WRITTEN QUESTION E-0501/03 by Evelyne Gebhardt (PSE) to the Commission. European Parliament resolution on the memorandum presented by the Commission to the Council on income taxation and equal treatment for men and women (A2-0055/85).
Date: 2003-02-21
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: application of EU law, female work, gender equality, position of women, tax on income, tax system, unmarried person

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84 E/459

The position of the Commission is clear. It roundly condemns all forms of violence and incitement to
3.
violence. The Union has pointed out the Palestinian Authority’s responsibilities in fighting terrorism and
will continue to press the Palestinian Authority, as the governing body responsible for maintaining law and
order in the Palestinian territories. The Union has also called on the Palestinian Authority and Mr Arafat to
take a clear position against incitement to hatred and violence. In this context the Union has welcomed, as
a positive step, the Palestinian Authority’s commitment in its Reform Action Plan of 25 June 2002
‘to renounce fanaticism in the educational curricula and spread the spirit of democracy, enlightenment and
openness on a wide scale.’ The Union will continue to press the Palestinian Authority in the context of
these commitments.

(2004/C 84 E/0534)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0501/03

by Evelyne Gebhardt (PSE) to the Commission

(21 February 2003)

Subject: European Parliament resolution on the memorandum presented by the Commission to the Council

on income taxation and equal treatment for men and women (A2-0055/85)

In its resolution A2-0055/85 (1) on the Commission memorandum on income taxation and equal
treatment for men and women (2), the European Parliament refers to the fact that the national income
taxation systems often hinder a woman’s career and put married women in a less favourable tax position
than unmarried women.

The European Parliament also states that one of the ways in which the goal of tax equality for men and
women should be achieved is by means of measures put forward by the Commission. The memorandum,
however, makes no mention of this kind of initiative.

The resolution also makes reference to Action 6 of
the Commission’s ‘Action Programme on the
promotion of equal opportunities for women’, which provides for an analysis of the national taxation
systems and for related measures.

An analysis of this kind is extremely desirable, especially as a review of the tax benefit systems in view of
reducing disincentives for women forms one of the objectives of the Community Framework Strategy on
Gender Equality (2001-2005).

Does the Commission now have the results of this analysis? Can the Commission make these results
available? Have measures aimed at tax equality for men and women already been introduced?

(1) OJ C 229, 9.9.1985, p. 128.
(2) COM(84) 695.

Answer given by Ms Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(14 April 2003)

The Commission would point out to the Honourable Member that direct taxation is, in principle, an area
that comes under the responsibility of the Member States. However, Member States must exercise this
responsibility consistently with Community law (1).

The principle of equal treatment for men and women is definitely one of the fundamental principles of
Community law,
implying that the Member States must comply with this principle in their taxation
legislation concerning income from employment, among other things.

C 84 E/460

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.4.2004

In this area, the Commission, which ensures that Community law is applied, does not hesitate to bring
proceedings against Member States, notably on the basis of Article 226 of the EC Treaty, when it observes
violations of Article 141 of the EC Treaty (ex-Article 119) that guarantees the principle of equal pay for
women and men, in order to remove all forms of direct discrimination on grounds of sex and all indirect
forms of discrimination, notably those stemming from differences of treatment due to the family or marital
status of tax-payers that are not justified on grounds other than sex.

Moreover, the Commission financed a study on the impact of national taxation schemes on women’s work,
the 300-page report on which (cid:1) in English (cid:1) was finalised in February 2001 by Professor Paloma de
Villota. While the Commission cannot be held responsible for this excellent study produced by this
independent expert,
it is definitely a precious source of information and thoughts that is taken into
consideration when implementing the Commission’s initiatives and measures, especially those of a
legislative nature.

The Honourable Member may consult this study on the site of the ‘Equality for Women and Men’ Unit of
the Commission’s Directorate-General for Employment and Social Affairs at the following address: (http://
europa.eu.int/comm/employment_social/equ_opp/women_work.pdf).

(1) See, in this connection, ‘inter alia’ the judgment of 14 February 1995 of the Court of Justice in the Schumacker

case, C-279/93.

(2004/C 84 E/0535)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0661/03

by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(28 February 2003)

Subject: Tariffs on imports of tinned tuna from Thailand and the Philippines

the negotiations intended to secure approval of

Following the fourth WTO Ministerial Conference held in Doha (Qatar) in November 2001, in the course
of
the waiver needed for the EU to be granted
authorisation allowing it
to maintain tariff preferences with the ACP countries, Thailand and the
Philippines made their votes conditional upon improved access for their tinned tuna to the Community
market. The Trade Commissioner, Pascal Lamy, undertook merely to hold a series of consultations on the
subject, which concluded without any agreement and with the EU proposing to go through a mediation
process before the WTO, a procedure which is not legally binding. Following the mediation, the mediator,
Mr Rufus Yerxa, proposed the possible opening of a quota of 25 000 tonnes of tinned tuna as a finished
product at a 12 % tariff. A considerable period of time has elapsed since the Doha Ministerial Conference,
and the European Union currently intends to adopt a regulation accepting the proposal put forward by the
mediator, against the opposition of the two main tinned tuna-producing countries in the European Union,
as well as the opposition of the entire EU tuna-fishing and tuna-processing and canning industry.

Can the Commission say what studies it has carried out to assess the impact which the opening of
1.
this quota will have on the tuna-fishing and canning industry in the European Union? If no such studies
have been carried out, does the Commission not consider that, before granting any type of preferences to
third countries, an impact assessment should be carried out to evaluate the effects which this measure will
have on the tuna-fishing and canning industry in the European Union and on the workers employed in
these sectors in the Community?

Can the Commission say whether the commitment given by Commissioner Lamy in Doha was solely

2.
to open consultations with Thailand and the Philippines?

3.
On this subject, Commissioner Lamy has stated that the only commitment given was to open
consultations with Thailand and the Philippines. Can the Commission therefore explain why the European
Union would lose credibility if it did not grant preferences to Thailand and the Philippines, if there was no
commitment other than to open consultations?