kfajdsl/voxpopuli huggingface dataset:
we need to blacklist tax havens like panama and the uk virgin islands.
one country panama but there are many others out there.
what we see is billions in tax money escaping european shores while our citizens are struggling with economic and social crisis billions in tax money that could be used for public services health education and jobs.
we need an easy way to identify beneficial ownership by public registration and end the secrecy around all types of entities including trusts.
therefore we need effective rules about transparency and public country by country reporting as is the case for the financial sector.
you are right that we have to put in place a number of measures to ensure that authorities have stronger powers to fight money laundering and that suspect transactions are reported to them.
you are also right that the commission is now working on the revision of this directive.
however not all international players have totally committed yet to playing a fair game and this is clearly the case for panama.
our shared objective is to aim for completion of this process by the end of this year.
we have adopted a directive on administrative cooperation that was recently complemented to cover tax rulings exchange and which will soon cover countrybycountry reporting between tax administrations as proposed in the commission's antitax avoidance package.
firstly ministers emphasised the need for the identification of third countries with strategic deficiencies in the area of money laundering or countering terrorist financing.
as you know the anti money laundering directive is very recent and is still being transposed by member states.
fourthly we called on the commission to propose by june certain targeted improvements to the fourth antimoney laundering directive.
the group is committed to promoting the adoption of the code of conduct principles in third countries.
other countries outside the eu should be involved in the near future.
so again the need for a swift agreement on this directive is stressed. the presidency is striving to reach an agreement on this proposal during this semester and i hope that we can count on you parliament as well.
in january the commission issued a communication on an external strategy for effective taxation as part of the anti tax avoidance package amongst other things proposing a common eu listing process to respond to third countries that refuse to respect tax good governance standards. the presidency is striving to react swiftly to these proposals explicitly taking into account the panama papers.
this issue which is closely linked to the financing of terrorism is also very high on our agenda.
the presidency will definitely strive to have swift progress on this proposal.
let me outline the ones which are particularly relevant in the context of our discussion today.
the eu itself is committed to the issue of the exchange of information.
in february we called for the identification process to be completed by one may.
to come back to the revelations i would like to speak of what we can do beyond increasing the exchange of information in order to fight tax fraud and avoidance as well as money laundering.
in february in reaction to the commission's action plan on the fight against terrorist financing the council agreed to proceed swiftly with the implementation of a number of measures which will contribute to combating both terrorist financing and money laundering.
here however we are in the hands of the commission.
some of the rules put forward in the draft directive could be of use considering that we are also talking about abusive forms of legal tax avoidance.
furthermore we have asked the commission to explore the possibility of introducing limits to large cash payments and to consider together with the european central bank whether appropriate measures might be necessary for high denomination notes such as the eur five hundred bill.
finally i would like to draw attention to the ongoing work of the code of conduct group on business taxation in fighting harmful tax regimes.
the group has worked successfully in switzerland and the commission is continuing its dialogue with liechtenstein on behalf of the group.
today the commission adopted a proposal on public countrybycountry reporting of multinational accounts to increase transparency and this proposal will obviously receive the full attention of the council.
thirdly we have undertaken to further improve the cooperation and exchange of information between member states' financial intelligence units.
the council has already reached agreement on this countrybycountry reporting and i would very much welcome the parliament adopting its opinion as soon as possible.
for certain areas however it has already become clear that targeted amendments are needed for example aimed at strengthening access to information such as access to bank and payments account information by financial intelligence units operationalising the list of high risk third countries and in view of the handling of virtual currencies.
in discussing what the eu can do i will distinguish between the tax aspects on the one hand and anti money laundering on the other.
in order to ensure efficient tax transparency we need everyone on board and the eu as a major international player must speak with one voice to convince its partners on the international stage to adopt the standards agreed by the majority.
it is too early unfortunately to have a full analysis of the panama papers but all of us are as you are examining their implications and the responses to be given.
i therefore plead to the commission to immediately launch infringement procedures against member states in order to make sure that existing legislation is enforced. this parliament needs to set up an investigative committee to look into this lack of implementation.
most of the activities which have been uncovered are already in violation as far as europe is concerned of existing money laundering law which has been in place since. two thousand and five therefore we have to be serious about implementing existing legislation. i have been informed by a whistle blower that he has been in touch with the commission for years to insist that existing money laundering legislation is not being implemented in reality.
therefore it is legitimate that this parliament looks into why member states do not implement european law and why the commission is not insisting enough that law is really arriving on the ground of the member states.
lastly it is important if we launch a new committee now that we do not shelve the work we have done in taxe but that we realise what we have done there because citizens will not accept that we jump from scandal to scandal and finish nothing that is not acceptable.
yet we have seen him personally intervene to water down provisions to control money laundering and to exclude the very sort of trusts that we now know he has benefited from.
it is the relationship between these overseas territories and the city of london that facilitates tax avoidance by the wealthy.
so much for the slogan we are all in this together'.
by enabling tax avoidance by the wealthy the legal limbo land of british overseas territories is depriving us of public revenue at the very time when the nhs is showing record debts and services to the disabled and vulnerable in my country are being slashed.
madam president the debate on the panama papers has so far focused on corrupt politicians and downright criminals who have hidden their wealth or laundered money.
david cameron has sought to portray himself as the champion of tax transparency.
more of half of the companies that appear in the files one hundred and thirteen zero in total are registered in the british virgin islands.
these are common goals and it is our joint responsibility to pursue them further at a global level by taking up the role of front runner.
to be clear the council wants to know the facts as much as you parliament and i am convinced the commission. that is why we will examine the information in the panama papers and examine closely our policies with a view to making our fight against evasion and fraud as effective as possible.
although each country is free to pursue its national interest let us not forget that there is no integration without a minimal solidarity and that the bad feelings accumulated today might burst out tomorrow when times are better slowing down our further integration.
mr president the schengen arrangement is the purest expression of a basic value shared by the eu namely the free circulation of people within the union.
mr president the socialist and democrat group also begins with the premise that schengen is a cornerstone of the european union and therefore we should not create a two tier situation in relation to the member states of the european union.
the continuing delay and blocking by member states in particular the netherlands and finland of romania and bulgaria joining the schengen acquis risks creating that two tier system for eu member states.
furthermore this has been judged and verified by the independent expert eu committee yet some member states are now taking the political initiative of blocking their accession on the basis that they have serious levels of corruption and organised crime.
of course corruption and organised crime are serious issues but the approach to these serious issues is disingenuous and is creating a problem with one of the key principles of the european union and its freedoms.
we work hard to tackle all forms of discrimination and we have to ensure that we do not allow for the creation of a subsidiarity position for romania and bulgaria.
however the rules that we create must also be respected by all member states in council.
it should not be that we negotiate eu legislation which is then ignored by some member states and council. we have to strengthen schengen and ensure that an instrument which was created for solidarity purposes across the eu for the freedom of individuals across the eu is not now used to divide it.
from the commission's side we have repeatedly said that the two countries fulfil the technical criteria they belong in the schengen area we support them entering the schengen area and we also support the numerous and very hard efforts made by the polish presidency.
this chamber has already made its position clear and we reiterate it today namely that bulgaria and romania should be allowed to join schengen once they fulfil the entry conditions.
that is disappointing because both these countries have a strong european tradition of respect for fairness and the rule of law.
i would not like to think that the reason for the blockage is that these governments are held hostage to populism because that would be very worrying indeed.
we should not be afraid to explain this to the public. we should not be afraid of taking fair decisions and we should not be afraid to show political responsibility.
mr president the eu is based on the rule of law;
in fact it is a disgrace that member states which insisted on keeping charge of setting the criteria failed to insert anti corruption the independence of judges and fighting mafia crime into them.
that is what we need to do from now on so new and existing schengen members are properly evaluated and if necessary sanctioned.
mr president suggesting there are flaws in a system and acknowledging weaknesses is not intended as an attack on any member state or the achievements of the schengen area but instead the logical conclusion from reflecting on a system which is no longer working properly or responding to modern challenges.
unfortunately romania and bulgaria are the victims of the current criteria which are outdated and lack coordination with modern european concerns concerns which should rightfully include corruption and organised crime.
we have the resources through europol eurojust and frontex and indeed olaf to improve the system to find a better way forward by making sure that member states are ready to join.
by ignoring this reality we do ourselves the schengen area and the member states in question a gross disservice.
i would like to finish by saying that those who seek to water down these proposals hiding behind scaremongering on data privacy are neither serious nor ambitious in supporting global action to tackle the scourge of tax evasion and to promote good governance good citizenship and social responsibility.
stronger tax cooperation is the only way forward. this does not weaken national sovereignty but on the contrary strengthens and enhances national tax systems stopping those who seek to undermine the integrity and functioning of those systems. if we have learned one lesson from the global financial crisis it is that we need more openness and transparency on financial transactions.
it robs public services health education and research of vital resources. moreover according to a major charity tax evasion by the super rich and by global corporations has a severe impact on the lives of more than five million children in the developing world.
more shockingly still a uk charity christian aid maintains that around eur seven trillion is hidden away in tax havens.
therefore the actions and recommendations proposed in these reports are essential to supporting a level playing field and to tackling the distortions and abuses which underpin those systems of tax evasion and fraud.
that is why i support the proposals to move towards a global agreement and standard on automatic exchange of tax information tabled by our rapporteurs.
tax havens are under investigation with proposals in the eu and in the oecd being taken forward.
i would like to speak specifically on mr domenici's report and to thank him for the great transparency that he has shown in working together across parliament to improve this document.
the first one is that combating tax fraud should not be used as a back door excuse for those who want to open up the debate on tax harmonisation across the eu.
the second point is on the controversial matter of exchange of information.
thirdly the domenici report suggests an eu wide levy on financial movements to and from certain jurisdictions. there are different sanctions and different incentives as the commissioner has pointed out that could be used to promote good behaviour in this area.
it is very clear that in certain circumstances better exchange is needed and indeed like the savings tax the automatic exchange does have benefits.
there is wording in the document about the common consolidated corporate tax base and i think we should wait until the commission comes to us later on this year with their impact assessment before jumping to a conclusion on any of the pros and cons of that debate.
i understand that the reports encourage increased efforts concerning firstly good governance in tax matters both in the european union and beyond;
the commission can accept in principle certain amendments such as those introducing the possibility of the commission adopting delegated acts in respect of technical improvements to the categories of income and capital that are subject to the automatic exchange of information while the categories concerned should be defined in the directive itself and not through comitology.
this communication will address what role good governance in tax matters can play in improving resources mobilisation in developing countries notably through capacity building.
however for the sake of clarity i could envisage a general recital referring to the existing community
the commission's proposal is intended to provide for an improved assistance system with rules that are easier to apply and provide for more flexible conditions for requesting assistance.
the commission can also accept in principle the amendments on bank secrecy which would not distinguish between taxpayers based on their tax residency.
the european commission should continue to be an active player to ensure that all partners live up to their commitments.
secondly the willingness of a jurisdiction to continue to sign agreements even after it has reached this threshold and thirdly the effectiveness of implementation.
this is also reflected in the council compromise
text. however the commission cannot accept other amendments such as introducing systematic and automatic exchange of information in the area of recovery because it could lead to a disproportionate administrative burden as it would also cover unproblematic recovery situations.
in relation to the number which is twelve of tax information exchange agreements for a country to conclude for achieving the status of a cooperating jurisdiction the commission supports the need to review it and to take qualitative aspects into account such as firstly the jurisdictions with which the agreements have been signed.
i welcome your support to fully associate the commission in the works of the oecd global forum peer review exercise in particular with regard to the identification of non cooperative jurisdictions the development of a process for evaluating compliance and the implementation of measures to promote adherence to the standards.
text. let me now turn to the commission's proposal on mutual assistance for the recovery of
possible. finally i would like to thank the european parliament once again for its speedy reaction as well as for its clear
further. they must be able to use the best instruments at their disposal to achieve their political objectives of fighting tax fraud and
report. concerning the amendments aimed at providing for more defined rules on the protection of private data i would like to underline that in any case member states are compelled to respect the existing community legislation on this subject and that therefore these rules will have to be respected without any further amendment of the present draft directive.
the commission strongly believes that the deepening of economic relations between the eu and its partner jurisdictions should always be accompanied by commitments to good governance principles.
one relates to the public registries and disclosure of information concerning investors in tax havens.
problems. let me finally conclude with a few words on the commission's proposal for an optional and temporary application of the reverse
while there should be no restrictions on exchange on the basis of bank secrecy or domestic tax interest requirements respect for taxpayers' rights and strict confidentiality of information exchanged must apply.
they would need to assess the effectiveness of this measure as well as its impact on a possible shift of fraud to other member states to other types of supplies and other fraud
i am very pleased that the essential message of the reports is one of support for the commission's initiatives.
i am glad to see that the european parliament and the commission share views on the action to be undertaken to better combat tax fraud and evasion in the european union and beyond.
the eu urgently needs to reach a unanimous agreement internally to be able to show on the international scene its determination to move ahead from the oecd standard and the g twenty recommendations and pave the way for a future evolution at international level by proving it is able to develop fully fledged administrative cooperation.
achieving rapid progress and unanimous agreement on the proposal on administrative cooperation is one of the priorities of the spanish presidency.
on the external aspects of the principles of good governance in tax matters all actions mentioned in the communication should be promoted with special attention to those related to developing countries.
i fully agree with you and i am sure that with your support and with that of the governments of the member states the new commission will be able to tackle the challenges ahead. i know that these files remain a priority for my successor.
your reports have covered virtually all of them from the formal legislative proposal promoting administrative cooperation to our work with third countries.
promoting good governance in tax matters is a complicated dossier containing several different issues.
i was pleased to hear that many of you encouraged the commission to be more ambitious.
as regards the specific proposals on administrative cooperation mutual assistance in the recovery of tax claims and the optional and temporary reapplication of the reverse charge mechanism i also want to thank you for your comments and views.
it is also now a priority for most member states.
i also see general support for the three proposals.
for that reason there can be no common consolidated corporate tax base and the principle of fair tax competition must remain.
at the same time the eu is limited by what it can do because the lisbon treaty does not give it great competences in the area of tax.
mr president i would like to thank the rapporteurs and other shadows for the hard work they have put into producing these reports.
we need to balance the need to operate an efficient single market with the need to protect member state competence on taxation.
tax competition is a jolly good thing.
member states must be free to sign bilateral agreements with third countries.
the uk and the us readily share information because of their history of cooperation in fighting terrorism.
if this information was to be shared across the eu many third countries would refuse to sign similar agreements in the future.
i urge members to approach these reports pragmatically.
their economies will either die of a thousand cuts or be bailed out to the ruin of taxpayers in britain and elsewhere. there will be very little tax to cooperate over.
there are two ways out either abolish the euro and return to the captive nations of this strawberry soviet their own currencies or expel the problem countries' from the euro.
that might be the pigs.
more justly it would be germany and her french collaborator because running the euro according to german interests is the root of this shambles.
this endless crisis will destroy the federal project tax cooperation and all.
now in many in fact i would say in most things we have had a mutually supportive dialogue commissioner though of course we have not agreed on everything.
for example we agreed on vat for intra community supplies but disagreed on joint and several liability in the framework of cross border transactions and in quite a few instances we have both been disappointed by the slowness or lack of backing by member states.
but in the face of these disappointments you have brought forward more intensive traditional controls based on cooperation information exchange and data access.
so both personally and as chair of the economic and monetary affairs committee i take this opportunity to thank you for your work and enthusiasm during your term of office. as colleagues have said at this time of fiscal stress enabling member states to collect their full dues of taxes is even more important.
with this driving force the council must be more progressive in future.
those who knowingly scheme to evade and avoid taxes do harm to society and should not expect leniency when they are caught and we must have the tools to catch them.
turning specifically to the matter of administrative cooperation i believe that automatic exchange of information is beneficial.
it goes along with the savings tax directive which i hope will soon be adopted in council. but your activism in this matter has already created positive developments both within and beyond the eu.
i also commend the directive on mutual assistance for recovery of claims but consider a lower threshold for implementation more appropriate.
and finally i apologise to you and colleagues for not staying for the rest of the debate but as ever there are double bookings going on in this house.
all these aspects are especially relevant in the context of the economic difficulties currently facing europe. since the adoption of the bioeconomy strategy and action plan in early two thousand and twelve considerable progress has been made. the bioeconomy is still developing so one of our important objectives has been to establish a bioeconomy observatory
this is the first time in the world that an observatory of this kind has been set up.
a low carbon resource efficient economy;
food security for all;