WRITTEN QUESTION E-2313/03 by Roger Helmer (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Ramifications of the Chemicals Directive.
Date: 2003-07-14
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EC Directive, European undertaking, chemical product, leather industry, production cost, restriction on competition

26.2.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 51 E/237

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(31 July 2003)

The current Community rules on the deduction of VAT (Article 17(6) of the Sixth Directive (1)) permit the
Member States to retain all the exclusions provided for under their national laws when the Directive came
into force until new rules on expenditure not eligible for a deduction enter into force.

In Case C-43/96 (2) the Court of Justice ruled that Article 17(6) authorises the retention of national VAT
rules excluding from the right to deduct tax on vehicles constituting tools essential to the taxable person’s
business, since:

it is apparent from the wording of Article 17(6) of the Sixth Directive that, while it is for the Council
to decide what expenditure is not eligible for a deduction of value added tax, the rules which the
Council
is called upon to adopt are not automatically limited to expenditure that is not strictly
business expenditure. In those circumstances, the expression ‘all the exclusions’, used in the second
subparagraph of Article 17(6) of the directive, comprises expenditure which is strictly business
expenditure.

The Court of Justice pursued this line of reasoning in Case C-305/97 (3). It ruled that Article 17(6) of the
Sixth Directive authorises the Member States:

… to retain general exclusions from the right to deduct the VAT payable on the purchase of motor
cars used by a taxable person for the purposes of his taxable transactions, even where those cars were
tools essential to the person’s business or where they could not, in specific cases, be used for private
purposes by that person.

The Commission considers the exclusions and restrictions that the Member States currently apply to the
right to deduct by virtue of Article 17(6) of the Sixth Directive to be highly disparate, which can lead to
distortions of competition. Though these disparities are nothing new, their adverse effects have become
more visible since the creation of the internal market. The Commission feels that the directive it has
proposed on the rules governing the right to deduct value added tax (4) would address the above problems
effectively.

The proposed directive provides for the deletion of Article 17(6)
It also
introduces an optional arrangement for the deduction of VAT on passenger cars enabling Member States
which so wish to determine the part of the non-business use of passenger cars in a simplified manner.
Member States not wishing to apply this simplified procedure would, however, have to apply the normal
deduction rules in this matter.

from the Sixth Directive.

Under Article 93 of the EC Treaty, the adoption of this proposal calls for unanimous agreement in the
Council. At the moment the proposal is still under discussion and no agreement has been reached on its
adoption.

(1) Sixth Council Directive of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to

turnover taxes (cid:1) Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment, OJ L 145, 13.6.1977.

(2) Commission of the European Communities v French Republic [1998] ECR I-3903.
(3) Royscot Leasing Ltd, Royscot

Industrial Leasing Ltd, Allied Domecq plc and T.C. Harrison Group Ltd v

Commissioners of Customs & Excise [1999] ECR I-6671.

(4) OJ C 219, 15.7.1998.

(2004/C 51 E/258)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2313/03

by Roger Helmer (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(14 July 2003)

Subject: Ramifications of the Chemicals Directive

Is the Commission aware of the concerns of the leather industry in Europe regarding the Chemicals
Directive? The industry fears that the directive will lead to substantially increased costs for processing

C 51 E/238

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

26.2.2004

leather within the EU, and that the industry will then face unfair competition from third countries where
the directive does not apply, and where processing costs are therefore far lower.

What action will the Commission take to ensure that the leather processing industry in the EU is not
disadvantaged in this way?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(12 August 2003)

The Commission is aware of concerns of the leather industry with regard to the impact of the future
Community chemicals legislation (REACH). An Internet consultation on texts prepared by the services
most directly concerned, namely, Directorates General Enterprise and Environment was recently concluded.
The comments received, including those of the leather industry in relation to higher costs and potential
distortions of competition, will be taken into account by the Commission in the adoption of its proposal.

(2004/C 51 E/259)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2322/03

by Véronique De Keyser (PSE) to the Council

(8 July 2003)

Subject: Netherlands EUR 2 coin

The edge of the Netherlands EUR 2 coin bears a reference to a God (God zij met ons). Although this
characteristic of the coin is described in Office Journal (1), could the Council state which God (Catholic,
Protestant, Islamic, Jewish, Buddhist, etc.) is being referred to? I feel that in our multi-faith, secular Europe
it is important that we should know to whom the words on the coin refer.

(1) OJ C 373, 28.12.2001.

Reply

(13 October 2003)

The indication on the edge of the EUR 2 coin issued by the Netherlands, which makes reference to God,
stems from a tradition in the Netherlands and was previously used for the national coins which have been
replaced by the euro coins.

This indication is in conformity with the decision of the Council to have an uniform European side and a
national side for the Euro coins in order to increase the acceptance of these coins by European citizens (see
recital No 10 of Council Regulation 975/98 on denominations and technical specifications of the Euro
coins intended for circulation).

It is therefore not for the Council to reply to the question raised by the Honourable Parliamentarian.

(2004/C 51 E/260)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2331/03

by Olivier Dupuis (NI) to the Commission

(16 July 2003)

Subject: Vote on a freedom-annihilating law

On 9 July 2003, the Hong Kong Legislative Council was asked to definitively adopt an anti-subversion law
designed to incorporate into the former British colony’s legislation the same repressive measures the
Chinese authorities use against the Falun Gong, clandestine churches and political opponents. According to