate law standards in the place in which they operate should be ensured, particularly provisions on social dialogue and staff notification and consultation; ad hoc provisions should be laid down to enable the cross-border consultation and notification of staff working in several Member States;
Amendment 45 #
Draft opinion
Recommendation v – indent 3 b (new)
Recommendation v – indent 3 b (new)
– provision should be made to notify volunteers by the appropriate means, and the manner in which they are notified and consulted must be in accordance with the applicable national law in the Member States;
Amendment 48 #
Draft opinion
Recommendation v – indent 6
Recommendation v – indent 6
Amendment 56 #
Draft opinion
Recommendation vi
Recommendation vi
(vi) Emphasises, with regard to taxation, that tax-law harmonisation is not being proposedTakes the view that work towards harmonisation of taxation rules for public- benefit foundations should still be carried out with a view to eliminating differences in European foundations from Member State to Member State, or even cases of tax dumping between Member States;
Amendment 60 #
Draft opinion
Recommendation vii
Recommendation vii