WRITTEN QUESTION E-3661/00 by Glenys Kinnock (PSE) to the Commission. Coastal fishing in ACP countries.
Date: 2000-11-27
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: ACP countries, agreement (EU), fishing agreement, fishing controls, inshore fishing

C 174 E/104

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

19.6.2001

autonomous regions (Law No 40/1998, Articles 50 and 61); up to the 1998 tax year the rate could be as
high as 56 %). However, for non-residents, a general flat-rate amount of income tax (25 %) applies (Law No
41/1998, Article 24(1)(a)). In the Commission(cid:146)s view non-residents are only put at a disadvantage if their
worldwide income, hypothetically subject to Spanish tax in the same way as that of residents, does not
attain a marginal rate of 25 % (for 2000 such a rate applies for a taxable income of PTE 2 142 000
(€ 10 684). In such an unlikely event, the Commission would consider that the Spanish authorities should
only apply the amount of tax that would be payable by residents.

The profits (defined in Law No 40/1998, Articles 31 and 32) earned by non-residents on the sale of
property in Spain which is not a main residence are taxable in Spain (Law No 41/1998, Article 12(1)(g)) at
a standard rate of 35 % (Law No 41/1998, Article 24(1)(f)). However, a rate of 18 % applies to profits
earned by residents who were owners for more than one year (Royal Decree 3/2000); if the building is
sold during the first year, profits are taxed according to the sliding scale referred to above. In such a case
the conditions mentioned above would have to apply (in 2000, a marginal rate of 35 % is attained at a
taxable income of PTE 4 182 000 (€ 20 859) for the Commission to conclude that non-residents were being
treated less favourably. However, it does consider that there is clear discrimination as a different flat rate is
applied. It has brought this to the attention of the Spanish authorities and reserves the right to initiate
formal proceedings under Article 226 of the EC Treaty if legislation is not brought into line with the
requirements of the Treaty.

The sliding scale for property tax applies equally to buildings owned by residents and non-residents.
However, residents receive a basic allowance of PTE 18 000 000 (€ 89 783). This would only discriminate
against non-residents if their assets outside Spain were worth less than that amount.

(1) OJ C 27 E, 29.1.2000.

(2001/C 174 E/107)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3661/00

by Glenys Kinnock (PSE) to the Commission

(27 November 2000)

Subject: Coastal fishing in ACP countries

Would the Commission outline what measures it is taking to ensure that Community fishing vessels,
operating under EU-ACP fishing agreements, respect the needs and rights of small-scale, coastal fishing
communities in ACP countries and do not damage the local ACP fisheries sector?

What action is the Commission taking to improve the capacity of ACP countries to patrol the waters
under their jurisdiction, so as to control the activities of both Community and ACP fishing fleets and
thereby prevent overfishing?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(5 January 2001)

The Commission thanks the Honourable Member for her question and informs her that, in order to avoid
clashes with small-scale traditional fishermen, protocols to fisheries agreements specify fishing zones for
the Community which differ from those for local vessels.

19.6.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 174 E/105

As for improving the capacity of African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) countries to control fishing
activities, the Commission is pleased to inform the Honourable Member that, since 1997 the majority of
fisheries agreements concluded between the Community and third countries (namely ACP countries)
stipulate that an important part of the financial compensation paid in exchange for fishing possibilities
be devoted to (cid:145)targeted actions(cid:146), amongst which are monitoring, control and surveillance activities,
including the setting up of satellite based vessel monitoring systems.

(2001/C 174 E/108)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3662/00

by Piia-Noora Kauppi (PPE-DE) to the Council

(28 November 2000)

Subject: The EU(cid:146)s White Paper seminar in Paris from 5 to 7 October 2000

The Commission has drawn up a first white paper on youth policy. A hearing on the subject for young
people in Europe was organised in Paris from 5 to 7 October 2000.

Responsibility for the event in Paris was shared between the Commission and France(cid:146)s Ministry of Youth
and Sport. According to sources, the practical arrangements could be described as little short of chaotic.
Hotel reservations went astray, and many delegations had to look for hotels for themselves late at night.

Although the official speeches constantly stressed taking account of the needs of special groups, no
account whatsoever had been taken, for example, of the needs of the disabled or those with special dietary
requirements.

The meeting rooms for the working groups were too small, and there were not even enough chairs for all
the participants. The original intention was that the hosts should make the travelling arrangements, but
those for the Finnish participants, for instance, ultimately had to be made at short notice by the Finnish
organisation CIMO. As the Sunday flights were fully booked, the whole of the Finnish delegation had to
leave in the middle of the working groups(cid:146) reporting session on Saturday afternoon.

What will the Council do to ensure that similar organisational problems do not arise during further white
paper preparations?

Reply

(8 March 2001)

With regard to the preparations for the European youth seminar in Paris from 5 to 7 October 2000, the
Council would draw the Honourable member(cid:146)s attention to the fact that it is only responsible for the
organisation of meetings held under its Rules of Procedure: Ministerial Councils (Article 2) and meetings to
prepare for them (Article 19 of the Council(cid:146)s Rules of Procedure).

The Council
invites the Honourable Member to address any questions concerning the organisation of
discussions in preparation for the White Paper on youth policy to the author of the White Paper, the
Commission.

(2001/C 174 E/109)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3663/00

by Piia-Noora Kauppi (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(27 November 2000)

Subject: The EU(cid:146)s White Paper seminar in Paris from 5 to 7 October 2000

The Commission has drawn up a first white paper on youth policy. A hearing on the subject for young
people in Europe was organised in Paris from 5 to 7 October 2000.