WRITTEN QUESTION E-2236/99 by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission. Replacement rates.
Date: 1999-12-01
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU Member State, Japan, United States, economic analysis, economic consequence, social security, unemployment insurance

8.8.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 225 E/77

Apart from the above, the year-to-year development of capital flows does not indicate any marked effects
either from the referendum or from the current Community proposal for a proposal for a Council directive
to ensure a minimum of effective taxation of savings income in the form of interest payments within the
Community (1). The developments mentioned earlier, as well as more persistent trends, such as the
globalisation of financial markets, all contributed to influence the capital flows and appear to dominate
their variation. Still, a possible influence from Community efforts to harmonise capital income taxation
could materialise eventually, once a new directive concerning capital income taxation is adopted and the
public and the market can learn the precise content of the new legislation,
implementation date and
implications.

(1) OJ C 212, 8.7.1998.

(2000/C 225 E/077)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2236/99

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission

(1 December 1999)

Subject: Replacement rates

What are the typical replacement rates (benefit payments on unemployment as a percentage of earnings)
for each of the Member States and, for comparison, the United States and Japan?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(11 January 2000)

The definition and management of social benefit schemes (cid:129) including their relative level of assistance, the
replacement rates (cid:129) fall within the responsibility and legal competence of the Member States.

Policy issues related to tax and benefit systems, and their impact on the labour market, have been given an
increasing weight in the employment guidelines (1) and the broad economic policy guidelines in recent
years.

Some analysis and data on replacement rates for the Community, the United States and Japan have been
published in (cid:145)The EU Economy 1999 Review(cid:146), Part II, Chapter 2 (2), and further analysis based on data from
the European Community household panel (ECHP) will be published in the forthcoming (cid:145)Social Protection
in Europe(cid:146) report 1999. These documents deal with some of the conceptual issues involved in defining and
measuring replacement rates and provide some examples of the results obtained.

(1) OJ C 69, 12.3.1999.
(2)

European Economy series No 69.

(2000/C 225 E/078)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2247/99

by Neil MacCormick (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

Subject: The Structural Funds and regional assistance

(19 November 1999)

1. Will the Commission confirm that any award to a Member State of structural funding, for example
under Objective 1 or Objective 2, is subject to the rule of additionality, that is that the Member State must
ensure that expenditure of the funds in question by a local or regional level of government does not
replace expenditure from existing budgets but is additional to them? Does this require a dedication of
matching funds within locally secured budgets to match expenditure facilitated through the Structural
Funds?