REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL in accordance with Article 18 of Council Directive 2003/48/EC on taxation of savingsincome in the form of interest payments
Date: 2012-03-02
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: European tax cooperation, cross-frontier data flow, exchange of information, interest, national statistics, savings, tax evasion, tax on investment income

EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Brussels, 2.3.2012  
COM(2012) 65 final 

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL 

in accordance with Article 18 of Council Directive 2003/48/EC on taxation of savings 
income in the form of interest payments 

{SWD(2012) 16 final} 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
 
 
REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL 

in accordance with Article 18 of Council Directive 2003/48/EC on taxation of savings 
income in the form of interest payments 

1. 

INTRODUCTION 

Art. 18 of Council Directive 2003/48/EC of 3 June 2003 on taxation of savings income in the 
form  of  interest  payments  (the  "Savings  Directive"  or  "Directive")1  states  that  "The 
Commission shall report to the Council every three years on the operation of this Directive. 
On  the  basis  of  these  reports  the  Commission  shall,  where  appropriate,  propose  to  the 
Council  any  amendments  to  the  Directive  that  prove  necessary  in  order  better  to  ensure 
effective taxation of savings income and to remove undesirable distortions of competition." 

The  report  for  the  first  review2  was  prepared  in  2008  (the  "2008  Report")3  and  covered  the 
transposition and implementation of the Directive, summing up the economic evaluation4 and 
the  Commission's  advice  on  the  need  for  changes.  The  necessary  changes  identified  in  the 
2008  Report  were  primarily  meant  to  clarify  certain  interpretational  issues  and  to  close 
existing  loopholes.  To  that  end,  the  Commission  adopted  an  amending  proposal5  on  13 
November  2008  (the  "Proposal")  to  the  Directive  with  a  view  to  closing  existing  loopholes 
and better preventing tax evasion.  

The  report  for  this  second  review  primarily  covers  the  functioning  and  an  economic 
evaluation  of  the  Directive.  The  main  findings  of  this  document,  i.e.  the  widespread  use  of 
offshore  jurisdictions  for  intermediary  entities  and  the  growth  in  key  markets  that  provide 
products  comparable  to  debt  claims  reinforce  the  arguments  for  extending  the  scope  of  the 
Directive  and  the  relevant  agreements  concluded  in  accordance  with  Article  17  of  the 
Directive. These findings are also consistent with the political commitment expressed by the 
G20  to  promote  compliance  with  international  tax  and  financial  information  exchange 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2003:157:0038:0048:en:PDF  

http://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/taxation/personal_tax/savings_tax/savings_directive_review/index 
en.htm 
Report COM/2008/0552 
http://eurlex.europa.eu/Result.do?T1=V5&T2=2008&T3=552&RechType=RECH_naturel&Submit=Se
arch  
Detailed in the Commission Staff Working Document presenting an economic evaluation of the effects 
of  Council  Directive  2003/48/EC  on  the  basis  of  the  available  data,  Brussels,  15.9.2008,  SEC(2008) 
2420 
http://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/resources/documents/taxation/personal_tax/savings_tax/savings_d
irective_review/sec%282008%292420.pdf  
Proposal for a Council Directive amending Directive 2003/48/EC on taxation of savings income in the 
form of interest payments, Brussels, 13.11.2008, COM(2008) 727 final, 
http://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/resources/documents/taxation/personal_tax/savings_tax/savings_d
irective_review/com%282008%29727_en.pdf  

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
                                                 
 
 
standards  and  to  use  all  the  countermeasures  available  to  combat  tax  havens  and  non-
cooperative jurisdictions that do not comply with these standards.  

The  Commission  Staff  Working  Document  accompanying  this  report  provides  more  factual 
details of the subjects covered below. 

2. 

TRANSPOSITION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE DIRECTIVE 

In  the  first  review,  the  Commission  concluded  that  all  Member  States  had  transposed  the 
Directive6  and  had  started  applying  the  implementing  rules  from  the  scheduled  dates  (i.e.  1 
July  2005  and,  for  Bulgaria  and  Romania,  1  January  2007).  The  Commission  has  opened 
infringement  procedures  against  individual  Member  States  on  specific  elements  of  their 
implementing rules which were closed only after confirmation from them that such rules had 
been  brought  into  line  with  the  Directive.  There  are  currently  no  pending  infringement 
procedures. 

At the ECOFIN Council meeting of 7 December 2010, the Commission  committed itself to 
presenting an ad-hoc report by mid-2011 on the correct and effective application by Member 
States of the Directive. Based on the answers received to a questionnaire sent to all Member 
States,  the  Commission  services  compiled  that  report  (SEC  2011  (775)  Final7)  which  was 
transmitted to the Council on 14 June 2011. 

An  assessment  of  the  replies  from  Member  States  suggests  that  certain  of  the  Directive’s 
provisions have been interpreted differently by Member States. Some of the risks of different 
interpretation thus highlighted had already been identified in the 2008 Report. In this context, 
the main problems would be removed through the corresponding new rules contained in the 
Proposal. 

3. 

THE FUNCTIONING OF THE DIRECTIVE 

The functioning of the Directive has been assessed by means of a questionnaire sent to the tax 
administrations  of  Member  States  concerning  their  use  of  the  data  exchanged  under  the 
Directive.  In  addition,  the  Commission  has  reviewed  the  statistics  provided  under  the 
Directive  and  commissioned  a  study  to  assess  the  administrative  burden  of  the  existing 
Directive for economic operators. The main findings of the analysis are provided below.  

3.1. 

Questionnaire on the use of data  

A questionnaire was sent to the experts of the ACDT Group8 concerning the use of the data 
received by their tax administrations from other Member States which included the following: 
the  use  of  data  for  tax  audits;  the  quality  of  data  received  from  other  Member  States;  and 
whether the introduction of the Directive had led to better compliance by tax payers. 

6 
7 

8 

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:72003L0048:EN:NOT#FIELD_BE 
http://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/resources/documents/taxation/personal_tax/savings_tax/implemen
  tation/sec(2011)775_en.pdf 

Commission expert group of national experts: Administrative Cooperation in Direct Taxation 

EN 

3 

   EN 

                                                 
Best practices 

Member States that have carried out an assessment have reported positive compliance results. 
However, this review highlights some areas which Member States could improve in order to 
make better use of the information exchanged: 

• 

• 

• 

integration of a savings directive database with the national tax database; 

development of risk management and more automated process of cross-checking the 
data; 

streamlining of the dissemination of data between the central tax administration and 
the local collection offices. 

Quality of data 

Member States have highlighted a clear increase in the quality of the data they receive due to 
the structured format and common rules of procedures under which the data are reported. By 
comparison  with  exchange  of  information  under  bilateral  treaties,  the  quality  of  the  data 
received under the Directive is significantly higher.  

However,  the  quality  of  data  received  still  remains  a  concern  for  many  Member  States. 
Currently,  around  half  of  the  Member  States  confirmed  that  they  conduct  checks  on  the 
content of the information received from paying agents before sending them to the receiving 
Member States.  

Given the importance of increasing the quality, all Member States should consider applying 
systematic checks on the quality of the information to be sent. In addition, Member States are 
encouraged to use an online checking system being developed by the Commission for the Tax 
Identification number (TIN) to correctly identify the taxpayer.  

3.2. 

Statistics under the Directive 

As  the  Directive  had  only  been  in  operation  since  01.07.2005,  a  lack  of  data  restricted  the 
scope of the first review. It was only in a Council meeting of 12.05.2008 that Member States 
agreed on the statistics9 to be provided to the Commission in order to assess the efficiency and 
effectiveness of the Directive. 

Since the first review, data definitions and formats have been defined which have led to better 
and more timely exchanges of information between Member States. Concerning the quantity 
of  data  exchanged,  Member  States  that  are  large  or  with  significant  financial  centres  have 
exchanged  the  most  information.  The  peak  year  for  information  exchanged  was  2007  with 
reported  transactions  valued  at  EUR  38,9  billion  (2009  figure10:  EUR  9,9  billion).  The 
inclusion of gross proceeds in the figures can lead  to a different basis of comparison  and if 
this  element  is  excluded  the  amounts  reported  are  more  stable  (interest  income  in  2009  is 
EUR 2,3 billion (2007: EUR 3,6 billion)). Withholding tax shared by all countries under the 

9 
10 

http://register.consilium.europa.eu/pdf/en/08/st09/st09467.en08.pdf 
Sweden did not submit data to the Commission on information exchanged with other Member States for 
all fiscal years. Ireland has had technical problems with its submission of data for 2009. 

EN 

4 

   EN 

                                                 
Directive and related Savings Agreements has decreased from EUR 700,9 million in 2008 to 
EUR 495,9 million in 2009. Both decreases in information exchanged and tax withheld can be 
partially explained by the financial crisis in the last quarter of 2008 which led to a significant 
fall in interest rates for household deposits in 2009.  

A notable feature of the data is the high variability of the information exchanged by Member 
States  during  the  period  under  review.  A  simulation  exercise  on  ECB  cross-border  deposits 
(section  4  of  this  report)  confirmed  that  for  some  Member  States  the  interest  payments 
amounts  reported  for  the  classical  type  of  interest  income  were  below  the  estimated 
benchmark  for  cross-border  deposits  and  interest  rates.  Furthermore,  replies  from  Member 
States to the ad-hoc report (section 2 of this report) indicated that most Member States rely 
primarily  on  the  correct  application  of  their  guidelines  by  paying  agents  for  the  correct 
identification  of  relevant  income  to  be  reported,  although  they  have  provisions  in  place  to 
perform audits and apply sanctions for non-compliance with the Directive.  

To  address  the  issue  of  variation  of  data  exchanged  across  the  fiscal  years,  Member  States 
should  consider  the  use  of  controls  on  the  completeness  of  data  submitted  by  their  paying 
agents  including  the  following:  (i)  a  central  register  to  be  created  by  each  Member  State 
which  lists  paying  agents  established  in  their  jurisdiction  to  verify  whether  data  has  been 
submitted when due; (ii) fluctuation analyses of data submitted by paying agents, in particular 
for amounts reported and the number of beneficial owners; (iii) cooperation between Member 
States in order to strengthen the audit procedures relating to paying agents including paying 
agents' systems and internal control guidelines; and (iv) the development of benchmarks and 
comparisons to other sources of data, for example national statistics on the reporting of cross-
border deposits. 

3.3.  Evaluation of the start-up and recurring costs of implementation of the Directive  

A study to assess the administrative burden of the existing Directive on economic operators 
concluded that information was already available to them for most reporting obligations under 
the  existing  Directive  due  to  Anti-money  laundering  legislation11,  domestic  legislation  or 
internal  business  practices.  However,  none  of  the  respondents  indicated  that  they  would 
collect information on Art. 4(2) (paying agent on receipt provisions) unless required to do so 
by the Directive. 

Most  steps  in  the  reporting  under  the  Directive  are  considered  by  the  paying  agents  as 
"business as usual" costs and therefore the associated administrative burden seems not to be 
excessive. 

11 

Directive  2005/60/EC  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  26  October  2005  on  the 
prevention  of  the  use  of  the  financial  system  for  the  purpose  of  money  laundering  and  terrorist 
financing (Text with EEA relevance) 

EN 

5 

   EN 

                                                 
4. 

ECONOMIC EVALUATION 

As  part  of  this  review  an  economic  evaluation  was  carried  out  in  order  to  analyse  the 
development of key EU and non-EU markets for savings products in terms of the importance 
of the relevant markets and the geographical structure of their client base. Bank reporting data 
were  used  from  the  Bank  of  International  Settlements  (BIS),  the  European  Central  Bank 
(ECB)  and  the  Swiss  National  Bank  (SNB).  The  ECB  data  were  also  used  to  perform  a 
simulation  exercise  on  the  coverage  of  the  potential  base  of  exchange  of  information  or 
withholding. 

In addition, data on relevant specific markets – (1) bonds and shares (from the IMF CPIS), (2) 
debt  and  equity  products  and  derivatives  in  general  (from  Eurostat),  (3)  structured  retail 
products  (from  Avery),  (4)  UCITS  (primarily  from  EFAMA)  and  (5)  insurance  products 
(primarily from a Europe Economics study) were used in order to analyse the development of 
those markets in recent years. 

For the purposes of this report, the term UCITS is meant to refer to undertakings or entities 
authorised  in  accordance  with  Directive  2009/65/EC12  (formerly  Directive  85/611/EEC13). 
The terms non-UCITS and non-UCITS funds refer to all other collective investment funds or 
schemes. 

The main findings of the evaluation are provided below. 

BIS DATA 

The  International  Locational  Banking  Statistics  of  the  Bank  for  International  Settlements 
(BIS)  include  quarterly  data  on  assets  and  liabilities  of  domestic  banks  and  branches  of 
foreign  banks  situated  in  the  43  reporting  countries  broken  down  on  a  bilateral  basis 
according to the vis-à-vis country of their foreign counterparts. The positions are reported on 
a gross and unconsolidated basis and in USD millions.  

Most  of  the  important  offshore  financial  centres  did  not  agree  to  the  disclosure  of  their 
bilateral positions through BIS. However, publicly available BIS data, including the data on 
vis-à-vis countries14, enabled a detailed analysis of offshore holdings with jurisdictions both 
in and outside the network of the Savings Agreements.  

The publicly available BIS data indicated that the amount of foreign non-bank deposits for the 
Cayman Islands in 2011 is the second largest of the BIS reporting countries and comparable 
to that of the United States. The vis-à-vis results revealed that a significant share of the non-
bank  deposits  in  Member  States,  and  in  jurisdictions  within  the  network  of  the  Savings 

12 

13 

14 

Directive  2009/65/EC  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  13  July  2009  on  the 
coordination  of  laws,  regulations  and  administrative  provisions  relating  to  undertakings  for  collective 
investment in transferable securities (UCITS), OJ L 302, 17.11.2009, p. 32 
Council  Directive  85/611/EEC  of  20  December  1985  on  the  coordination  of  laws,  regulations  and 
administrative  provisions  relating  to  undertakings  for  collective  investment  in  transferable  securities 
(UCITS), OJ L 375, 31.12.1985, p. 3 
All Member States, Switzerland and Guernsey agreed to the disclosure of their bilateral positions with 
all vis-à-vis countries, i.e. the countries of their deposit holders. 

EN 

6 

   EN 

                                                 
Agreements,  are  held  by  customers  located  in  offshore  jurisdictions  (average  of  35%  for 
Member States and jurisdictions within the network of the Savings Agreements combined for 
the years 2000 – 2010; for the jurisdictions within the network of the Savings Agreements this 
share peaks at 65% in 2007)15.  

he  relevance  of  offshore  centres  as  a  location  for  deposits  and  as  place  of  establishment  or 
management of non-bank deposit holder structures indicates that the implementation of look-
through  and  paying  agent  upon  receipt  provisions  for  certain  legal  structures  located  in 
offshore  jurisdictions  is  justified  and  necessary  for  both  the  Directive  and  the  Savings 
Agreements. 

15 

It can reasonably be assumed that the non-bank sector in these jurisdictions do not consist primarily of 
industrial companies or individuals, but of intermediary entities. 

EN 

7 

   EN 

                                                 
ECB DATA 

Coverage simulation 

The data provided by the ECB is based on MFI16 balance sheet statistics. Financial institutions 
in each Member State report to the ECB on a monthly basis the deposits held by non-resident 
households  located  in  the  euro-area.  The  amounts  are  reported  for  the  aggregate  euro-area 
without a detailed split among individual euro-area Member States. The data is split according 
to the sector of the deposit holder (including a detailed split for households) by seven different 
interest  rate  maturities.  This  data  was  selected  as  the  best  available  on  which  to  perform  a 
simulation exercise in order to provide a limited evaluation of whether the data exchanged (or 
tax  withheld)  under  the  Directive  reflect  a  satisfactory  coverage  of  the  potential  tax  base 
involved.  

Using a 70% estimated coverage benchmark for the average data for fiscal years 2006-2009, 7 
Member States fall below the 70% coverage benchmark while 4 others are below 100%. 16 
Member States exceed 100%17.  

The results of the simulation exercise further support the need for Member States to consider 
the use of systematic controls on the completeness of data submitted by their paying agents as 
suggested in section 3.2  

Evolution of cross-border deposits by euro-area households 

The  ECB  data  was  also  analysed  to  assess  the  evolution  of  cross-border  deposits.  Deposits 
from all maturities, including overnight deposits typically producing low interest, amounted to 
EUR  164  billion  in  2003  and  peaked  at  over  EUR  247  billion  in  October  2008  (a  50% 
increase for the period).  

Deposits with agreed maturity have decreased from EUR 72 billion in January 2003 to EUR 
60 billion in November 2005 – 15% for the period and a monthly decrease of -0.52%. This is 
not  replicated  by  the  deposits  without  an  agreed  maturity  (e.g.  overnight  deposits).  A  finer 
distinction between the trends for deposits with agreed maturity in the euro-area and the non-
euro  area  Member  States  reveals  that  the  downward  trend  until  November  2005  came 
primarily from euro-area Member States (-38.84% for the period and a monthly decrease of -
1.51%).  During  the  following  three  years  from  November  2005  to  November  2008  the  two 
categories show an almost perfectly matched increase in cross-border deposits from EUR 60 
billion to EUR 81 billion (an increase of 25% for the euro-area and 30% for the non-euro area 
respectively). 

16 
17 

MFI: monetary financial institution  
Results above 100% are normal as the definition of interest income in the Directive is wider than the 
deposits covered by the ECB data 

EN 

8 

   EN 

                                                 
After  the  end  of  2008,  deposits  with  agreed  maturity  in  euro  area  Member  States  appear  to 
have  suffered  the  strongest  decrease  (from  EUR  41  billion  in  November  2008  to  EUR  21 
billion in March 2010), primarily due to the financial crisis.  

The trends for cross-border deposits of euro area households in other Member States show a 
general  increase  until  the  start  of  the  financial  crisis.  The  increase  was  primarily  driven  by 
deposits  with  no  agreed  maturity  (e.g.  overnight  deposits  with  very  low  interest  rates), 
whereas  the  deposits  with  agreed  maturity  (e.g.  term  savings  accounts  with  higher  interest 
rates) in euro-area Member States have decreased until November 2005, but recovered in line 
with deposits outside the euro area afterwards. 

SNB DATA 

The Swiss National Bank (SNB) issues an annual publication "Banks in Switzerland" which 
provides  detailed  statistics  based  on  the  financial  reports  of  Swiss  banks.  Most  importantly, 
the  publication  provides  some  detailed  geographical  and/or  client  breakdowns  for  the:  (i) 
"Geographical breakdown of assets and liabilities shown in the balance sheet"; (ii) "Fiduciary 
business, by country"; and (iii) "Holdings of securities in bank custody accounts, by domicile 
of the custody account holder, the category of security and the business sector".  

The results from the SNB data show a strong client base located in offshore jurisdictions both 
within and outside the network of Savings Agreements18. This confirms the urgent need (see 
also  the  above  section  devoted  to  BIS  data)  to  address  such  cases  where  intermediary 
structures  in  offshore  jurisdictions  are  involved  in  the  payment  of  savings  income  by 
jurisdictions  within  the  network  of  savings  agreements  and  in  particular  the  EU-Swiss 
Savings Tax Agreement.  

IMF CPIS DATA 

The  IMF  in  its  Coordinated  Portfolio  Investment  survey  (CPIS)  reports  cross-border 
investment  positions  (investment  holdings  at  market  prices  prevailing  at  the  year  end)  of 
investors  resident  in  74  participating  countries  (country  of  investor)  with  a  split  by  the 
corresponding  country  of  investment  (country  of  issuer).  The  data  is  in  principle  compiled 
according to where the debtor (debt or equity issuer) and creditor (investor) is located which 
does not necessarily replicate the paying agent-beneficial owner status which is central to the 
functioning of the Directive.  

18 

For  example,  fiduciary  liabilities  to  (mainly  non-bank)  entities  in  the  West  Indies  (For  SNB  and  BIS 
purposes  that  includes  Anguilla,  Antigua  and  Barbuda,  British  Virgin  Islands,  Montserrat  and  St. 
Christopher/St.  Kitts  –  Nevis)  and  Panama  (with  shares  of  16%  and  9%  respectively)  rank  first  and 
second as a share in all fiduciary liabilities. 

EN 

9 

   EN 

                                                 
Two major conclusions can be drawn from the CPIS data on the Member States that provide a 
detailed sectoral split:  

The  introduction  of  the  Directive  did  not  drive  individual  investors  away  from  investing  in 
securities  issued  in  Member  States  and  in  particular  those  exchanging  information.  On  the 
contrary,  for  most  of  the  Member  States  surveyed,  individuals increased their investment in 
securities in Member States, particularly those exchanging information; and  

The Luxemburg investment funds industry has experienced a significant increase in its share 
of cross-border equity investments of households in the EU. 

EUROSTAT DATA 

Income 

A comparison was made between income received by households compared to all sectors of 
the  economy  for  income  elements  inside  and  outside  the  scope  of  the  Directive  to  check 
whether  there  has  been  product  substitution.  The  data  revealed  that,  over  the  period  2000-
2009, interest income  received  by  EU households as a proportion of property  income19 was 
relatively stable until 2008 before falling sharply in 2009 due to lower interest rates received 
on debt claims following the financial crisis, a trend which also applies to the total economy.  

No  evident  shift  of  the  source  of  savings  income  towards  products  outside  the  scope  of  the 
Directive could be observed based on the Eurostat data on income20.  

Assets 

An analysis of debt assets held by households revealed that these assets have been relatively 
stable  over  the  period  2000-2009  compared  to  equity  held  by  households  which  has  almost 
halved over the same period, which may reflect the greater risk aversion of investors and/or a 
general  decrease  in  the  value  of  shares.  A  notable  development  is  the  large  increase  in 
financial  derivatives  held  by  households  (1,05%  of  total  households'  assets  in  1999  and 
18,03% in 2009).  

The  increased  use  of  financial  derivatives  would  support  an  extension  of  the  scope  of  the 
Directive  to  include  structured  financial  products  where  the  asset  base  is  equivalent  to  debt 
claims. 

STRUCTURED RETAIL PRODUCTS 

The  Commission  made  use  of  the  Avery  structured  retail  products  database  which  contains 
detailed data on 34 markets and has over 2 million structured products launched worldwide. 
As of January 2005 the database is estimated to include around 90% of the structured retail 
products issued in Europe. The main limitation is that the database is designed for its clients' 

19 
20 

Property income: income derived from assets 
It should be noted that a major limitation of the Eurostat data is that it does not differentiate between 
domestic and cross-border income, therefore only broad conclusions can be drawn. 

EN 

10 

   EN 

                                                 
marketing  needs  and  does  not  distinguish  for  the  Directive's  purposes  between  domestic 
investments  and  cross-border  investments.  Nevertheless,  irrespective  of  the  lack  of  specific 
data  on  the  cross-border  element,  the  importance  of  this  product  market  is  demonstrated  by 
the size of the market where the current outstanding amount of sales in covered EU markets is 
EUR  767,3  billion.  This  product  market  has  undergone  rapid  development  in  general  (an 
average  annual  increase  of  more  than  30%)  with  a  high  proportion  of  products  with  capital 
protection features (dominating the launches in terms of volumes with a share of 60-70%) and 
interest-based  underlying  features  (interest  rate  asset  class  share  rose  from  3.2%  in  2001  to 
almost 30% in 2007). 

The demonstrated importance of the structured products market and in particular of products 
similar  to  debt  claims  as  well  as  the  development  of  particular  European  markets  that  are 
primarily serving foreign retail investors justifies and supports the extension of the Directive 
and the Savings Agreements to include the types of structured products concerned. 

UCITS data21 

Regarding fund substitutability, data provided by EFAMA22 reported a decrease in bond funds 
as a % of total UCITS (31% in 2002 – 23% in 2010) with an increase in investment in UCITS 
of  other  fund  categories  which  were  more  likely  to  be  outside  the  scope  of  Directive 
2003/48/EC  because  of  the  composition  of  their  assets.  Similarly,  there  has  been  a  shift  to 
non-UCITS over the same period (22% in 2002 to 25% in 2010).  

The  increase  of  non-UCITS  funds,  although  not  necessarily  driven  by  tax  avoidance 
strategies,  justifies  the  elements  contained  in  the  Proposal  intended  to  bring  about  equal 
treatment of UCITS and non-UCITS funds having a comparable composition of assets. 

INSURANCE PRODUCTS 

Both data sources and anecdotal evidence suggest the appropriateness of the inclusion of life 
insurance products with an investment element within the scope of the Proposal. The PRIPS 
report23  by  Europe  Economics  identified  the  significance  of  unit  linked  life  insurance  as  a 
proportion of the EU life insurance market, including Member States which have significant 
cross-border life insurance business with retail investors in the EU.  

The  development  of  significant  cross-border  markets  for  unit-linked  life  insurance  products 
(considered  as  a  distribution  channel  for  UCITS)  justifies  the  element  contained  in  the 
Proposal according to which the Directive would extend to benefits from insurance products 
comparable to debt claims. 

21 
22 
23 

On the applicable definition, cf. page 6 above. 
EFAMA: European Fund and Asset Management Association 
Study on the Costs and Benefits of potential changes to distribution changes for Insurance Investment 
Products and other Non-MIFID packaged retail investment products. 
http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/consultations/docs/2010/prips/costs_benefits_study_en.pdf 

EN 

11 

   EN 

                                                 
5. 

CONCLUSIONS 

Member  States  have  generally  expressed  their  satisfaction  with  the  data  received  under  the 
Directive  to  ensure  their  taxpayers'  compliance for  the  reporting  of  interest  income.  For  the 
period under review, Member States have indicated a clear increase in the quality of the data 
received which they attribute to the structured format and common rules of procedures under 
which  the  data  are  reported.  The  review  has  also  indicated  how  Member  States  can  make 
better use of the data and demonstrated the necessity of further improving the correctness and 
completeness of the data exchanged.  

The economic analysis has shown that the updating of the Directive and the relevant Savings 
Agreements,  in  terms  of  product  scope  as  well  as  transactions  and  economic  operators 
covered,  is  urgently  needed  in  order  to  address  the  existing  possibilities  for  circumvention, 
including those arising from triangular situations which involve jurisdictions both within and 
outside the scope of the Savings Agreements. A consensus on the Proposal and the adoption 
of a negotiating mandate for equivalent improvements in these Agreements are necessary in 
order to promote transparency and good governance in tax matters both within and outside the 
EU. 

EN 

12 

   EN