WRITTEN QUESTION E-0182/00 by Paul Rübig (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Exclusion from the right to deduct VAT on cars in Austria.
Date: 2000-01-31
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Austria, EU policy, VAT, motor car, restriction on competition, tax relief

3.10.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 280 E/195

(2000/C 280 E/227)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0177/00

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(31 January 2000)

Subject: Making low-cost health insurance subject to free competition

1.
Can the Commission confirm the accuracy of the announcement by the Council for Public Health
and Care (RVZ) in the Netherlands to the effect that the Medical Insurance (Access) Act (WTZ) may no
longer provide for a low-cost (cid:146)standard package policy(cid:146) for people over the age of 65, which every private
insurer is obliged to offer?

Can the Commission also confirm that the (cid:145)MOOZ,(cid:146) the solidarity levy paid by all privately insured
2.
persons to compensate health insurance funds with a large number of elderly insured persons for their low
premiums and high costs, is no longer authorised by the European Union?

Does the Commission realise that, if the answers to questions 1 and 2 are yes, hundreds of thousands

3.
of individual insured persons on low incomes will find themselves in difficulty?

4.
Can the Commission also confirm that it is considering other measures which would, if implemented,
lead to a sharp increase in public-sector expenditure on health care, for instance the obligation to conclude
contracts with a larger number of health care providers and agreements on health care costs and cover?

5. What action does the Commission intend to take to prevent health care in the Netherlands from
free
becoming subordinate to considerations of
competition is to increase individual and public-sector expenditure on the existing health care package
unnecessarily?

in particular when the result of

free competition,

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(14 March 2000)

It is for each Member State to organise its social security system (including health systems) as it wishes,
and to determine the conditions for entitlement to benefits under those systems, providing of course that
they do so in accordance with Community law. There are Community provisions on the co-ordination of
social security systems removing obstacles to the free movement of people within the Community and
provisions on discrimination between men and women in social security.

However, the Commission is not aware of the specific announcement described by the Honourable
Member, nor of any Community measures with the characteristics described. The Commission will
therefore seek further information from the Dutch authorities.

(2000/C 280 E/228)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0182/00

by Paul R(cid:252)big (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(31 January 2000)

Subject: Exclusion from the right to deduct VAT on cars in Austria

In Austria it is not possible to deduct VAT on passenger cars and estate cars; this results in blatant
distortion of competition for Austrian undertakings compared with other Member States.

The section of the Commission(cid:146)s proposal for a directive COM(98) 377 final (1) covering the harmonisation
of provisions on expenditure not eligible for deduction of the full VAT, as amended by the European
Parliament, should therefore be implemented immediately.

C 280 E/196

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

3.10.2000

Furthermore, the abolition of the VAT refund procedure under this proposal for a directive is to be
welcomed because the procedure is extremely costly in virtually all Member States and, in view of the
length of time it takes (cid:129) up to 5 years (cid:129) and the costs involved, it is having a damaging effect on the
economy of the Union.

What measures does the Commission intend to take to ensure that the changes to Directive 77/388/EEC (2)
proposed in COM(98) 377 final or the proposal for a regulation can be implemented rapidly?

Is the Commission thinking of bringing forward the second part of proposal COM(98) 377 final
concerning exclusions from the right of deduction, since what is involved is merely the modernisation
and uniform application of the existing VAT system, but in a way that will reduce distortions of
competition in the internal market?

(1) OJ C 219, 15.7.1998, p. 16.
(2) OJ L 145, 13.6.1977, p. 1.

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(14 March 2000)

The proposal for a Council Directive amending Directive 77/388/EEC as regards the rules governing the
right to deduct value added tax, to which the Honourable Member refers, was sent to the Council by the
Commission for adoption on 17 June 1998. It could provide a genuine response to the problems raised.

Under Article 93 (ex-Article 99) of the EC Treaty, adoption of this proposal requires the Council(cid:146)s
unanimous agreement. The proposal is currently still on the table of a Council technical working party
and no agreement has yet been reached on its adoption.

The attempts to reach a compromise in the Council have the Commission(cid:146)s full support. Nevertheless, it
wishes to ensure that any compromise reached is in line with the aims of its proposal.

As the Honourable Member rightly points out, the proposal is in two parts: first, the approximation of
national rules relating to expenditure not eligible for a full deduction; and second, the introduction of a
cross-border right of deduction to replace the refund procedure laid down in the eighth Council Directive
79/1072/EEC of 6 December 1979 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to
turnover taxes (cid:129) arrangements for the refund of value added tax to taxable persons not established in the
territory of the country (1).

The Commission considers both parts of the proposal of equal importance. The need for them to be
separated has not yet arisen in the course of the discussions in the Council.

(1) OJ L 331, 27.12.1979.

(2000/C 280 E/229)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0184/00

by Konstantinos Hatzidakis (PPE-DE) to the Commission

Subject: Failure of Greece to comply with Community legislation

(31 January 2000)

According to the 1998 annual report on the harmonisation of the national legislation of the Member
States with Community legislation, Greece appears to have failed to comply with Community legislation in
241 cases. Will the Commission say, in respect of the situation in 1999, in how many instances Greece
failed to comply with Community legislation, what these cases were and what progress Greece has made as
regards the 241 cases of non-compliance in 1998?