WRITTEN QUESTION E-2595/01 by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Pressure on Member States to harmonise their tax rates by reducing the price of petrol and diesel fuel.
Date: 2001-09-26
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: energy policy, environmental policy, fuel tax, motor fuel, road transport, tax harmonisation, transport policy

C 147 E/30

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

20.6.2002

It is reflected in the Social Policy Agenda, the road map for social policy until 2005. The Commission has
made it very explicit that the modernisation and the improvement of the European Social Model is crucial
for increasing employment creation and hence a high level of labour participation as well as for fighting
social
inclusion and improving social protection. Social policy in this sense is a productive factor,
underpinning economic performance, while contributing to the goal of solidarity and social fairness.

The role of the social partners is crucial here and the Commission has made clear that it wants to
encourage the full participation of social partners in this process of modernisation. It gives preference to
the social dialogue and negotiations between the social partners $ in line with Articles 138 and 139
(ex Articles 118A and 118B) of the EC Treaty $ to put in place concrete answers to the challenges Europe
is confronted with in those areas for which the social partners are responsible.

3.
The Commission is aware that in the United States, like in the Union, a public debate is held on the
most balanced way to ensure public services. The Commission puts the emphasis, as the EC Treaty
prescribes, on services of general economic interest and refers to the document which was adopted in its
meeting of 17 October 2001 and which has been based on an earlier Communication of the Commission
regarding this important subject (1).

4.
The Commission believes that adhering to the Conclusions of Lisbon will be the best way to keep the
European economy on a dynamic and modern track. In particular, a well-timed process of modernisation
and proper adjustment to new circumstances will ensure the vitality of the European economy. The
Commission is not aware of any reduction of social security or limitation of pension claims.

5.
The United States has the highest average living standard as measured by the gross domestic product
(GDP) per capita. The relative positions of the United States and the Union in this respect have been fairly
stable for a long time (2), although with some advantage for the United States in the second half of the 90s.
This seems to indicate that in terms of economic welfare and in terms of the employment rate the United
States at least in aggregate terms has been doing better. However, a number of questions concerning social
cohesion have been raised as to the American-model. The Lisbon conclusions should be seen in this light.

6.

The Commission fully supports the Conclusions of Lisbon.

(1) COM(2000) 580 final.
(2) See paragraph 2 on page 12 of the 2000 Broad Economic Policy Guidelines, COM(2001) 105 final.

(2002/C 147 E/028)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2595/01

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(26 September 2001)

Subject: Pressure on Member States to harmonise their tax rates by reducing the price of petrol and diesel

fuel

1.
Does the Commission recall that the increase in the price of crude oil in summer 2001 also resulted
in a rise in the price of diesel fuel and that, as a reaction to that rise, road haulage companies carried out
campaigns to force the governments of the Member States to offset their increasing payments to the oil
companies by a reduction in the long-standing taxation on liquid fuels for road transport?

2.
Does the Commission also recall that various Member States reacted in different ways by taking
measures which benefited the competitive position of the road haulage sector in their own country but
that the United Kingdom, in particular, did not bow to this pressure for a tax cut?

Can the Commission confirm the report which appeared in the issue of the Sunday Times published
3.
on 9 September 2001 that,
it will be asking the British
in a White Paper to be published shortly,
Government to reduce the cost of petrol by 10 % as a contribution towards tax harmonisation within the
European Union?

20.6.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 147 E/31

4. What does it expect the results of the price cut referred to in Question 3 to be as regards the transfer
of goods transport from rail to road, the extent of the use of fossil fuels and the increase in CO2 emissions?

5.
Is the Commission taking into account the fact that Member States’ tax revenues are needed for the
fulfilment of the commitments they have undertaken vis-à-vis their inhabitants and for the preservation of
a decent environment, all the more so since they are now prohibited from covering revenue shortfalls by
increasing loans?

6. What is the relationship between the Commission’s efforts to secure price cuts and the 1997 Kyoto
and 2001 Bonn Agreements to reduce CO2 emissions?

7. Why is the Commission now seeking harmonisation since it
is other Member States acting
independently which have created a situation where the Member State which maintained the tax rate at the
old level has succeeded in attaining an exceptional position?

8.
Is the Commission prepared to promote the tax harmonisation it might desire by raising the prices of
petrol and diesel fuel for motor vehicles where those prices are still not in line with the finiteness of
petroleum reserves and with the impact of the burning of such fuels on the environment instead of urging
an immediate implementation of tax cuts by Member States which did not previously apply such tax cuts?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(15 November 2001)

1. ,2. and 5.
On 4 October 2000, following the sharp rise in petrol prices during the summer, the
Commission published a communication entitled The European Union’s oil supply (1) in which it stated
that the petrol price rises should not be offset by tax cuts and that fiscal instruments must be used in a
manner compatible with the economic policy guidelines and the commitments given on budgetary
consolidation. This approach was subsequently confirmed in the Green Paper on Security of energy supply
in the European Union (2), adopted by the Commission on 29 November 2000.

Most Member States gave in to pressure from road hauliers and lowered excise duties or other taxes, such
as axle tax in the case of the United Kingdom.

3. and 4.
White Paper on European Transport Policy For 2010: Time To Decide (3) was wrong.

The information published in the Sunday Times prior to publication of the Commission’s

In the White Paper the Commission considers a measure for harmonising the taxation of diesel consumed
in connection with proposals for charging for infrastructures and reviewing existing
by road hauliers,
charges. The objective is not, then, to lower the price of road haulage.

6. ,7. and 8.
incorporate negative externalities such as greenhouse gas emissions.

Sustainable development

requires consumers

to take on board ‘real’ prices which

The Commission therefore intends proposing a harmonised Community excise duty on diesel
for
commercial road haulage, which would be higher than the average current rate. Separating the taxation
systems for fuels for commercial use and fuels for private use would also enable Member States to increase
charges on diesel consumed by passenger vehicles, approximating them to the charges on petrol (4). The
proposed innovations would satisfy the requirements of Community transport, environmental and energy
policies.

(1) COM(2000) 631 final.
(2) COM(2000) 769 final.
(3) COM(2001) 370 final.
(4) Excise duties on diesel are approximately € 140 per 1 000 l lower than those on petrol.