natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Arsarrangementet skulle således ændres på kort sigt.
Consequently, the annual scheme should be amended in the short term.
I modsætning hertil gik Udvalget om Eksterne Økonomiske Forbindelser principielt ind for at lade alle lande i det tidligere Sovjetunionen være omfattet.
Contrary to this vote, the Committee on External Economic Relations approved the inclusion of the socalled ex-Soviet states in principle.
Det foreskriver navnlig også. at AVS fortsat står til rådighed for de hidtil begunstigede udvik lingslande.
The report also envisages continuing to make the GPS available to the developing countries which it previously favoured.
Budgetudvalget anslår den deraf resulterende indtægtsnedgang til ca. 1 mia ECU.
The Committee on Budgets estimates the drop in revenue resulting from this at roughly ECU 1 billion.
BRAUN-MOSER (PPE), ordfører. — (DE) Hr. formand, først må jeg desværre komme med en protest, da vi egentlig ønskede at behandle denne betænkning på mødet om fredagen under mødeperioden i december.
BRAUN-MOSER (PPE), rapporteur. — (DE) Mr President, unfortunately I must begin by complaining that we originally intended to treat this report in the Friday sitting of the December partsession, but that the President held it over, although it was urgent, with the result that it never came to a debate or vote.
Betænkningen foreskriver endvidere, at vi følger Budget udvalget og foretager en undersøgelse af de finansielle virkninger ved udgangen af året.
Furthermore, the report plans to follow the Committee on Budgets and assess the financial fallout at the end of the year.
Når Uruguay-Runden er afsluttet, håber vi alle. at det resulterer i en principiel fornyelse af vor toldpræferenceordning, og at de enkelte bilaterale aftaler med staterne i det tidligere Sovjetunionen måske fører til et godt resultat.
When the Uruguay Round has been concluded, we all hope that this will result in a basic renewal of the GPS and that the individual bilateral agreements with the states of the former Soviet Union could meet with success.
Vi ønsker jo at begunstige handelen med disse lande, at give dem hjælp til selvhjælp, for at de gennem handel og produktion samt gennem en bedre udnyttelse af deres nationalprodukt kan indlede en gunstigere udvikling.
However, we wish to benefit trade with these countries, helping them to help themselves, so that their development can take a turn for the better through trade, production and better exploitation of their domestic product.
Da der ikke kunne stemmes om betænkningen, var det ved udgangen af året umuligt for de nye lande, som vi ønskede at opføre på listen over begunstigede lande, nemlig de mindst udviklede lande — det drejer sig om Kampuchea, Liberia, Madagaskar, Salomon-øerne, Zambia, Vanuatu og Zaïre — at nyde godt af toldpræferencer ne, og dette er jo overordentlig beklageligt!
Since no vote could be taken on the report, at the end of the year the countries which we wanted to include on the list of beneficiaries for the first time, namely the least developed countries — Kampuchea, Liberia, Madagascar, the Solomon Islands, Zambia, Vanuatu and Zaire, could not join at the favourable rates. This is most unfortunate!
Jeg ved ikke. hvilken afgørelse Rådet har truffet i mellemtiden, men Parlamentet er forpligtet til at efterkomme beslutninger om uopsættelig forhandling.
I do not know what the Council has mean while decided, but Parliament has an obligation to see that urgent matters are attended to.
Jeg vil gerne fortælle Dem. hvorfor jeg anser denne betænkning for at være så vigtig.
I would now like to explain why I feel this report is so important.
MENDES BOTA (LDR). — (PT) Hr. formand, i 1993, ligesom i 1991 og 1992 står vi over for en videreførelse af den generelle toldpræferenceordning, medens vi venter på en aftale i Uruguay-Runden.
MENDES BOTA (LDR). — (PT) Mr President, as in 1991 and 1992, we are now confronted with the extension of the system of generalized tariff preferences while awaiting an agreement on the Uruguay Round.
Det vil sige, vi har to modstridende handelssystemer, og begge gør krav på at være gavnlige for udviklingslandene.
Or rather, we are faced with two opposing trade systems, both of which claim to be beneficial to developing countries.
Ifølge OECD vil en delvis ophævelse af handelsbarrierer give større udbytte i størrelsesorden 195 mia dollars, heraf ca. 90 mia til udviklingslandene, og landene i Central- og Østeuropa; det vil sige det dobbelte af den officielle støtte til udviklingen af disse lande.
According to the OECD, the partial dismantling of trade barriers will lead to an increase in trade worth roughly $195 billion, approximately $90 billion of which are intended for developing nations and the countries of central and eastern Europe. This is equivalent to doubling the official developmental aid to these countries.
Denne betænkning blev for det første sat på vor dagsor den på grund af Uruguay-Rundens mislykkede udfald, for det andet naturligvis på grund af den årlige revision al' Det Europæiske Fællesskabs toldordninger.
We are in an impasse — not only because the goals of the Uruguay Round are too ambitious and complex, but because of the domestic political interests of the various countries involved. Such interests were at play in the United States, and are now at play in France, whose policies are at odds with its farmers.
Vi har siden 1971 haft et system med generelle toldpræferencer, som arbejder med undtagelsestold for visse udviklingslande.
Since 1971 we have had a Generalized Prefer ences Scheme (GPS), which works with exceptional tariffs for specific developing countries, especially ACP states.
Ikke alene fordi Uruguay-Roundtos målsætninger er for ambitiøse og komplekse, men også på grund af de forskellige landes interne politiske inter-
The Committee on Develop ment and Cooperation is quite clearly aiming for various motions for amendment and supplementary applications,
gerne.
PATTERSON
For det andet ser det også ud til, at Det Økonomiske og Sociale Udvalg modsætter sig forslaget, idet jeg i hr. Harrisons betænkning ser, at ØSU gør opmærksom på, at opkrævning af merværdiafgiften på afrejsesstedet kan få indflydelse på befordringspriserne og medføre betydelige administrationsomkostninger. Jeg mener derfor ikke, at man kan se bort fra branchens synspunkt.
Secondly, the Economic and Social Committee is also opposed to the proposal because, as it says in the report: "The Economic and Social Committee also underlines that levying VAT at the place of departure may have a tangible effect on intraCommunity bus fares; it may also generate considerable administrative costs."
Hvis jeg tager en rundtur, køber min billet i Luxembourg, kører gennem Frankrig.
VAT on the return ticket.
Men hvis det ikke er tilfældet, vil jeg gerne have kommissæren til at forklare det nærmere, da dette så giver et transitproblem.
But if it is not the case, I should like the Commissioner to explain, because this then involves the problem of transit.
Hvis jeg gør et kort ophold for at skifte bus, har jeg klart 24 timer til at gøre dette, hvis det foregår i transit, og jeg ikke påbegynderen ny rejse.
Obviously if I make a short stop in order to change buses I am allowed 24 hours to do this provided it is transit and I do not start a new journey.
Men jeg kan forudse alle slags problemer, når rejsebureauerne og navnlig busselskaberne begynder at analysere dette direktiv og forsøger at arrangere deres ture på en sådan måde. at de minimerer deres momssatser, og vi får forfærdelige problemer mellem de forskellige skattemyndigheder.
But I can foresee all sorts of problems as travel agents, and particularly bus companies, start analysing this directive and try to arrange their journey so as to minimize their tax rates and we are going to have awful problems between the different tax authorities.
Jeg er således enig med hr. Harrison, men vi bør virkelig forsøge at få den optimale løsning, og den optimale løsning er helt klar: alle disse rejser bør beskattes til nulsatsen, og det er noget, som jeg formoder vi bliver nødt til at opnå i sidste instans.
So, I agree with Mr Harrison, but really we ought to go for the optimum solution and the optimum solution is pretty clear: all these journeys should be taxed at zero rate and that is something which I suspect we will have to come to in the end.
Endelig er der fare for. at der opstår endnu en forvridning, idet man for at undgå den første forvridning foreslår afskaffelse af indirekte afgifter på kollektiv personbefordring og skabelse af bevidst forvridning mellem individuel og kollektiv befordring.
Lastly, a final distortion is likely to be created by the proposal — aimed at avoiding the first distortion — to abolish indirect taxes on passenger transport and create a voluntary distortion between individual transport and collective passenger transport.
Efter vor opfattelse har den slags statspåtvunget forvridning ingen eksistensberettigelse.
In our opinion, this kind of State-imposed distortion is entirely unjustified, for it prevents individuals from making cost-based choices.
Den vil nemlig hindre det enkelte menneske i at træffe sin afgørelse efter prisen.
By doing this we would be artificially affecting individual choices by fiscal means.
Jeg gør opmærksom på, at den almindelige tendens henimod sænkning af de indirekte afgifter nødvendigvis fører til opretholdelse af høje direkte skatter.
I would like to point out that the general trend towards wanting to lower indirect taxes will necessarily lead to the maintenance of high direct taxes.
Høje direkte skatter er imidlertid diskriminerende og fratager lysten til arbejde, foretagsomhed og opsparing.
High direct taxes are discriminatory, and discourage people from working, taking initiatives and saving mon ey.
Mange økonomer mener i dag. at det er en fejl at have for høje direkte skatter.
Many economists now feel that excessively high direct taxation is a mistake.
Jeg gør for øvrigt opmærksom på. at de gamle grækere betragtede direkte skat som borgerretsstridig udplyndring.
At this point, I would remind the House that the ancient Greeks felt that direct taxation was a form of plunder that violated citizens' rights.
PORTO (LDR). — (PT) Hr. formand, da man generelt på moms-området anså det for nødvendigt at opretholde destinationsprincippet indtil 1997 omend med forskellige opkrævningsmåder, har de forskellige forhold inden for personbefordring ad landvejen pudsigt nok og i henhold til det foreliggende forslag ført til. at man gik ind for territorialprincippet og anvendelsen af oprindelsesprincippet med betaling i afrejselandet.
PORTO (LDR). — (PT) Mr President, I find it strange that after it was deemed necessary, as part of the universal implementation of VAT, to maintain the destination principle until 1997 — albeit with a different mode of application — the specific nature of passenger transport by road led us to the present situation, which, in terms of the proposal under consideration, passes from the principle of territoriality to the application of the principle of origin, with payment being made in the country of departure.
Ud over at være praktisk, har man i den forbindelse fremført et vægtigt argument: handelen foregår på afrejsestedet. og del er afhandelen, man betaler afgiften.
Apart from its practicability, there is also a more substantial reason for this, namely that the country of departure must be the place where the business that is subject to taxation is transacted.
Følgelig forekommer ønsket om at give den direkte beskatning forrang og at skabe forvridning mellem individuel og kollektiv befordring os ud fra et økonomisk synspunkt at være totalt irrationelt.
Consequently, we feel that this desire to encourage indirect taxation and create distortion between individual and collective passenger transport is totally irrational from an economic point of view.
SCRIVENER, medlem af Kommissionen. — (FR) Hr. formand, jeg vil først og fremmest takke Europa-Parlamentet og dets ordfører for så hurtigt at have behandlet Kommissionens direktivforslag om merværdiafgift på personbefordring.
SCRIVENER, Member of the Commission. — (FR) Mr President, first of all I would like to thank the European Parliament and its rapporteur for having examined the Commission proposal for a directive on VAT arrange ments applicable to passenger transport so rapidly.
Imidlertid må det understreges, at med den foreslåede ordning vil det være vanskeligt eller endda umuligt at opnå en korrekt kontrol af afgiftens pålæggclse i henhold til rejsens længde, ud over som allerede nævnt at være en tilskyndelse til at flytte afrejscstedet til et land nærmere ved, eller til at udstykke rejsen for at undgå en tungere afgift.
To start with, it should be emphasized that the proposed system will make it difficult, if not impossible, to ensure proper control over the application of the tax according to the distance travelled, since there is an incentive to change the place of departure to a closer country or — in defiance of the rules — to split up the trip in order to avoid a higher payment.
Derudover er forvridningen mellem landtransport og lufttransport ret chokerende, idet sidstnævnte nyder nul-sats-fordelen i alle lande, selv om man i øvrigt af miljømæssige årsager burde fremme den kollektive land transport — jernbanetransport og befordring ad landevejen — for at undgå for voldsom trafiktæthed og samtidig undgå omkostningerne ved individuel transport.
Having said that, as regards taxes, this can only aggravate the distortion between land transport and air transport, which benefits from a zero-rate in all countries. On the other hand, due to saturation levels and the environment, it is important to promote collective passenger transport by rail and road, thus avoiding the burden of individual transport.
Det bør understreges, at fritagelsen af den kollektive personbefordring ad landevejen for merværdiafgiften ville være en måde, hvorpå man kunne fremme bevægeligheden mel lem landene, navnlig de perifere lande — blandt andre Portugal — som er særlig berørt af transportomkostnin
It should be stressed that international mobility could still be promoted by not taxing collective passenger land transport. Such a tactic would be of greater importance to the peripheral countries, including Portugal, which are more strongly affected by transport costs.
Jeg tilføjer straks, at jeg er noget forbavset over Europa-Parlamentets reaktion, da forslaget ikke mindst for landevejspersonbefordring faktisk er meget vigtigt i forbindelse med de skatte- og afgiftsmæssige grænsers afskaffelse.
I would then add, straight away, that 1 am rather surprised at the reaction of the European Parliament, because the text in question is in fact of great importance in the context of abolishing fiscal frontiers, especially for passenger transport by road.
Hvad drejer det sig da om?
What does it in fact involve?
Forslaget har til formål at opretholde den i øjeblikket eksisterende nulsats for EF-intern personbefordring, især for befordring ad luft- og søvejen samt foren del af jernbanebefordringen mellem to medlemsstater.
This proposal aims to maintain the zero-rate currently applicable to intraCommunity passenger transport, especially as regards air transport, sea transport and, in part, rail transport between two Member States.
Jeg vil gerne gøre opmærksom på, at sidstnævnte aspekt er særligt vigtigt for de europæiske forbrugere, da det giver mulighed for at undgå en forhøj else af prisen for personbefordring.
I would like to remind you that this latter aspect is particularly important for European consumers insofar as it makes it possible to avoid raising the cost of passenger transport, and that, I would emphasize, is the main aim of this draft — to avoid a price increase for these major forms of transport.
SCRIVENER at drøfte det igen, for jeg er sikker på, at der foreligger noget af en misforståelse.
SCRIVENER join us on the barricades to support the interests of consumers?
At man absolut bør forhøje dem, eller som foreslået af andre skal nedsætte dem til nul.
That we definitely have to increase them or, as some others suggest, reduce them to zero.
De kan sikkert forestille Dem, at det bliver yderst vanskeligt i Rådet.
This, you may imagine, would be extremely difficult in the Council.
Om hr. Mettens ændringsforslag vil jeg gerne sige, at når afrejsestedskriteriet begrænses til landevejsbefordring, så skyldes det, at der for de øvrige befordringsformer — jernbane, luft- og søvej — ikke efter det nuværende system foretages nogen afgiftskontrol ved grænserne.
As for Mr Metten's amendment, I would like to point out that the limitation of the system involving the country of departure to road transport is due to the fact that the system currently in force does not impose any VAT checks on the other modes of transport — rail, air and sea.
Følgelig var det ikke nødvendigt at ændre systemet for jernbane, luft- og søtransport. Så meget desto mere som det ikke ville medføre nogen som helst praktisk ændring for disse transportformer, men derimod store administrationsomkostninger for virksomhederne.
Consequently, it was unnecessary to alter the system for rail, air or sea transport, as it would have brought about no practical changes; on the contrary, it would have entailed sizeable administrative costs for the companies concerned.
Til gengæld kan busser fremdeles underkastes grænsekontrol i forbindelse med merværdiafgiften.
Coaches, meanwhile, are still subject to VAT border checks.
Det er selvfølgelig målet med forslaget at prøve på at løse problemet. Det er en situation, der hurtigst muligt bør afhjælpes.
Of course, the proposal before you is intended to remedy this problem, which is in urgent need of being resolved.
HARRISON (S), ordfører. — (EN) Hr. formand, jeg glæder mig over fru Scriveners tilbud om at samarbejde mest muligt for at få klaret dette spørgsmål.
HARRISON (S), rapporteur. — Mr President, I welcome Mrs Scrivener's offer to work together as much as we can in order to straighten this matter out.
Jeg er overrasket over, at hun er overrasket, fordi jo mere kollegerne og jeg har set på disse forslag, jo mere har vi fået kolde fødder.
I am surprised that she is surprised, because the more that colleagues and I have looked into these proposals the more we have got cold feet about them.
Der er en række punkter, som vi har forelagt Parlamentet og fru Scrivener i aften, og som vi også har nævnt over for hendes kolleger i Kommissionen på et tidligere tidspunkt, men som jeg ikke mener er blevet besvaret, og som er i modstrid med hendes ønske om at hjælpe forbrugeren og sikre, at der ikke bliver nogen stigning i priserne for bus- og hyrevognsbefordring.
There are a number of items which we have laid before the House and before Mrs Scrivener this evening and which we have also mentioned to her Commission colleagues at an earlier time, but which I do not think have been answered and which contradict her desire to help the consumer and to ensure that there is no increase in prices in terms of bus and coach and taxi transportation.
Vi har indtryk af, at priserne snarere vil stige end falde.
In fact, we feel that prices may well rise, not fall.
Jeg håber derfor, vi kan benytte denne lejlighed til at forsøge at bringe nogle af de vanskeligheder, der efter vor mening findes, ud af verden, da vi, selv om vi absolut deler de samme forhåbninger, ikke har den samme mening om dette forslags virkninger.
So I hope that we can take this opportunity to try to iron out the difficulties that we think exist, because whilst we certainly share the same aspirations, we do not have the same opinion of this proposal's effects.
SCRIVENER, medlem af Kommissionen. — (FR) Hr. formand, blot et par ord for at svare på et til mig stillet spørgsmål om en afgift, der i ti år ikke er blevet forhøjet i Tyskland.
SCRIVENER, Member of the Commission. — (FR) Mr President, just a brief word in response to the question I have just been asked regarding a tax which has not been collected in Germany for over 10 years.
Det har man i hvert fald fortalt mig.
At least that is what they tell me.
Det, jeg rent generelt kan sige, er, at vi med det fremsatte forslag i fremtiden vil undgå sådanne ulemper.
What I can say to you in general is that the proposal put to you would avoid any such inconveniences.
Vi kan ikke gøre alt ensartet fra den ene dag til den anden, og det er vort hovedmål at undgå en afgiftsforhøjelse.
We cannot harmonize everything from one day to the next, and our prime objective is to avoid higher taxes.
Tænk Dem derfor nøje om.
So have a good think.
Er det det. De ønsker?
Is that what you want?
Hvad satserne angår, går vort forslag ud på at opretholde de bestående.
On the question of rates, our proposal envisages retaining the rates currently in application.
For fællesskabsintern personbefordring, dvs. mellem to EF-lande, er de nuværende satser som følger: Nulsats for befordring ad sø- og luftvejen og en positiv sats for landevejsbefordring.
For intraCommunity passenger transport the rates are as follows: zero-rate for transport by air and sea, and a positive rate for road transport.
Som kommissær med forbrugerpolitik som arbejdsområde er det mig magtpåliggende ikke at forhøje befordringspriserne for forbrugerne.
As the commissioner in charge of consumer policy, I would very much like to avoid raising transport costs for consumers.
Det er derfor, at man har valgt at opretholde de eksisterende satser.
That is the reason why we opted to maintain the currently applicable rates.
Omvendt vil det være vanskeligt at foreslå udvidelse af nulsatsen.
Moreover, it would have been difficult to propose extending the zero-rate.
Harmonisering af omsætningsafgifter
Harmonization of turnover taxes
Det er udtryk for måde hold at bevare det bestående og ikke at forøge udgifterne for forbrugerne.
We merely considered it wise to conserve the existing system and not increase the costs incurred by consumers.
A3-424/92) af Friedrich for Udvalget om Økonomi, Valutaspørgsmål og Industripolitik om forslag fra Kommissionen til Rådet (KOM(92) 215 — C3-333/92) til direktiv om harmonisering af medlemsstaternes lovgivning om omsætningsafgifter — ophævelse af visse undtagelser i henhold til artikel 28, stk. 3, i direktiv 77/388/EØF og artikel 1, stk. 1, andet afsnit, i direktiv 89/465/EØF.
A3-424/92) by Mr Friedrich, on behalf of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs and Industrial Policy, on the proposal from the Commission to the Council (COM(92) 215 — C3-0333/92) for a directive on the harmonization of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes.
Til hr. Porto, som stillede mig et spørgsmål, vil jeg gerne sige, at man bør gøre sig klart, at den i øjeblikket hårdeste konkurrence slet ikke foregår mellem jernbaner og luft fart.
To Mr Porto, who asked me a question, I would reply that the most lively competition at present has nothing to do with the battle between rail and air transport, but rather with rivalry between air transport, intraCommunity transport and transport to third countries.
Den foregår inden for luftfarten mellem EF-lande og til tredjelande.
That is the nub of the problem of competition and, maybe, distortions of competition.
Det er dér, det egentlige konkurrenceproblem og måske også konkurrenceforvridningen forekom mer.
And it is there, within this single transport sector, that the competition is fiercest and that the imposition of higher taxes would risk putting intraCommunity air transport at a grave disadvantage.
Og det er inden for én og samme befordringsmåde, at konkurrencen er hårdest, og at en afgiftsforhøjelse indebærer fare for i alvorlig grad at forfordele den EF-interne luftbefordring.
PATTERSON (PPE), deputizing for the rapporteur. — Mr President, I am taking over this report for Mr Friedrich, on behalf of the committee.
Det var det, jeg gerne ville sige til Dem efter at have undret mig over Deres reaktion.
That is what I wanted to say following my initial astonishment at your reaction.
PATTERSON (PPE), stedfortræder for ordføreren. — (EN) Hr. formand, jeg overtager denne betænkning for hr. Friedrich på udvalgets vegne.
CORNELISSEN (PPE). — (NL) Mr President, we are always talking about bringing Europe closer to its citizens. As from 1 January of this year, the German authorities increased the tax on bus journeys through Germany by 85%.