natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
According to the European Commission, a drop in income tax of 1% of GDP together with an increase in consumption tax of 1% of GDP could generate some kind of synergy effect producing extra growth exceeding 1%
According to the European Commission, a drop in income tax of 1% of GDP together with an increase in consumption tax of 1% of GDP could generate some kind of synergy effect producing extra growth exceeding 1%
The European Commission Paper: Shifting the tax burden - from direct to indirect tax. .
The European Commission Paper: Shifting the tax burden - from direct to indirect tax. .
Permanent derogations granted to particular Member States (such as super-reduced rate, parking rate, zero rate listed under the title XVI Transitional provisions Article of the 6th Directive, etc.) are applied to a great number of taxable transactions.
Permanent derogations granted to particular Member States (such as super-reduced rate, parking rate, zero rate listed under the title XVI Transitional provisions Article of the 6th Directive, etc.) are applied to a great number of taxable transactions.
In the year 2000, 69% of the average EU-15 VAT taxable transactions, were taxed at the standard VAT rate
In the year 2000, 69% of the average EU-15 VAT taxable transactions, were taxed at the standard VAT rate
The European Commission: Taxation Papers: VAT indicators 2004/2. .
The European Commission: Taxation Papers: VAT indicators 2004/2. .
Admission of the 10 new countries could not change this ratio but to a relatively small extent.
Admission of the 10 new countries could not change this ratio but to a relatively small extent.
Taking into account all VAT rates existing in the Member States (standard + reduced), gives us an implicit VAT rate that is in average 30% lower than the statutory standard rates in force in the Member States.
Taking into account all VAT rates existing in the Member States (standard + reduced), gives us an implicit VAT rate that is in average 30% lower than the statutory standard rates in force in the Member States.
In the given 2000, the EU-15 average statutory standard VAT rate was 19.4% (within the band with a minimum of 15% and maximum of 25%) whilst the implicit VAT rate (i.e. average effective VAT rate, VAT burden which means substituting VAT rates in force for one VAT rate without any revenue loss) reaches up to 15.9% hiding larger volatility Member State by Member State.
In the given 2000, the EU-15 average statutory standard VAT rate was 19.4% (within the band with a minimum of 15% and maximum of 25%) whilst the implicit VAT rate (i.e. average effective VAT rate, VAT burden which means substituting VAT rates in force for one VAT rate without any revenue loss) reaches up to 15.9% hiding larger volatility Member State by Member State.
Agreeing with the Commission that the VAT standard rate scheme currently in force has worked out satisfactorily and divergences between standard VAT rates that distort competition and trigger structural imbalances should be avoided, the Rapporteur approves the 15% minimum VAT rate and disapproves the idea of applying a band with a maximum rate of 25%.
Agreeing with the Commission that the VAT standard rate scheme currently in force has worked out satisfactorily and divergences between standard VAT rates that distort competition and trigger structural imbalances should be avoided, the Rapporteur approves the 15% minimum VAT rate and disapproves the idea of applying a band with a maximum rate of 25%.
As the present regime expires with the 31 st of December 2005, the extension proposal should be adopted as soon as possible and be forwarded to the Council yet before the December ECOFIN meeting.
As the present regime expires with the 31 st of December 2005, the extension proposal should be adopted as soon as possible and be forwarded to the Council yet before the December ECOFIN meeting.
However, in the light of above mentioned arguments, the Rapporteur asks the Commission to elaborate a general assessment on implicit and standard VAT rates and associated revenue, budgetary implications on the EU up to 1 January 2007, and - in accordance with its results - to present a guideline or draft legislative proposal examining the opportunity of increase in standard compulsory VAT rate.
However, in the light of above mentioned arguments, the Rapporteur asks the Commission to elaborate a general assessment on implicit and standard VAT rates and associated revenue, budgetary implications on the EU up to 1 January 2007, and - in accordance with its results - to present a guideline or draft legislative proposal examining the opportunity of increase in standard compulsory VAT rate.
It should be, nevertheless, dealt in parallel with discussions in the Council on the reduction - or extension in case of the new Member States, as communicated by the Commissioner for Taxation and Customs - of permanent VAT derogations laid down in the Sixth VAT Directive applied at present in EU-15 exclusively.
It should be, nevertheless, dealt in parallel with discussions in the Council on the reduction - or extension in case of the new Member States, as communicated by the Commissioner for Taxation and Customs - of permanent VAT derogations laid down in the Sixth VAT Directive applied at present in EU-15 exclusively.
Návrh směrnice Rady, kterou se mění, pokud jde o dobu uplatňování minimální základní sazby, směrnice 77/388/EHS o společném systému daně z přidané hodnoty
Proposal for a Council directive amending Directive 77/388/EEC on the common system of value added tax, with regard to the length of time during which the minimum standard rate is to be applied
KOM(2005)0136 – C6 0113/2005 – 2005/0051(CNS)
COM(2005)0136 – C6 0113/2005 – 2005/0051(CNS)
Zsolt László Becsey 10.5.2005
Zsolt László Becsey 10.5.2005
Zjednodušený postup Datum rozhodnutí
Simplified procedure – date of decision
Zsolt László Becsey, Pervenche Berès, Sharon Margaret Bowles, Ieke van den Burg, David Casa, Jonathan Evans, Elisa Ferreira, José Manuel García-Margallo y Marfil, Jean-Paul Gauzès, Robert Goebbels, Benoît Hamon, Gunnar Hökmark, Karsten Friedrich Hoppenstedt, Sophia in 't Veld, Othmar Karas, Wolf Klinz, Kurt Joachim Lauk, Astrid Lulling, Hans-Peter Martin, Gay Mitchell, Cristobal Montoro Romero, Joseph Muscat, John Purvis, Karin Riis-Jørgensen, Dariusz Rosati, Eoin Ryan, Antolín Sánchez Presedo, Peter Skinner, Ivo Strejček, Sahra Wagenknecht
Zsolt László Becsey, Pervenche Berès, Sharon Margaret Bowles, Ieke van den Burg, David Casa, Jonathan Evans, Elisa Ferreira, José Manuel García-Margallo y Marfil, Jean-Paul Gauzès, Robert Goebbels, Benoît Hamon, Gunnar Hökmark, Karsten Friedrich Hoppenstedt, Sophia in 't Veld, Othmar Karas, Wolf Klinz, Kurt Joachim Lauk, Astrid Lulling, Hans-Peter Martin, Gay Mitchell, Cristobal Montoro Romero, Joseph Muscat, John Purvis, Karin Riis-Jørgensen, Dariusz Rosati, Eoin Ryan, Antolín Sánchez Presedo, Peter Skinner, Ivo Strejček, Sahra Wagenknecht
Katerina Batzeli, Jorgo Chatzimarkakis, Ján Hudacký, Alain Lipietz, Jules Maaten, Thomas Mann, Charles Tannock
Katerina Batzeli, Jorgo Chatzimarkakis, Ján Hudacký, Alain Lipietz, Jules Maaten, Thomas Mann, Charles Tannock
17.11.2005 A6/0323/2005
17.11.2005 A6/0323/2005
Poznámky (údaje, které jsou k dispozici jen v jednom jazyce)
Comments (available in one language only)
PE 362.854v02-00
PE 362.854v02-00
– s ohledem na návrh Komise předložený Radě (KOM (2004)0728)
– having regard to the Commission proposal to the Council ( COM(2004)0728 )
– s ohledem na článek 93 Smlouvy o ES, podle kterého Rada konzultovala s Parlamentem ( C6‑0251/2005 ),
– having regard to Article 93 of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament ( C6‑0251/2005 ),
– s ohledem na zprávu Hospodářského a měnového výboru ( A6‑0324/2005 ),
– having regard to the report of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs ( A6‑0324/2005 ),
Členský stát, ve kterém byla odvedena daň z přidané hodnoty, oznámí rozhodnutí o žádosti o vrácení daně žadateli do tří měsíců ode dne jejího podání.
The Member State where the value added tax was incurred shall make its decision concerning the application for refund known to the applicant within three months of the date on which the application was submitted.
Členský stát usazení uvědomí členský stát vrácení daně, až osoba povinná k dani podá příslušnému daňovému úřadu žádost o vrácení DPH.
The Member State of establishment shall notify the Member State of refund when the taxable person submits his application for a VAT refund to the competent tax a uthority .
The amendment provides for legal clarification and gives time to Tax Authority of refund to prepare for possible request for transfer of VAT charged to taxable person.
The amendment provides for legal clarification and gives time to Tax Authority of refund to prepare for possible request for transfer of VAT charged to taxable person.
Tříměsíční lhůta začíná běžet ode dne, v němž daňový úřad v členském státě vrácení daně obdrží od daňového úřadu členského státu usazení ověřovací dokumenty týkající se osoby povinné k dani, která je o tom automaticky informována.
The three-month period shall start from the date on which the tax authority in a Member State of refund receives the electronic refund data from the tax authority in the Member State of establishment concerning the taxable person in question, who shall be automatically informed thereof.
Amendment serves for further legal clarification for the Tax Authority in the Member State of refund to avoid any misunderstanding of legal obligation related to time spell of the VAT claim.
Amendment serves for further legal clarification for the Tax Authority in the Member State of refund to avoid any misunderstanding of legal obligation related to time spell of the VAT claim.
Lhůta pro převod vrácené částky daně je jeden týden po uplynutí tříměsíční lhůty pro vydání rozhodnutí.
The refund transfer deadline shall be one week after expiry of the three-month decision-making period.
Amendment serves for further legal clarification to avoid any misunderstanding of time spell of VAT claim.
Amendment serves for further legal clarification to avoid any misunderstanding of time spell of VAT claim.
Otherwise the deadline of making refund is not determined without ambiguity because in public administration deadline for decision making has to be distinguished from the one of refund-transfer.
Otherwise the deadline of making refund is not determined without ambiguity because in public administration deadline for decision making has to be distinguished from the one of refund-transfer.
V určitých případech si může členský stát, v němž vnikla daňová povinnost, do tří měsíců ode dne podání žádosti vyžádat poskytnutí dodatečných údajů.
In specific cases, a Member State where value added tax has been incurred may request additional information within three months of the date on which application is submitted .
Po uplynutí této lhůty již nelze o poskytnutí dodatečných údajů žádat.
After that period has elapsed, no additional information may be requested.
Pokud daňový úřad členského státu vrácení daně požádá o provedení dalšího šetření, může být lhůta (během níž se zjišťuje, zda má osoba povinná k dani na vrácení nárok) prodloužena.
Where the tax authority of a Member State of refund requests that a further investigation be conducted, the period for determining whether a taxable person is entitled to a refund may be extended.
Avšak doba mezi dnem podání žádosti o vrácení daně a dnem převodu vrácené částky daně nesmí přesáhnout čtyři měsíce.
However, the period between the date on which the refund application is submitted and the date of the refund transfer may not exceed four months.
Amendment serves for interests of SMEs.
Amendment serves for interests of SMEs.
Requesting more information is not allowed for extending the refund procedure without any constraint of time.
Requesting more information is not allowed for extending the refund procedure without any constraint of time.
SMEs and tax authorities benefit from this concrete determination of length of VAT recovery proceeding, as well.
SMEs and tax authorities benefit from this concrete determination of length of VAT recovery proceeding, as well.
In October 2004, the European Commission tabled a new initiative
In October 2004, the European Commission tabled a new initiative
COM(2004)0728 of 29.10.2004. aiming at simplification of the completion of VAT liabilities related to cross-border VAT-transactions.
COM(2004)0728 of 29.10.2004. aiming at simplification of the completion of VAT liabilities related to cross-border VAT-transactions.
The Commission's package was made up of three separate proposals including establishment of the one-stop scheme, necessary changes in the Eight VAT Directive (79/1072/EEC) and modification of the 1798/2003 Regulation on VIES
The Commission's package was made up of three separate proposals including establishment of the one-stop scheme, necessary changes in the Eight VAT Directive (79/1072/EEC) and modification of the 1798/2003 Regulation on VIES
VAT Information Exchange System. co-operation.
VAT Information Exchange System. co-operation.
The European Parliament was consulted on the 1 st and 3 rd part of the package and in September 2005 it adopted a Report supporting the two proposals with an overwhelming majority.
The European Parliament was consulted on the 1 st and 3 rd part of the package and in September 2005 it adopted a Report supporting the two proposals with an overwhelming majority.
The Working Party on Tax Questions of 7 July 2005 agreed that Article 93 of the Treaty (instead of Article 29a of the Sixth VAT Directive) should be the legal basis for the 2 nd proposal and thus in accordance with the above mentioned article, the European Parliament is now entitled to give its opinion on the above mentioned second part of Commission's proposal as well.
The Working Party on Tax Questions of 7 July 2005 agreed that Article 93 of the Treaty (instead of Article 29a of the Sixth VAT Directive) should be the legal basis for the 2 nd proposal and thus in accordance with the above mentioned article, the European Parliament is now entitled to give its opinion on the above mentioned second part of Commission's proposal as well.
The legal and political origins of the current general turnover tax regime date back to 1967 when the First VAT Directive
The legal and political origins of the current general turnover tax regime date back to 1967 when the First VAT Directive
Council Directive 67/227/EEC of 11 April 67 on the harmonisation of legislation of Member States concerning turnover taxes - generally know as the First VAT Directive. was adopted, showing the Member States commitment to elaboration of a common VAT scheme.
Council Directive 67/227/EEC of 11 April 67 on the harmonisation of legislation of Member States concerning turnover taxes - generally know as the First VAT Directive. was adopted, showing the Member States commitment to elaboration of a common VAT scheme.
It was then followed by a number of legislations among which the Sixth Council Directive
It was then followed by a number of legislations among which the Sixth Council Directive
Council Directive of 17 May 1977 (77/388/EEC) - generally known as the Sixth VAT Directive. that entered into force on 1 January 1978 is a corner stone of VAT legislation and constitutes a general framework including main important features of a multi-phased net general turnover taxation.
Council Directive of 17 May 1977 (77/388/EEC) - generally known as the Sixth VAT Directive. that entered into force on 1 January 1978 is a corner stone of VAT legislation and constitutes a general framework including main important features of a multi-phased net general turnover taxation.
Eighth Directive
Eighth Directive
There are many SMEs throughout the EU that do not have their establishments in each of the Member States where their charges, costs and fees (including VAT amount of a Member State of destination) are incurred.
There are many SMEs throughout the EU that do not have their establishments in each of the Member States where their charges, costs and fees (including VAT amount of a Member State of destination) are incurred.
These undertakings do not have any connection with the Tax Authority of a Member State where their costs and fees emerge in the course of their economics operations.
These undertakings do not have any connection with the Tax Authority of a Member State where their costs and fees emerge in the course of their economics operations.
In accordance with the general principle of turnover taxation, the amount of a VAT receivable paid in the price of a product or a service that is subjected to VAT charged in a Member State of destination, could constitute a base to a claim for reduction of the VAT payable.
In accordance with the general principle of turnover taxation, the amount of a VAT receivable paid in the price of a product or a service that is subjected to VAT charged in a Member State of destination, could constitute a base to a claim for reduction of the VAT payable.
This leaded to formulation of the Eighth VAT Directive
This leaded to formulation of the Eighth VAT Directive
Council Directive of 6 December 1979 (79/1072/EEC) on the harmonization of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes - Arrangements for the refund of value added tax to taxable persons not established in the territory of the country- generally known as the Eighth VAT Directive. which regulates precisely the regime of the refund of VAT taxes that emerged in a Member State where an undertaking is not established and supply of goods or services is not carried in that Member State.
Council Directive of 6 December 1979 (79/1072/EEC) on the harmonization of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes - Arrangements for the refund of value added tax to taxable persons not established in the territory of the country- generally known as the Eighth VAT Directive. which regulates precisely the regime of the refund of VAT taxes that emerged in a Member State where an undertaking is not established and supply of goods or services is not carried in that Member State.
The Directive entered into force 1 January 1981.
The Directive entered into force 1 January 1981.
The primary goal of the Directive in question is to eliminate discrepancies between the VAT arrangements in force in the Member States, which can give rise to trade deflection and distortion of competition resulting from tax evasion and avoidance.
The primary goal of the Directive in question is to eliminate discrepancies between the VAT arrangements in force in the Member States, which can give rise to trade deflection and distortion of competition resulting from tax evasion and avoidance.
The refund system provided for in this Directive ensures that a taxable person established in the territory of one Member State should be able to claim for tax which has been invoiced to it on expenditure in a Member State where it must not have either a branch or a fixed establishment and makes no supplies, directly from that Member State, i.e. the Member State of refund (or purchase)
The refund system provided for in this Directive ensures that a taxable person established in the territory of one Member State should be able to claim for tax which has been invoiced to it on expenditure in a Member State where it must not have either a branch or a fixed establishment and makes no supplies, directly from that Member State, i.e. the Member State of refund (or purchase)
With the exception of transport services and services ancillary thereto, exempted pursuant to Article 14 (1) (i), Article 15 or Article 16 (1), B, C and D of Directive 77/388/EEC AND services provided in cases where tax is payable solely by the person to whom they are supplied, pursuant to Article 21 (1) (b) of Directive 77/388/EEC. .
With the exception of transport services and services ancillary thereto, exempted pursuant to Article 14 (1) (i), Article 15 or Article 16 (1), B, C and D of Directive 77/388/EEC AND services provided in cases where tax is payable solely by the person to whom they are supplied, pursuant to Article 21 (1) (b) of Directive 77/388/EEC. .
The only exception to the main rule (e.g. exclusion of selling goods or services in other Member State) is supplying transport and those ancillary services falling under scope of the Reverse Charged Mechanism (RCM, for example immaterial services listed in VI.
The only exception to the main rule (e.g. exclusion of selling goods or services in other Member State) is supplying transport and those ancillary services falling under scope of the Reverse Charged Mechanism (RCM, for example immaterial services listed in VI.
Directive 9, article 2, indent e ).
Directive 9, article 2, indent e ).
Reverse Charge Mechanism is compulsory to apply to certain provision of services which means the customer charge VAT and deduct thereafter in his tax return, so in that case service supplier need not be registered in the Member State of consumption.
Reverse Charge Mechanism is compulsory to apply to certain provision of services which means the customer charge VAT and deduct thereafter in his tax return, so in that case service supplier need not be registered in the Member State of consumption.
Although the One-stop scheme provides that taxable person pursues taxable transactions (including purchase and sale of products or services), the Eighth VAT Directive is to be applied only in case of buying of products or services from a Member State of purchase.
Although the One-stop scheme provides that taxable person pursues taxable transactions (including purchase and sale of products or services), the Eighth VAT Directive is to be applied only in case of buying of products or services from a Member State of purchase.
The application for tax refund shall in principle relate to invoiced purchases made during a period not less than 3 months but not exceeding 1 calendar year.
The application for tax refund shall in principle relate to invoiced purchases made during a period not less than 3 months but not exceeding 1 calendar year.
As regards the refundable amount, the Eighth Directive provides for a low limit on pay-back.
As regards the refundable amount, the Eighth Directive provides for a low limit on pay-back.
If the time period between a chargeable transaction and tabling of the refund application exceeds 3 months but is less than 1 year, the amount for which the application is tabled must constitute at least the equivalent of 200 EUR.
If the time period between a chargeable transaction and tabling of the refund application exceeds 3 months but is less than 1 year, the amount for which the application is tabled must constitute at least the equivalent of 200 EUR.
If time period encompasses 1 calendar year or remaining part of a calendar year, the amount applied for must not be less than equivalent of 25 EUR.
If time period encompasses 1 calendar year or remaining part of a calendar year, the amount applied for must not be less than equivalent of 25 EUR.
The Refunding Tax Authority must announce its decision on the amount of VAT refund, and effect it, within 3 months following submission of the application.
The Refunding Tax Authority must announce its decision on the amount of VAT refund, and effect it, within 3 months following submission of the application.
Functioning of Eighth VAT Directive in practise
Functioning of Eighth VAT Directive in practise
Inefficient functioning of the Eighth VAT Directive hits major economic sectors (such as road transport) in the EU.
Inefficient functioning of the Eighth VAT Directive hits major economic sectors (such as road transport) in the EU.
Undertakings request to claim VAT paid on fuel, tolls for using motorways and various repair services - amongst other things - that are purchased in different Member States.
Undertakings request to claim VAT paid on fuel, tolls for using motorways and various repair services - amongst other things - that are purchased in different Member States.