WRITTEN QUESTION E-1287/01 by Theresa Villiers (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Taxation Policy Group.
Date: 2001-05-03
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: fiscal policy, supplementary pension, type of business

4.12.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 340 E/213

If the Commission is considering the need for harmonisation of property taxation, could it indicate
3.
precisely which areas it is looking at? Is the Commission primarily concerned with the VAT system and
VAT rates on building land, supplies of new buildings or renovation and repairs, for example, or is it also
considering harmonisation of
levies of real estate transfer taxes or stamp duties? What does the
Commission believe is the best way to proceed with property taxation?

The study by Arthur Anderson identified some problem areas and perceived distortions in the UK.
4.
interpretation involving provisions on
On VAT provisions the study found numerous problems of
protected buildings, relevant charitable buildings and rent adjustments on disposal of buildings,
for
example. It also perceived a distortion under the (cid:145)option to tax(cid:146) regime, whereby a landlord has to opt to
tax all leases in a building or none of them. Has the Commission considered any of these problem areas or
perceived distortions, and would they fall under the scope of any Commission proposals in this field?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(14 June 2001)

In his contribution to the seminar on the 2001 Belgian Presidency, on 26 March 2001, the Director-
General
in which some
coordination is needed, concerns direct taxation applied to highly mobile tax bases, such as company
taxation and capital taxation(cid:146) (translation of the French text of the transparency he used).

for Taxation and the Customs Union stated that

(cid:145)an intermediate zone,

In his oral presentation, in French, Mr Vanden Abeele used the words (cid:145)taxation mobiliŁre(cid:146) (taxation of
movable assets), not (cid:145)taxation immobiliŁre(cid:146) (taxation of immovable assets, or property taxation).

Property taxation was not mentioned. The Commission has no intention of carrying out any
harmonisation of direct taxation, although as part of a system of VAT taxation at source, which remains
our long-term objective, Community rules on VAT applicable to the property sector would, of course,
need to be revised.

As to the study conducted by Arthur Andersen to which the Honourable Member refers, the Commission
takes the view that the results do not make the case for the need for legal initiatives in the short term to
modernise and simplify the existing VAT system. This view is supported by reactions from representatives
of the sector concerned.

The transparencies used in the presentation have been sent directly to the Honourable Member and
Parliament(cid:146)s General Secretariat.

(2001/C 340 E/245)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1287/01

by Theresa Villiers (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(3 May 2001)

Subject: Taxation Policy Group

1.
Could the Commission please state what was discussed at the meeting of the Taxation Policy Group
on 16 March 2001, and what was discussed at any meetings held between 2 March 2000 and 16 March
2001?

2. What future meetings of the Taxation Policy Group have been scheduled, and what matters are due
to be discussed at upcoming meetings?

C 340 E/214

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

4.12.2001

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(7 June 2001)

The Eleventh meeting of

1.
the Taxation Policy Group on 5 May 2000 was mainly devoted to
a discussion on the review of the provisions of the Code of Conduct for business taxation and an exchange
of views on possible issues for further meetings of the Taxation Policy Group in 2000.

The Twelfth meeting of the Taxation Policy Group on 18 July 2000 was mainly devoted to a presentation
by the German representatives of the German business tax reform, followed by a discussion, and to an
exchange of views concerning one issue of the (ongoing) Commission company tax study (company tax
obstacles to cross-border economic activity in the Single Market).

The Thirteenth meeting of the Taxation Policy Group on 6 October 2000 was mainly devoted to
a discussion of the taxation of supplementary pensions and an exchange of views concerning one issue of
the (ongoing) Commission company tax study (the effective levels of company taxation in the
Community).

The Fourteenth meeting of the Taxation Policy Group on 16 March 2001 was mainly devoted to an
exchange of views on future priorities of Community tax policy and a brief evaluation of the progress
made concerning the new strategy to improve the operation of the VAT System within the context of the
Internal Market.

2.

The date and agenda of the next meeting of the Taxation Policy Group has not been fixed yet.

(2001/C 340 E/246)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1293/01

by Bernd Lange (PSE) to the Commission

(3 May 2001)

Subject: Light fittings supplied without connecting terminals (EN 60598-1/A13)

On 30 January 2001, the Commission published in the Official Journal an opinion within the framework
of Council Directive 73/23/EEC relating to electrical equipment designed for use within certain voltage
limits (1). In that opinion, the Commission comes to the conclusion that electrical equipment manufactured
in compliance with the EN 60598-1:1997 and EN 60598-1:1997/A13:1999 might still fail to comply with
the essential requirement of
the Low Voltage Directive. The opinion was delivered in response to
a complaint to the Commission lodged by France concerning failure to supply connecting terminals with
light fittings.

The Commission has been unable to find any acceptable solution to this problem since France lodged the
complaint on 12 May 1995. Since then, one German company in particular has been put at a huge
disadvantage. The facts of the case clearly demonstrate that France has erected a technical barrier to trade,
all the more so since the relevant standard (EN 60598-1/A13) was adopted by the Cenelec Standardisation
Committee TC 34Z by 17 votes to 1 (France voted against) and since products made in France and in
other EU countries may continue to be sold in France without connecting terminals! What is more, no
safety hazards have, to date, been proved. Live cables protrude only from ceilings or walls and are usually
protected by connecting terminals. An additional connecting terminal (cid:129) to be supplied with the light
fitting (cid:129) would simply be a further item to be added to Europe(cid:146)s refuse mountain and does not constitute
common practice in Europe. Without waiting for a the findings of a risk assessment procedure, the
European Commission has issued a recommendation to the Member States which takes no account
whatsoever of the facts of the case (cid:129) which are themselves the result of installation instructions which
vary from one Member State to another.

1.
Given this situation, will the Commission withdraw its opinion published on 30 January 2001 until
a solution acceptable throughout the EU is found and grant manufacturers an appropriate transitional
period until an EU-wide solution is presented?

2. What is the Commission(cid:146)s attitude to this decision, which was not coordinated with Cenelec, which
makes a laughing stock of the risk assessment procedure agreed by the Commission, Cenelec and industry?

(1) OJ C 29, 30.1.2001, p. 2.