WRITTEN QUESTION E-1416/03 by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Bank sentenced to pay compensation to clients for having provided information to the tax authorities of their Member State.
Date: 2003-04-23
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: bank, banking secrecy, exchange of information, judicial proceedings, tax authorities, tax avoidance, tax evasion, tax system

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78 E/367

(2004/C 78 E/0386)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1364/03

by Maurizio Turco (NI) to the Commission

(10 April 2003)

Subject: Exploitation of Community citizens by the Vatican City State

In view of the fact that:

(cid:1) the Vatican City State receives around EUR 9 million per year (EUR 6 million in 2002 and

EUR 12 million in the Jubilee year) from the sale of gifts and souvenirs;

(cid:1) around 50 European citizens of Italian nationality are employed in the sale of these articles;

(cid:1) these people work on commission on the basis of an ‘oral contract’ for percentages that vary from
2-3 % to 8-10 % and for between 8 and 10 hours every day, with a 30-minute break for lunch. At the
end of the day, after having loaded away the goods and emptied the cash boxes, for which they are
jointly responsible, they are paid cash in hand;

(cid:1) this has been going on since 1976;

(cid:1) despite the undertakings made to regularise their situation, a private company is soon to be made
these

responsible for managing their stalls, and would immediately ‘regularise’
‘clandestine’ workers by depriving them of any rights;

the position of

(cid:1) in the eyes of the Italian Republic these people are unemployed, and therefore benefit from public

services, including health care;

(cid:1) what action will the EU take with regard to a State which is exploiting Community citizens?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(16 May 2003)

The current legal instruments at the Commission’s disposal make no provision for Community action in
situations similar to those described in the written question.

The Commission will transmit a copy of the written question and the corresponding Commission reply to
the Mission of the Holy See to the Union Institutions for its information and follow-up as appropriate.

(2004/C 78 E/0387)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1416/03

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(23 April 2003)

Subject: Bank sentenced to pay compensation to clients for having provided information to the tax

authorities of their Member State

1.
Is the Commission aware of the ruling handed down by a Luxembourg court which sentenced the
Kredietbank Luxembourg (KBL) to pay compensation of EUR 25 000 to each of five Belgian former clients
who had brought an action against the bank on the grounds that it had failed to prevent the Belgian tax
authorities from identifying them?

2.
Does the Commission deem it acceptable that a situation may arise in the EU where persons guilty of
tax evasion may receive compensation from organisations which have failed to keep secret their liability to
punishment?

3.
Is the Commission aware that the Netherlands Inland Revenue Service identified 6 000 Dutch tax
evaders who held accounts with the KBL in the early 1990s in the same way and that they had to pay
additional taxes as a result?

C 78 E/368

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

27.3.2004

4. What impact does the Commission foresee if, after the first five successful parties in a court action,
thousands of other tax evaders also succeed in having their claims for compensation upheld in court? Will
that result in increasing pressure on the governments of the Member States in which banking secrecy still
operates to tighten up measures to combat and punish the provision of information to other Member
States?

5.
Does the Commission expect that actions brought by tax evaders against banks may become an
appropriate method whereby banks which claim that the accounts held with them may remain secret are
saddled with costs that are so heavy that they would have to give up banking secrecy once and for all on
the grounds of self-preservation?

In what way can these disputes inside the EU be terminated when tax evasion is not only not

6.
punished but actually rewarded and banks are given an incentive to withhold tax revenues?

Source: the edition dated 3 April 2003 of ‘de Volkskrant’ a Dutch newspaper.

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(27 May 2003)

The Commission is aware of the decision of the Luxembourg Court to which the Honourable Member
refers. National judicial proceedings and decisions of independent national judicial authorities in this area
belong to the internal competencies of Member States. The Commission does not wish to speculate on the
possible consequences of a particular national court decision for other similar cases or indeed for the
legislation of the Member State concerned.

The Commission agrees with the Honourable Member that the problem of tax fraud and evasion gives
cause for concern. The Commission is convinced that its policy which aims at increased co-operation and
exchange of information between the competent authorities of Member States can assist Member States in
tackling this problem more effectively. In recent years, the Commission has made a number of proposals
to improve the administrative assistance between Member States in the area of direct and indirect taxes.

In July 2001 the Commission presented a proposal for a Directive (1) on taxation of savings income which
provides for the automatic exchange of information between tax authorities with respect to interest paid to
individuals resident in other Member States. Although this proposal provides for transitional arrangements
for Belgium, Luxembourg and Austria, all Member States will ultimately be expected to participate in the
automatic exchange of information. The discussions on this proposal are at an advanced stage and the
Commission hopes that it will be adopted shortly. The Commission is convinced that this Directive will
enable Member States to fight cross-border tax evasion more effectively.

(1) Proposal for a Council Directive to ensure effective taxation of savings income in the form of interest payments

within the Community, OJ C 270 E, 25.9.2001.

(2004/C 78 E/0388)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1418/03

by Maria Carrilho (PSE) to the Commission

(23 April 2003)

Subject: Revision of the Europe-Asia strategic framework

It is a well-known fact that the deepening of relations between the European Union and Asia is of major
importance to both parties. These relations have been stepped up, especially since the mid-1990s, through
structures and fora, such as ASEAN-EC/EU meetings (which began in 70s), ASEM, the EU’s participation in
the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF), as well as the EU-China, EU-India, EU-Japan and, more recently,
EU-Korea summits. To give European action more coherence, the Commission published a communication