WRITTEN QUESTION P-0451/00 by Hanja Maij-Weggen (PPE-DE) to the Council. Distortion of competition resulting from different tax arrangements within the EU.
Date: 2000-02-14
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, United Kingdom, common commercial policy, restriction on competition, tax system

C 374 E/78

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

28.12.2000

In view of the above, can the Commission say:

1. whether these fears are justified;

2. what conditions the Region of Sicily has failed to comply with;

3. what changes should be made to the above-mentioned Plan;

4. whether there is real collaboration between Palermo and Brussels on the content of the Plan;

5. whether there is any real possibility that the Region of Sicily may lose the co-financing in the event of

the plan not fulfilling the criteria established by the Structural Funds?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(17 March 2000)

As part of the programming for 2000-2006, the Italian authorities included with the development plan for
the Mezzogiorno a series of proposals for operational programmes,
including those in Sicily. These
documents are currently being studied by the Commission.

With particular regard to the regional operational programme for Sicily, which was declared admissible,
the Commission made certain comments during the negotiations with the Italian authorities. These points
are currently being discussed with those authorities in order to arrive at the final version of the document
which will be the subject of a Commission Decision.

It should be stressed that assistance for 2000-2006 is prepared in full partnership with the national, central
and regional authorities concerned. At this early stage in programming, it is not possible to talk of the
under-utilisation of funds.

(2000/C 374 E/091)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0451/00

by Hanja Maij-Weggen (PPE-DE) to the Council

(14 February 2000)

Subject: Distortion of competition resulting from different tax arrangements within the EU

Can the Council confirm that a working party of Council officials has encountered in a number of Member
States sixty sets of tax arrangements which are deemed to have the effect of distorting competition?

Is it true that the report identifies the Netherlands as the front runner in this respect, with nine schemes
coming in for criticism?

What are the nine?

Is it true that no fiscal arrangements having the effect of distorting competition were found in Germany,
France, Italy and the United Kingdom (the large Member States)?

What is the Council(cid:146)s opinion of this official report and when will it present its own political appraisal?

Reply

(16/17 May 2000)

1.
The report of the Code of Conduct Group (Business Taxation) to which the Honourable Member
refers and which was submitted to the Council (Ecofin) on 29 November 1999 can be consulted on the
Council(cid:146)s Internet site (ue.eu.int/newsroom, under (cid:145)miscellaneous(cid:146), 4901/1999).

28.12.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 374 E/79

2. While deciding to make the text accessible to the public via the Internet, the Council has not as yet
taken any position on its content, and is therefore unable at this stage to give a reply concerning the
substance of the questions put.

The Council would also remind the Honourable Member that the European Council

3.
in Helsinki
agreed that a High Level Working Party would be set up which will, in the framework of the overall report
which it is to submit to the Council, put forward possibilities for solutions, particularly as regards the Code
of Conduct, since the latter forms part of the tax package, in accordance with the conclusions of the Ecofin
Council on 1 December 1997.

(2000/C 374 E/092)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0452/00

by Ioannis Mar(cid:237)nos (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(14 February 2000)

Subject: Turkish (cid:145)free zones(cid:146) and textile exports

On 8 July 1997 the Commissioner responsible for External Relations, Mr Hans van den Broek, notified the
European Parliament (Answer to Question E-1965/97) (1) that (cid:145)a Community team had gone to Turkey
in October 1996 to ascertain that the functioning of Turkish free zones complies with that country(cid:146)s
obligations under the Customs Union.(cid:146) This statement came in the wake of international press reports
voicing suspicions that
textile exports from third countries were passing through the Turkish (cid:145)free
industrial zones(cid:146) of Istanbul and Mersin and appearing on EU markets as (cid:145)Turkish(cid:146) products, thereby
benefiting from the provisions of the EU-Turkey Customs Union Agreement and displacing similar
Community products.

Mr Hans van den Broek also stated that (cid:145)the Community and Turkey agreed as part of the recommenda-
tions adopted by the Community-Turkey Association Committee on 24 April 1997) to keep a constant
watch on this matter in order to prevent any evasion of the rules of the Customs Union.(cid:146) Will the
Commission say how many Community monitoring teams similar to that of October 1996 have been
dispatched since then and what their findings have been?

(1) OJ C 45, 10.2.1998, p. 131.

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(7 March 2000)

Since the Commission(cid:146)s inspection mission to Turkey of October 1996, no further missions took place.
No evidence of actual fraud was found. Since the inspection mission there have been no indications of
fraud, whether by complaints by Community industry or otherwise. The Commission therefore does not
intend to make any periodic inspections, but will raise the matter immediately with the Turkish authorities
if the need arrises. Any suspicion of fraud can be directly communicated to the Director of the European
Anti-fraud Office (OLAF).

(2000/C 374 E/093)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0453/00

by Karin J(cid:246)ns (PSE) to the Council

(24 February 2000)

Subject: Regulation (EC) temporarily suspending some or all of the autonomous Common Customs Tariff

duties on certain fishery products

In Council Regulation (EC) No 2822/98 (1) of 21 December 1998, customs duties on a range of fisheries
lump fish, various crab species, etc) were fixed at zero per cent with effect from
products (sturgeon,