Showing posts with label tax. Show all posts
Showing posts with label tax. Show all posts

Tuesday, 28 December 2010

Liechtenstein under EU pressure on taxation

Yesterday I wished for public EU information to be more readily available and specific about the remaining issues regarding the common travel area: Liechtenstein heading for Schengen area (27 December 2010).

In the blog post 'What does the EU want from Liechtenstein?' (25 December 2010) we noticed how central EU aims in tax matters are with regard to the Principality:

Council conclusions on EU relations with EFTA countries; 3060th GENERAL AFFAIRS Council meeting Brussels, 14 December 2010

The General Affairs Council (GAC) dedicated three and a half out of eight paragraphs to issues regarding taxation and relevant to the financial services industry in the Principality of Liechtenstein:

21. With regard to cooperation and information exchange in tax matters and the fight against fraud and tax evasion and any other illegal activity to the detriment of the financial interests of the parties, the Council welcomes the commitments taken by the Principality to implement OECD standards on transparency and on tax information exchange and to fight against fraud, and calls on Liechtenstein to continue its efforts in this area. The Council expects a quick and consistent implementation of these commitments in the relationship between Liechtenstein and the EU and all its Member States.

22. Concerning the taxation of savings, the Council welcomes the openness of Liechtenstein to launch negotiations on a revision of the savings taxation agreement to reflect the evolution of the corresponding EU acquis, once the EU has agreed the final text for its review of the savings taxation directive.

23. Considering that the EFTA Surveillance Authority has taken in recent years several decisions relating to state aid granted by Liechtenstein, the Council reiterates its recommendation of 2008 that Liechtenstein assesses all measures applied to industry, services and trade with respect to the definition of state aid provided for in the EEA Agreement, particularly in finance. The Council welcomes the intention of Liechtenstein to reform its tax legislation and looks forward to a reform compatible with state aid legislation. The Council will closely follow the implementation of this reform.

24. With regard to harmful tax practices, the Council encourages the Principality to continue discussions with the EU on the application of the principles and criteria of the EU Code of Conduct on business taxation.

Taxation and banking

I would have hoped for complementing quality information from the Council about the EU's aims regarding more controversial issues, such as cooperation against fraud and tax evasion, the revision of the savings tax agreement, state aid reform and curtailing harmful tax practices.

The European Union needs to take a more open attitude towards specifying the problems (as it sees them), defining its objectives and publishing reports on progress (or lack of it) in negotiations.

We can also hope for the EU's counterparts, in this case the Principality of Liechtenstein, to present their positions and arguments transparently.


DG Taxation and Customs Union

I have to admit that I found the web pages of the Commission service Taxation and Customs Union disappointing, because they did not offered clear thematic pages, country pages or search options.

The DG seemed to leave visitors only crumbs to pick here and there.

The first option is to go back to the annual report, almost a year old, but offering a background view:

Activities of the European Union (EU) in the tax field in 2009

The very first sentence of the report highlighted the aspirations of the EU with regard to Liechtenstein, and concrete issues concerning the Principality are mentioned in many places in the 30 page report:

Widespread tax evasion through the use of Liechtenstein foundations which came to light at the beginning of 2008 once again demonstrated the importance of international cooperation in the area of savings taxation.

With regard to fresher information, the only option seemed to be to trundle through the press releases published in 2010, but at headline level I found nothing relevant.

For those with a wish for a forward view commissioner Algirdas Šemeta spoke about the Commission Work Programme 2011 (CWP 2011) to the Economic and Monetary Affairs Committee of the European Parliament 30 November 2010.

Among other things, commissioner Šemeta said:

… I am working closely with the forthcoming Hungarian presidency to identify how to progress on the savings directive and on the anti-fraud agreements with third countries.

Third, as you know, I am convinced that we have to maintain our efforts in the fight against harmful tax competition both within the EU and with our international partners. We entered in constructive discussions with Switzerland and Liechtenstein on how to extend the principles of the Code of Conduct to those two "third" but "close" countries. I also plan to discuss the future of the Code of Conduct itself with the Member States during the next meeting of the Tax Policy Group.


Council: Tax policy

The Council offers a web page with links concerning Tax policy (Taxation of Savings Income), with links to Liechtenstein, but I have found no quality overview regarding tax discussions with the Principality.

All in all, the information from the Commission and the Council about taxation pressure on Liechtenstein comes in bits and pieces rather than in a comprehensive and user-friendly manner.



Ralf Grahn



P.S. On Se former à la communication européenne, or a bit easier Lacomeuropéenne, Michael Malherbe dissects the communication activities of the EU institutions as an expert engaged for citizens and consumers. His most recent blog post was a review of European communication in 2010.

Thursday, 12 August 2010

EU tax: Discussing a part of a fraction of public spending

Total government expenditure in EU-27 during 2011 is forecast at 50.3 per cent of gross domestic product (GDP), according to the publication Public Finances in EMU 2010 (European economy 4/2010).



The draft budget of the European Union for 2011 (DB) corresponds to 1.14 per cent of EU gross national income (GNI), which amounts to EUR 142.6 billion in commitment appropriations.

Very roughly, the EU’s public spending is one 44th part of total public spending in the European Union.



Federal government spending in the United States of America is estimated to be 25.06 per cent of GDP in the financial year 2011.

The cumulative sum of European Union spending is important, but only a tiny fraction of what the US government spends as a proportion of wealth creation.

Still, some people are deluded enough to believe that they live in a centralised European super-state.

Before we see the concrete options, we can only guess that the coming proposal on an EU tax would concern only a part of the minuscule proportion of total public spending the European Union budget stands for in Europe.




Ralf Grahn



P.S. It is easier to understand a language than to use it correctly. As Eurobloggers we could and should promote interaction among Europeans across borders and between linguistic communities. Grahnlaw has adopted a multilingual comment policy:

I do my best to read comments in Danish, Dutch, English, Finnish, French, German, Italian, Norwegian, Portuguese, Spanish or Swedish, even if the Grahnlaw blog and my possible replies are in English.

EU tax: Euroblog discussion on Bloggingportal.eu

One of the few silly season issues to make waves during summer recess in Brussels has been the preliminary announcement by the EU Budget Commissioner Janusz Lewandowski that he will present a few options for an EU tax in September, as reported by Financial Times Deutschland on 9 August 2010 (in German).



For the benefit of those who read English, EUobserver ran a story two days later, where Lewandowski defended the idea of shifting the burden from the budgets of the member states to revenue financed by Europeans more directly (although it would most probably be an indirect tax).



Incidentally, I found no official information on the web pages of Commissioner Lewandowski or the DG Budget or the pages of Financial Programming and Budget, which gives the discussion something of a silly season flavour, at this stage.

Some member state governments and lobby groups wanted to score immediate points by rejecting any proposals out of hand, before seeing the details and arguments.



Despite the predictable gut reactions from the usual suspects, there have also been more measured responses among Euroblogs. A fair sample of blog posts is available under the topics tag Taxation and Customs, and newer, still untagged posts are aggregated in the stream of all posts on Bloggingportal.eu.



In the short term, discussing a European Union tax may be as futile as defence pleading before the French Revolutionary Tribunal during the reign of terror, but EU level taxation touches upon a number of fundamental issues of European integration, ultimately relevant to the security and prosperity of EU citizens.

In some cases aspects have been deliberately or unwittingly distorted by media and citizens, so there is also cause to correct a few misunderstandings.

Let the EU tax discussion continue in order to clarify matters.




Ralf Grahn



P.S. It is easier to understand a language than to use it correctly. As Eurobloggers we could and should promote interaction among Europeans across borders and between linguistic communities. Grahnlaw has adopted a multilingual comment policy:

I do my best to read comments in Danish, Dutch, English, Finnish, French, German, Italian, Norwegian, Portuguese, Spanish or Swedish, even if the Grahnlaw blog and my possible replies are in English.

Friday, 5 February 2010

EU and Switzerland: Bilateral treaties and challenges

Since Switzerland is outside the European Union (EU) as well as the European Economic Area (EEA), the relations have been developed mainly on the basis of bilateral agreements. The Treaties Office of the European Commission’s DG External Relations offers access to the existing EU-Switzerland treaties, bilateral and multilateral, 175 in all.




DG Trade presents an overview of trade with Switzerland, noting that:


Switzerland's main trading partner is the EU. On the other hand, Switzerland is currently the fourth largest trading partner of the EU. Trade figures in 2008 show €80 billion in imports and €97.6 billion in exports. In terms of imports, Switzerland was the EU's 5th most important trading partner in 2008, after the US, China, Russia and Norway. Regarding exports, Switzerland was the 3rd after the US and Russia in the same period.



The presentation contains on overview of how the agreements have developed, including the Bilateral I package (in force from June 2002) and the Bilateral II package (signed in October 2004).




Among the 130 Commission Delegations and Offices, the European Union has a Delegation in Berne, Switzerland (for Liechtenstein as well). The New Year’s greeting (available in German, French and Italian) by the Head of Delegation Michael Reiterer is refreshingly free from empty phrases. Instead Reiterer outlines the macro level challenges ahead and digs into new areas of cooperation as well as unresolved issues on the table, such as tax fraud and evasion.




More information about the history of cooperation and ongoing issues is offered on the web page (here the German version) Die EU und die Schweiz and further topical links:


Agrarfreihandel


On trade in agricultural goods:

Ein allfälliges Abkommen im Agrar- und Lebensmittelbereich (FHAL) liegt im beiderseitigen Interesse der EU und der Schweiz.


Beihilfendiskussion


State aid:

Die Europäische Kommission hat im Februar 2007 eine Beihilfenentscheidung getroffen. Die EU hat eine Beihilfenentscheidung getroffen, was nicht ausreichend zur Kenntnis genommen wird, weshalb auch von "Steuerstreit" gesprochen wird.


Elektrizität


Electricity:

Ein Elektrizitätsabkommen zur Sicherung der Energieversorgung, zur Regelung des Transits und zur Teilnahme der Schweiz am europäischen Elekrtizitätsbinnenmarkt liegt im beidseitigen Interesse der EU und der Schweiz.


Erweiterungsbeitrag


Participation in cohesion policy costs:

Die Kohäsionspolitik der Europäischen Union hat zum Ziel, die Unterschiede im wirtschaftlichen Entwicklungsstand der europäischen Regionen zu verringern. Damit soll der wirtschaftliche und soziale Zusammenhalt innerhalb der EU verstärkt werden. Die Schweiz profitiert dank ihrer bilateralen Abkommen, welche sie mit der EU abgeschlossen hat, direkt von jeder Erweiterung der Union, weshalb die EU die Schweizer Behörden einlud, einen Beitrag an die europäische Kohäsion zu leisten.


Personenfreizügigkeit


Free movement of persons:

Personenfreizügigkeit zwischen der Schweiz und der EU.


Schengen


Cooperation in the Schengen area:

Im Rahmen der Schengen Zusammenarbeit wird der Reiseverkehr erleichtert, indem die systematischen Personenkontrollen an den gemeinsamen Grenzen zwischen den Schengen-Staaten aufgehoben werden.


Zinsbesteuerung


Taxation of savings income:

Die Richtlinie regelt die Besteuerung von Zinserträgen, welche an natürliche Personen in einem EU-Mitgliedstaat ausserhalb ihres eigenen Wohnsitzstaates gezahlt werden.


Zollsicherheit


Customs security cooperation:

Aus Sicherheitsgründen sind Wirtschaftsteilnehmer verpflichtet, die Zollbehörden im voraus über Waren zu informieren, die in das Zollgebiet der EU ein- oder aus diesem ausgeführt werden. Das betrifft zu einem grossen Teil auch die Schweiz.






Ralf Grahn








P.S. A federal system is democratic and aims at resolving issues at the right level. The Federal Union Blog argues for federalist solutions in Britain, Europe and the world.

The Federal Union Blog is listed among 522 great Euroblogs (at the latest count) on growing multilingual Bloggingportal.eu, your useful one-stop-shop for fact, opinion and gossip on European affairs, i.a. politics, more than thirty policy areas, communication, economics, finance, business, civil society and law.

At the same time Euroblogs are an agreeable way to brush up one’s skills in foreign languages.

If you are interested in the EU or the euroblogosphere, you can also subscribe to the RSS feed for new blog posts appearing on Bloggingportal.eu.

By the way, I also discuss European issues, including the relations between the EU and Switzerland, in Finnish on Eurooppaoikeus and in Swedish on Grahnblawg.

Wednesday, 10 June 2009

EU free movement: Tax exemptions for personal property

Here is information for those who move to another EU member state. A new codified Directive has been published on tax exemptions for personal property:

Council Directive 2009/55/EC of 25 May 2009 on tax exemptions applicable to the permanent introduction from a Member State of the personal property of individuals (Codified version), published in the Official Journal of the European Union (OJEU) 10.6.2009 L 145/36.




However, the scope of Directive 2009/55 excludes some of the taxes and duties most interesting to individuals:



Article 1
Scope

1. Every Member State shall, subject to the conditions and in the cases hereinafter set out, exempt personal property introduced permanently from another Member State by private individuals from consumption taxes which normally apply to such property.

2. The following shall not be covered by this Directive:

(a) value added tax;

(b) excise duty;

(c) specific and/or periodical duties and taxes connected with the use within the country of property referred to in paragraph 1, such as for instance motor vehicle registration fees, road taxes and television licences.


***

Regulation 2009/55 is based on Article 93 of the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC), on harmonisation of legislation concerning turnover taxes, excise duties and other forms of indirect taxation.


Ralf Grahn

Wednesday, 11 June 2008

EU TFEU: Approximation of internal market laws in sensitive areas

Approximation or harmonisation of internal market laws in sensitive areas, such as company taxes, is subject to unanimous decision making by the EU Council. The Treaty of Lisbon does not change the unanimity rule, although the reform treaty tries to make the relationship between ordinary and special legislative procedures clearer.


***

Article 115 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) is found in the consolidated version of the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, published in the Official Journal of the European Union, OJ 9.5.2008 C 115/95:

Part Three Union policies and internal actions

Title VII Common rules on competition, taxation and approximation of laws

Chapter 3 Approximation of laws

Article 115 TFEU
(ex Article 94 TEC)

Without prejudice to Article 114, the Council shall, acting unanimously in accordance with a special legislative procedure and after consulting the European Parliament and the Economic and Social Committee, issue directives for the approximation of such laws, regulations or administrative provisions of the Member States as directly affect the establishment or functioning of the internal market.

***

In Article 2, point 80 of the Treaty of Lisbon (ToL) the IGC 2007 renumbered and amended Article 94 of the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC), and in point 82 it amended the new Article 95 TFEU (ToL) (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/69):

APPROXIMATION OF LAWS

80) The order of Articles 94 and 95 shall be reversed. Article 94 shall be renumbered 95 and Article 95 shall be renumbered 94.

---

82) In Article 94, renumbered 95, the words ‘Without prejudice to Article 94,’ shall be inserted at
the beginning.

***

The TFEU table of equivalences confirms that Article 94 TEC first became Article 95 TFEU (ToL) in the original Treaty of Lisbon, and it tells us that it was later renumbered Article 115 TFEU in the consolidated version (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/211).

***

The current Article 94 of the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC) is found under Title VI ‘Common rules on competition, taxation and approximation of laws’, Chapter 3 ‘Approximation of laws’, in the latest consolidated version of the treaties in force (OJ 29.12.2006 C 321 E/79).

When the proposed TFEU Article 114 (the current Article 95 TEC) with the normal or ordinary procedures for approximation (harmonisation) of laws was lifted to the beginning of the Chapter 3, the sensitive areas, mentioned in the second paragraph, requiring unanimity, were left to be dealt with in Article 115 TFEU (the current Article 94 TEC) of the amending treaty.

The new order feels like an improvement, but in spite of the words added at the beginning of Article 115 TFEU, plain language to express the scope of the provision would not have been amiss.

The only specific amendment by the Treaty of Lisbon was to add the words ‘Without prejudice to Article 94,’ (renumbered Article 114 TFEU) at the beginning. The words ‘acting unanimously on a proposal from the Commission’ were replaced by ‘acting unanimously in accordance with a special legislative procedure’ according to horizontal amendment 3 of Article 2 of the Treaty of Lisbon (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/42), and the words ‘common market’ at the end were replaced by ‘internal market’ in line with horizontal amendment 2(g) (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/41).

Here is the current Article 94 TEC:

Article 94 TEC

The Council shall, acting unanimously on a proposal from the Commission and after consulting the European Parliament and the Economic and Social Committee, issue directives for the approximation of such laws, regulations or administrative provisions of the Member States as directly affect the establishment or functioning of the common market.

***

We have seen the minor differences between Article 94 TEC in force and Article 115 TFEU.

For the sake of systematic comparison, we look at the Article during the intervening treaty reform stages.

First, we turn to the European Convention, the closest thing to a constituent assembly EU citizens have had. The Article in question is located in Part III ‘The policies and functioning of the Union’, Title III ‘Internal policies and action’, Chapter I ‘Internal market’, Section 7 ‘Approximation of legislation’.

Article III-64 of the draft Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe was still the first Article of Section 7. The terminology of the draft Constitution differed from the TEC and there were some changes in wording, including the words ‘Without prejudice to Article III-65’ added at the beginning. But the substance remained unchanged. See OJ 18.7.2003 C 169/38.

Article III-64 Draft Constitution

Without prejudice to Article III-65, a European framework law of the Council of Ministers shall establish measures for the approximation of such laws, regulations or administrative provisions of the Member States as directly affect the establishment or functioning of the internal market. The Council of Ministers shall act unanimously after consulting the European Parliament and the Economic and Social Committee.

***

In the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe, approved by 18 member states, the provisions on approximation (harmonisation) were located in Part III ‘The policies and functioning of the Union’, Title III ‘Internal policies and action’, Chapter I ‘Internal market’, Section 7 ‘Common provisions’.

The IGC 2004 lifted Article III-172 (the current Article 95 TEC) as the new ‘high road’ to the top of Section 7, and Article III-173 (the current Article 94 TEC) sank to become the ‘low road’ for areas requiring unanimity.

Consequently, the referral at the beginning changed. The ‘Council of Ministers’ became the ‘Council’ in the Constitutional Treaty, but otherwise the IGC 2004 took over the wording of the draft Constitution.

Article III-173 is found in OJ 16.12.2004 C 310/75:

Article III-173 Constitution

Without prejudice to Article III-172, a European framework law of the Council shall establish measures for the approximation of such laws, regulations or administrative provisions of the Member States as directly affect the establishment or functioning of the internal market. The Council shall act unanimously after consulting the European Parliament and the Economic and Social Committee.

***

What has been said about Article 115 TFEU, with the shifted position, but substantially unchanged from the current Article 94 TEC?


United Kingdom

Professor Steve Peers covered the Treaty of Lisbon in a number of Statewatch Analyses. ‘EU Reform Treaty Analysis no. 3.3: Revised text of Part Three, Titles I to VI of the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC): Internal Market and competition’ (Version 2, 23 October 2007) includes the current Title VI Common rules on competition, taxation and approximation of laws.

Peers indicated the changing numbering of Article 94 TEC, 95 TFEU (ToL), to be renumbered Article 115 TFEU in the consolidated version, and highlighted the changes, and he added the following comment (pages 30–31):

“The draft Reform Treaty attempts to clarify the relationship between Articles 94 and 95.”

The analysis 3.3 and other useful Statewatch analyses are available through:

http://www.statewatch.org/euconstitution.htm


***

The Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) offers a convenient source of brief annotations on Lisbon Treaty amendments in ‘A comparative table of the current EC and EU treaties as amended by the Treaty of Lisbon’ (Command Paper 7311, published 21 January 2008). It offers the following comment on Article 115 TFEU, Article 95 TFEU (ToL) in the original Lisbon Treaty (page 12):

“In substance the same as Article 94 TEC.”

The FCO comparative table is available at:

http://www.official-documents.gov.uk/document/cm73/7311/7311.asp

***

The UK House of Commons Library Research Paper 07/86 ‘The Treaty of Lisbon: amendments to the Treaty establishing the European Community’ (published 6 December 2007) discussed the approximation of internal market laws on page 60 (under the heading ‘2. Taxation’).

The Research Paper commented briefly on the harmonisation of internal market laws, before moving on to tax harmonisation:

“Articles 94–97 (Constitution Articles III-172 – III-176) are on the approximation of internal market laws. The general aims are unchanged and the Council will adopt measures for the approximation of laws, regulations or administrative provisions of the Member States that directly affect the internal market. The out-dated term “common market” is removed and replaced with “internal market”.”

The Reasearch Paper then proceeded to discuss the approximation (harmonisation) of tax law and the British official position (pages 60–61):

“Harmonisation in the sphere of direct taxes under Article 94 TEC is much more limited than in that of indirect taxes. Although directives introduced under Article 94 TEC may be approved under the co-decision procedure, this does not apply to fiscal provisions. The TFEU, like the Constitution, maintains the requirement for unanimity in Article 95 on any fiscal measure introduced under this Treaty base. The wording of Articles 94 and 95(2) (Constitution Articles III-173 and III-172) is fundamentally unchanged.

The possibility that all taxation measures might be subject to unanimity [sic] at some point in the future has been a controversial issue for some time. The Government’s position on the issue has been stated many times. In June 2003 the then Paymaster General, Dawn Primarolo, said the British Government would “not accept any changes that move away from unanimity on tax matters. When the then Prime Minister, Tony Blair, made a statement to the House following agreement on the Constitution in June 2004, he underlined the point that “this treaty … keeps unanimity for the most important decisions … in particular for tax, social security, foreign policy, defence and decisions on the financing of the Union affecting the British budget contribution.” Tony Blair told the Liaison Committee on 18 June 2007 shortly before the June European Council which agreed the IGC Mandate: “we will not agree to anything that moves to qualified majority voting, something that can have a big say in our own tax and benefit system”.”

(I have deleted the footnotes, but they can be found in the original document.)

The Library Research Paper 07/86 is available at:

http://www.parliament.uk/commons/lib/research/rp2007/rp07-086.pdf

***

The House of Lords European Union Committee report ‘The Treaty of Lisbon: an impact assessment, Volume I: Report’ (HL Paper 62-I, published 13 March 2008) is a valuable resource on the Treaty of Lisbon, but I found no reference to Article 115 TFEU (Article 94 TEC or Article 95 ToL).

The report is accessible at:

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200708/ldselect/ldeucom/62/62.pdf


***

Sweden

The consultation paper ’Lissabonfördraget’ is still valuable as a description of the Lisbon Treaty amendments, and it is available at:

http://www.regeringen.se/content/1/c6/09/49/81/107aa077.pdf

But my standard reference is currently the Swedish government’s draft ratification bill ‘Lagrådsremiss – Lissabonfördraget’, published 29 May 2008 and sent to the Council on Legislation (Lagrådet) for an expert opinion. The draft deals with the EU’s internal policy areas in Chapter 23 ‘Unionens interna åtgärder’, and section 23.1 presents the internal market (Inre marknaden), on pages 175 to 181.

The Swedish government presents a short background paragraph on the harmonisation of laws in the internal market (page 176):

”Artiklarna 94–97 i EG-fördraget återger möjligheten att harmonisera lagstiftningen på den inre marknaden. Det finns en stor volym sekundärrätt med utgångspunkt i artikel 95 i EG-fördraget samt en omfattande praxis på området. Möjligheten till harmonisering av medlemsstaternas lagar och författningar är en förutsättning för den inre marknadens bibehållande och fortsatta funktion.”

The government later remarks on the essentially unchanged nature of most internal market provisions (e.g. page 176), but on the following page it adds a comment on the changing position of Articles 94 and 95, with the remark that the purpose is to clarify the relationship between the Articles and it mentions the words added at the beginning of Article 95 TFEU (ToL):

“Vad avser tillnärmning av lagstiftning, byter artiklarna 94 och 95 plats. Syftet med omnumreringen är att klargöra förhållandet mellan de båda artiklarna. I inledningen till artikel 95 i EUF-fördraget görs ett tillägg om att artikeln inte ska påverka tillämpningen av artikel 94 i EUF-fördraget.”

The draft bill ‘Lagrådsremiss – Lissabonfördraget’ can be downloaded through:

http://www.regeringen.se/sb/d/5676/a/106277

***

Finland

The Finnish ratification bill, ‘Hallituksen esitys Eduskunnalle Euroopan unionista tehdyn sopimuksen ja Euroopan yhteisön perustamissopimuksen muuttamisesta tehdyn Lissabonin sopimuksen hyväksymisestä ja laiksi sen lainsäädännön alaan kuuluvien määräysten voimaansaattamisesta’ (HE 23/2008 vp), is the most systematic analysis of the Lisbon Treaty I have encountered.

Under the heading Approximation of laws (Lainsäädännön lähentäminen), the bill offers a description of Article 95 TFEU (ToL), renumbered Article 115 TFEU. The government explains the subsidiary nature of Article 95 TFEU (ToL) in relation to Article 94. The added words reflect the current interpretation of the relationship between the Articles (page 209):

”95 artiklassa (uusi 115 artikla) määrätään neuvoston mahdollisuudesta antaa komission ehdotuksesta yksimielisesti Euroopan parlamenttia kuultuaan direktiivejä sisämarkkinoiden vaatimaksi jäsenvaltioiden lainsäädäntöjen yhdenmukaistamiseksi. Artikla vastaa perustuslakisopimuksen III-173 artiklaa ja korvaa SEY 94 artiklan seuraavin muutoksin. SEUT 95 artiklassa on uusi määräys, jonka mukaan SEUT 95 artikla ei rajoita SEUT 94 artiklan soveltamista. Tämä tarkoittaa, että SEUT 94 artikla on ensisijainen SEUT 95 artiklaan nähden. Vastaavaa määräystä ei sisälly nykyiseen SEY 94 artiklaan, mutta määräys vastaa nykyistä oikeustilaa. Käytännössä SEY 95 artiklaa ja SEY 94 artiklaa on tulkittu siten, että SEY 95 artikla on ensisijainen SEY 94 artiklaan nähden.”

The Finnish ratification bill is available at:

http://www.finlex.fi/fi/esitykset/he/2008/20080023.pdf


The Swedish language version of the ratification bill ‘Regeringens proposition till Riksdagen med förslag om godkännande av Lissabonfördraget om ändring av fördraget om Europeiska unionen och fördraget om upprättandet av Europeiska gemenskapen och till lag om sättande i kraft av de bestämmelser i fördraget som hör till området för lagstiftningen’ (RP 23/2008 rd), makes the same remarks under ’Tillnärmning av lagstiftning’ on Article 95 TFEU (ToL), the future Article 115 TFEU, on pages 211–212:

”I artikel 95 (blivande artikel 115) föreskrivs om rådets möjlighet att på förslag av kommissionen enhälligt och efter att ha hört Europaparlamentet utfärda direktiv om tillnärmning av sådan lagstiftning i medlemsstaterna som krävs för den inre marknaden. Artikeln motsvarar artikel III-173 i det konstitutionella fördraget och ersätter artikel 94 i EG-fördraget med följande ändringar. I artikel 95 i EUF-fördraget ingår en ny bestämmelse enligt vilken artikel 95 i EUFfördraget inte begränsar tillämpningen av artikel 94 i EUF-fördraget. Detta betyder att artikel 94 i EUF-fördraget är primär i förhållande till artikel 95 i EUF-fördraget. Någon motsvarande bestämmelse ingår inte i nuvarande artikel 94 i EG-fördraget, men bestämmelsen motsvarar rådande rättsläge. I praktiken har artiklarna 95 och 94 i EG fördraget tolkats så att artikel 95 är primär i förhållande till artikel 94.”

The ratification bill in Swedish can be accessed at:

http://www.finlex.fi/sv/esitykset/he/2008/20080023.pdf

***

Both Article 114 TFEU and Article 115 TFEU are general in the sense that they provide legal bases for harmonising measures, when the treaties have not catered for special grounds for internal market legislation.

In the absence of a special base, Article 114 TFEU applies, with the ordinary legislative procedure, for internal market objectives.

When fiscal (tax) provisions, those relating to the free movement of persons and those relating to the rights and interests of employed persons, expressly excluded by Article 114(2) TFEU, directly affect the establishment or functioning of the internal market, Article 115 TFEU enters the picture. These sensitive areas are subject to unanimous decision making by the Council, and the European Parliament is only consulted.




Ralf Grahn

Monday, 9 June 2008

EU TFEU: Tax harmonisation III

On the face of it, this could look like a road less travelled, for legal historians mainly, but the Irish referendum debate has unearthed confusions all of its own.

What did the European Convention propose with regard to harmonising taxes, and what happened to these proposals during the intergovernmental conference (IGC 2004), which led to the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe?

This third question and post may shed some additional light on the tensions and the exertions in the field of European taxation.


***

The European Convention, the closest thing to a constituent assembly EU citizens have had, located the provisions on tax legislation in Part III ‘The policies and functioning of the Union’, Title III ‘Internal policies and action’, Chapter I ‘Internal market’, Section 6 ‘Fiscal provisions’.

There are two Articles, III-62 and III-63, of relevance in the draft Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe (OJ 18.7.2003 C 169/38):

Article III-62 Draft Constitution

1. A European law or framework law of the Council of Ministers shall lay down measures for the harmonisation of legislation concerning turnover taxes, excise duties and other forms of indirect taxation provided that such harmonisation is necessary for the functioning of the internal market and to avoid distortion of competition. The Council of Ministers shall act unanimously after consulting the European Parliament and the Economic and Social Committee.

2. Where the Council of Ministers, acting unanimously on a proposal from the Commission, finds that the measures referred to in paragraph 1 relate to administrative cooperation or to combating tax fraud and tax evasion, it shall act, notwithstanding paragraph 1, by a qualified majority when adopting the European law or framework law adopting these measures.


Article III-63 Draft Constitution

Where the Council of Ministers, acting unanimously on a proposal from the Commission, finds that measures on company taxation relate to administrative cooperation or combating tax fraud and tax evasion, it shall adopt, by a qualified majority, a European law or framework law laying down these measures, provided that they are necessary for the functioning of the internal market and to avoid distortion of competition.

That law or framework law shall be adopted after consultation of the European Parliament and the Economic and Social Committee.

***

Two contributions illustrate the forces at work at the European Convention, which changed in tenor from a constituent assembly of parliamentarians and government representatives into a preliminary intergovernmental conference during the later stages.

The French-German contribution on Economic Governance (CONV 470/02) included a section ‘3) Finalising the internal market by achieving genuine convergence of taxation’. France and Germany did not propose the wholesale scrapping of veto powers, but they presented a selective, although fairly long, list of problem areas (page 4).

They reiterated their common position on a broader use of a qualified majority vote for the tax issues directly related to the internal market, such as for the elimination of direct obstacles to the free movement of goods, persons, services or capital and, in particular, the prevention of situations involving discrimination, double taxation or double remission, for certain provisions for the harmonisation of turnover taxes and excise duties and cooperation between tax authorities, for combating fraud and tax evasion and for elimination of harmful tax competition.

Joschka Fischer and Dominique de Villepin added that it seems necessary to finalize the internal market, i.e. to limit existing divergences between taxation in the member states and to eliminate harmful tax regimes. In addition, the concluded, the most pragmatic and the most efficient medium-term approach to the creation of a single Europe is to fix a policy convergence objective focusing efforts on a number of key tax issues.

***

Through Peter Hain, Lena Hjelm-Wallen and fourteen others, the opposing view was tabled. The contribution (CONV 782/03) recognised that there could be a case for appropriate and effective European Union action in the area of administrative cooperation and in the area of tax fraud. However, measures in these areas must be decided by unanimity (page 1).

The opposing group (of member states) was ready to accept the first paragraph of the then Article III.59 of the Praesidium’s proposal, but suggested the deletion of paragraph 2 and of Article III.60.

***

The compromise or consensus view of the European Convention (above), in essence, added the words ‘and to avoid distortion of competition’ to the grounds for legislation in Article 93 TEC, in what became Article III-62(1) of the draft Constitution concerning indirect taxation.

The new Article III-62(2) incorporated something of the French and German proposal in a novel two stage procedure. First, the Council would rule by unanimity that a legislative proposal related to administrative cooperation or to combating tax fraud and tax evasion. After that, the Council could act, notwithstanding paragraph 1, by a qualified majority when adopting the European law or framework law adopting these measures.

Certain aspects of company taxation were addressed in the following Article. The new Article III-63 proposed a similar procedure for measures on company taxation relating to administrative cooperation or combating tax fraud and tax evasion. The first finding had to be unanimous, but then the measures could be decided by qualified majority, provided that they are necessary for the functioning of the internal market and to avoid distortion of competition.

***

Étienne de Poncins commented on the forces for QMV and the meagre results of the European Convention in ‘Vers une Constitution européenne’ (Éditions 10/18, 2003 ; pages 286–287):

« Commentaire : l’article 62 a été longuement débattu par la Convention. Une large majorité a plaidé pour l’application de la majorité à l’ensemble de l’article III-62. La Commission a notamment fait valoir que l’absence de règles minimales conduisait à une concurrence déloyale entre États membres en matière fiscale. De nombreux Conventionnels ont rappelé que l’unanimité conduisait à des accords minimaux à l’issue de débats et de procédures particulièrement longs se poursuivant sur de nombreuses années comme pour les directives TVA.

Aucune avancé n’a cependant été possible, les Britanniques, les Suédois et les Irlandais notamment ayant fait du statu quo un point majeur de leur position. Les tentatives et propositions de compromis pour élargir le champ d’application de la majorité qualifiée ont toutes été repoussées. À noter enfin au paragraphe 2 les mots « évasion fiscale illégale » et la procédure suivie, l’appréciation que la matière couverte entre dans le champ visé au paragraphe 2 se faisant à l’unanimité. »

***

Here are a few views on the results of the European Convention, ahead of the intergovernmental confrence (IGC 2003/2004), which led to the Constitutional Treaty.

United Kingdom

Prime Minister Tony Blair set out the UK position on the draft Constitution in the foreword to ‘A Constitutional Treaty for the EU – The British Approach to the European Union Intergovernmental Confrence 2003’ (Command Paper 5934, September), after welcoming the result (page 3):

“But the text is not perfect. Like many other Member States, there are some points in the Convention text which we will want to examine in more detail. And we could only accept a final text that made it clear that issues like tax, defence and foreign policy remain the province of the nation State.”

Point 66 on page 32 presented the view of the United Kingdom government on unanimity:

“66. But we will insist that unanimity remain for Treaty change; and in other areas of vital national interest such as tax, social security, defence, key areas of criminal procedural law and the system of own resources (the EU’s revenue-raising mechanism). Unanimity must remain the general rule for CFSP, as proposed in the final Convention text.”

***

Sweden

The government of Sweden stated that the Convention’s proposal is a good basis for the intergovernmental conference. In ‘Regeringens skrivelse 2003/04:13 Europeiska konventet om EU:s framtid’ (2 October 2003) the Swedish government added as an important point of departure that future decisions concerning taxes, defence policy and large areas of foreign policy are to be taken unanimously (page 7):

”En viktig utgångspunkt är att enhällighet i beslutsfattandet i rådet även i framtiden bör gälla beslut som rör skatter, försvarspolitik och stora delar av utrikespolitiken.”

The government later repeated the standpoint on levels of taxation, although it noted that the national tax authority (Riksskatteverket) favoured some flexibility concerning unanimity.

***

Finland

In ‘Valtioneuvoston selonteko eduskunnalle konventin tuloksista ja valmistautumisesta hallitusten väliseen konferenssiin’ (VNS 2/2003 vp), the Finnish government stated that the national participants in the Convention had proposed a move to qualified majority voting on issues regarding environment and energy taxes. The government noted that a substantial number of the delegates would have been ready to progress towards QMV in a limited way, but some member states had been totally opposed. The government found the end result acceptable (page 67):

” Sisämarkkinaluvussa on myös veroja ja maksuja koskeva jakso. Verotuksen osalta keskeisin kysymys konventissa oli siirtyminen määräenemmistöpäätöksentekoon. Suuri osa konventin jäsenistä olisi ollut valmis etenemään tässä rajatusti, esimerkiksi ympäristöverotuksen alalla, mutta muutamille jäsenvaltioille yksimielisyyden säilyttäminen verotuksessa oli täysin ehdoton vaatimus. Määräenemmistöpäätöksentekoa voidaan soveltaa ainoastaan hyväksyttäessä eurooppalakeja tai -puitelakeja jotka koskevat veronkiertoa ja veropetoksia koskevia hallinnollisia to imia. Suomen edustajat konventissa esittivät, että ympäristö- ja energiaverotuksen alalla tulisi siirtyä määräenemmistöpäätöksentekoon ministerineuvostossa.

Valtioneuvosto voi hyväksyä ehdotetut muutokset”.

***

IGC 2004

The intergovernmental conference 2003 failed, so it is more natural to speak about the IGC 2004. The Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe was negotiated under Irish stewardship.

In essence, the Constitutional Treaty retained Article III-62(1) of the draft Constitution, but the second paragraph was deleted. Article III-171 closed the needle’s eye to QWV regarding TVA and other indirect taxes.

The IGC 2004 deleted Article III-63 on limited recourse to QWV regarding certain aspects of company tax, where the Council of Ministers, acting unanimously on a proposal from the Commission, could have found that measures on company taxation related to administrative cooperation or combating tax fraud and tax evasion, and it then could have adopted, by a qualified majority, a European law or framework law laying down these measures, provided that they were necessary for the functioning of the internal market and to avoid distortion of competition.

This left Article III-173 to cater to the needs of approximation (harmonisation) of fiscal provisions and rules relating to the free movement of persons or to those relating to the rights and interests of employed persons. These measures, including direct taxation such as company taxes, were subject to unanimous decisions by the Council.

Article III-171 Constitution

A European law or framework law of the Council shall establish measures for the harmonisation of legislation concerning turnover taxes, excise duties and other forms of indirect taxation provided that such harmonisation is necessary to ensure the establishment and the functioning of the internal market and to avoid distortion of competition. The Council shall act unanimously after consulting the European Parliament and the Economic and Social Committee.

Article III-173 Constitution

Without prejudice to Article III-172, a European framework law of the Council shall establish measures for the approximation of such laws, regulations or administrative provisions of the Member States as directly affect the establishment or functioning of the internal market. The Council shall act unanimously after consulting the European Parliament and the Economic and Social Committee.

***

Almost a clean sweep for the no or unanimity camp, one could say. The preservation of the words ‘and to avoid distortion of competition’, in what was to become Article 113 TFEU (ex Article 93 TEC) on indirect taxes, may look like a poor consolation prize for the supporters of change.

Perhaps this background picture goes some way towards putting the Coughlan furore into perspective.

Next time, I am going to take ‘legally accurate’ with fourscore and seven pinches of salt, if I come across opinions from that quarter.


Ralf Grahn

Saturday, 7 June 2008

EU TFEU: Tax harmonisation I

What does the EU Treaty of Lisbon say about harmonisation of tax law? This post looks at the various stages of the treaty reform process and it refers to a sample of the best available general descriptions of the amending treaties.

After this factual exploration, a second post will take a closer look at what to some seem to be unclear points. At the same time, we will take a peek at some wider issues of tax harmonisation, brought to (relative) light during the long reform process.


***

Article 113 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) is found in the consolidated version of the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, published in the Official Journal of the European Union, OJ 9.5.2008 C 115/94:

Part Three ‘Union policies and internal actions’

Title VII Common rules on competition, taxation and approximation of laws

Chapter 2 Tax provisions

Article 113 TFEU
(ex Article 93 TEC)

The Council shall, acting unanimously in accordance with a special legislative procedure and after consulting the European Parliament and the Economic and Social Committee, adopt provisions for the harmonisation of legislation concerning turnover taxes, excise duties and other forms of indirect taxation to the extent that such harmonisation is necessary to ensure the establishment and the functioning of the internal market and to avoid distortion of competition.

***

In Article 2, point 79 of the Treaty of Lisbon (ToL) the IGC 2007 amended Article 93 of the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC). See OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/69, which says:

TAX PROVISIONS

79) At the end of Article 93, the words ‘within the time limit laid down in Article 14’ shall be
replaced by ‘and to avoid distortion of competition.’.

***

The TFEU table of equivalences tells us that Article 93 TEC first became Article 93 TFEU (ToL) in the original Treaty of Lisbon, but later renumbered Article 113 TFEU in the consolidated version (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/211).

***

The current Article 93 of the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC) is found under Title VI ‘Common rules on competition, taxation and approximation of laws’, Chapter 2 ‘Tax provisions’, in the latest consolidated version of the treaties in force (OJ 29.12.2006 C 321 E/79).

When we compare the current Article 93 TEC with the proposed Article 113 TFEU, we notice two specific amendments, which follow directly from the Treaty of Lisbon (above).

The first specific amendment: the disappearance of the words ‘within the time limit laid down in Article 14’, redundant because it refers to the progressive establishment of the internal market by 31 December 1992.

The second specific Lisbon Treaty amendment to the current TEC is the addition of the words ‘and to avoid distortion of competition’ in the liberated slot at the end of the sentence.

The third difference between the TFEU and the TEC follows from the general choices of terminology for the Lisbon Treaty. Horizontal amendment 3 says that in a number of Articles, among these Article 93 TEC, the words ‘acting unanimously on a proposal from the Commission’ shall be replaced by ‘acting unanimously in accordance with a special legislative procedure’ (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/42).

These are things we can keep in mind, when we look at the wording of Article 93 TEC, currently in force:

Article 93 TEC

The Council shall, acting unanimously on a proposal from the Commission and after consulting the European Parliament and the Economic and Social Committee, adopt provisions for the harmonisation of legislation concerning turnover taxes, excise duties and other forms of indirect taxation to the extent that such harmonisation is necessary to ensure the establishment and the functioning of the internal market within the time limit laid down in Article 14.

***

We have now seen the small differences between Article 93 TEC in force and Article 113 TFUE .

For the sake of systematic comparison, we look at the provisions on tax harmonisation during the intervening treaty reform stages.

First, we turn to the European Convention, the closest thing to a constituent assembly EU citizens have had. The provisions on tax legislation are located in Part III ‘The policies and functioning of the Union’, Title III ‘Internal policies and action’, Chapter I ‘Internal market’, Section 6 ‘Fiscal provisions’.

There are two Articles, III-62 and III-63, of relevance in the draft Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe. For now, let the contents speak for themselves (OJ 18.7.2003 C 169/38):

Article III-62 Draft Constitution

1. A European law or framework law of the Council of Ministers shall lay down measures for the harmonisation of legislation concerning turnover taxes, excise duties and other forms of indirect taxation provided that such harmonisation is necessary for the functioning of the internal market and to avoid distortion of competition. The Council of Ministers shall act unanimously after consulting the European Parliament and the Economic and Social Committee.

2. Where the Council of Ministers, acting unanimously on a proposal from the Commission, finds that the measures referred to in paragraph 1 relate to administrative cooperation or to combating tax fraud and tax evasion, it shall act, notwithstanding paragraph 1, by a qualified majority when adopting the European law or framework law adopting these measures.


Article III-63 Draft Constitution

Where the Council of Ministers, acting unanimously on a proposal from the Commission, finds that measures on company taxation relate to administrative cooperation or combating tax fraud and tax evasion, it shall adopt, by a qualified majority, a European law or framework law laying down these measures, provided that they are necessary for the functioning of the internal market and to avoid distortion of competition.

That law or framework law shall be adopted after consultation of the European Parliament and the Economic and Social Committee.

***

In the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe the tax provisions were located in Part III ‘The policies and functioning of the Union’, Title III ‘Internal policies and action’, Chapter I ‘Internal market’, Section 6 ‘Fiscal provisions’.

As compared with the draft Constitution, the IGC 2004 shortened the end of the section with fiscal provisions by leaving just an Article III-171 at the end (OJ 16.12.2004 C 310/73):

Article III-171 Constitution

A European law or framework law of the Council shall establish measures for the harmonisation of legislation concerning turnover taxes, excise duties and other forms of indirect taxation provided that such harmonisation is necessary to ensure the establishment and the functioning of the internal market and to avoid distortion of competition. The Council shall act unanimously after consulting the European Parliament and the Economic and Social Committee.

***

This far, we have been able to see real aspirations to change the provisions on the harmonisation of taxes during the European Convention and the return to the narrower view from the Constitutional Treaty onwards.

This opens up an interesting second level of inquiry, but let us first follow our standard mode of operation, which is based upon a sample of more or less official documents focused on the similarities and differences between the existing treaties and the proposed Lisbon Treaty.

What has been said about Article 113 TFEU, with regard to the current Article 93 TEC?


United Kingdom

Professor Steve Peers covered the Treaty of Lisbon in a number of Statewatch Analyses. ‘EU Reform Treaty Analysis no. 3.3: Revised text of Part Three, Titles I to VI of the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC): Internal Market and competition’ (Version 2, 23 October 2007) includes the current Title VI Common rules on competition, taxation and approximation of laws.

Peers highlighted the changes to Article 93 TEC and TFEU (ToL), to be renumbered Article 113 TFEU in the consolidated version, without comment (page 29).

The analysis 3.3 and other useful Statewatch analyses are available through:

http://www.statewatch.org/euconstitution.htm


***

The Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) offers a convenient source of brief annotations on Lisbon Treaty amendments in ‘A comparative table of the current EC and EU treaties as amended by the Treaty of Lisbon’ (Command Paper 7311, published 21 January 2008). It offers the following comment on Article 113 TFEU, Article 93 TFEU (ToL) in the original Lisbon Treaty (page 12):

“Draws on Article 93 TEC. The explicit reference to distortion of competition is new, and the reference to the 1992 deadline is removed.”

The FCO comparative table is available at:

http://www.official-documents.gov.uk/document/cm73/7311/7311.asp

***

The UK House of Commons Library Research Paper 07/86 ‘The Treaty of Lisbon: amendments to the Treaty establishing the European Community’ (published 6 December 2007) discussed taxation on page 60 (although the heading ‘2. Taxation’ continued with (tax) harmonisation from page 60 to 61).

Here is the introductory text on Articles 90 to 93 TFEU (ToL), later renumbered Articles 110 to 113 TFEU in the consolidated version:

“Articles 90–93 (Constitution Articles III-170 – III-171) concern taxation. They incorporate the existing tax provisions set out in Articles 90 to 93 TEC. There is a considerable body of European law concerning the harmonisation across Member States of indirect taxes: that is, VAT and excise duties on alcoholic drinks, hydrocarbon oils and tobacco products. At present the Treaty base for this legislation is Article 93 TEC, which states:

The Council shall, acting unanimously on a proposal from the Commission and after consulting the European Parliament and the Economic and Social Committee, adopt provisions for the harmonisation of legislation concerning turnover taxes, excise duties and other forms of indirect taxation to the extent that such harmonisation is necessary to ensure the establishment and the functioning of the internal market within the time limit laid down in Article 14. (122)

The new Article 93 (Constitution Article III-171) has one substantive change. Legislation for harmonising indirect taxes may be adopted (emphasis added) “provided that such harmonisation is necessary for the establishment or the functioning of the internal market and to avoid distortion of competition.” It remains the case that any such legislation must be agreed by the Council acting unanimously.”

---
Footnote 122 stated: Article 14 refers to the establishment of the single European market on 1 January 1993.
---

The Library Research Paper 07/86 is available at:

http://www.parliament.uk/commons/lib/research/rp2007/rp07-086.pdf

***

The House of Lords European Union Committee report ‘The Treaty of Lisbon: an impact assessment, Volume I: Report’ (HL Paper 62-I, published 13 March 2008) is a valuable resource on the Treaty of Lisbon, but I found no reference to Article 113 TFEU (Article 93 TEC and ToL).

The report is accessible at:

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200708/ldselect/ldeucom/62/62.pdf

In case anyone wants to dig deeper, taxes, unanimity and harmonisation are discussed ‘passim’ in Volume II of the report ‘Evidence’.


***

Sweden

The consultation paper ’Lissabonfördraget’ is still valuable as a description of the Lisbon Treaty amendments for anyone interested, and it is available at:

http://www.regeringen.se/content/1/c6/09/49/81/107aa077.pdf

The Swedish government’s draft ratification bill ‘Lagrådsremiss – Lissabonfördraget’, was published 29 May 2008 and sent to the Council on Legislation (Lagrådet) for an expert opinion. It has since become my standard reference.

The draft deals with the EU’s internal policy areas in Chapter 23 ‘Unionens interna åtgärder’, and section 23.1 presents the internal market (Inre marknaden), on pages 175 to 181.

Tax provisions are dealt with on page 179 in a section called ‘Bestämmelser om skatter’. The government of Sweden remarks on the essentially unchanged nature of the tax provisions in general and it then explains the clarification of Article 93 TFEU (ToL), with the added words presented within quotation marks, but with no comment other than the description as a ‘clarification’ (förtydligande):

”Bestämmelser om skatter

Bestämmelserna om skatter är i princip oförändrade. I artikel 93 i EUF-fördraget om harmonisering av lagstiftningen om omsättningsskatter, punktskatter och andra indirekta skatter eller avgifter på den inre marknaden görs ett förtydligande. Som nödvändig förutsättning för att harmonisera lagstiftning anges som tillägg “att undvika snedvridning av konkurrensen”. Rådet ska, i likhet med nu gällande EG-fördrag, fatta beslut med enhällighet i skattefrågor efter att ha hört Europaparlamentet. (Se artikel 2.79 i Lissabonfördraget.)”

The draft bill ‘Lagrådsremiss – Lissabonfördraget’ can be downloaded through:

http://www.regeringen.se/sb/d/5676/a/106277

***

Finland

The Finnish ratification bill, ‘Hallituksen esitys Eduskunnalle Euroopan unionista tehdyn sopimuksen ja Euroopan yhteisön perustamissopimuksen muuttamisesta tehdyn Lissabonin sopimuksen hyväksymisestä ja laiksi sen lainsäädännön alaan kuuluvien määräysten voimaansaattamisesta’ (HE 23/2008 vp), under the heading Provisions on taxes and charges (Veroja ja maksuja koskevat määräykset), offers a statement on Article 93 TFEU (ToL), the future Article 113 TFEU. The essential concordance of this provision on indirect taxation with the current TEC and the Constitutional Treaty is noted. Deleting the deadline and the added requirement to avoid distortion of competition are presented as the only changes (page 208):

”93 artikla (uusi 113 artikla), joka koskee neuvoston toimivaltaa antaa säännöksiä välillistä verotusta koskevan lainsäädännön yhdenmukaistamiseksi, vastaa SEY 93 artiklaa ja perustuslakisopimuksen III-171 artiklaa. Ainoina muutoksina nykyiseen verrattuna on SEY 14 artiklan mukaisen määräajan poistaminen ja se, että lauseeseen, jonka mukaan säännöksiä annetaan tarvittaessa sisämarkkinoiden toimivuuden takaamiseksi, lisätään lisäedellytykseksi myös kilpailun vääristymisen välttäminen.”

The Finnish ratification bill is available at:

http://www.finlex.fi/fi/esitykset/he/2008/20080023.pdf


The Swedish language version of the ratification bill ‘Regeringens proposition till Riksdagen med förslag om godkännande av Lissabonfördraget om ändring av fördraget om Europeiska unionen och fördraget om upprättandet av Europeiska gemenskapen och till lag om sättande i kraft av de bestämmelser i fördraget som hör till området för lagstiftningen’ (RP 23/2008 rd), makes the same remarks under ’Bestämmelser om skatter och avgifter’ on Article 93 TFEU (ToL), the future Article 113 TFEU, on page 211:

”Artikel 93 (blivande artikel 113), som gäller rådets befogenheter att anta bestämmelser om harmonisering av lagstiftningen om indirekta skatter, motsvarar artikel 93 i EGfördraget och artikel III-171 i det konstitutionella fördraget. Den enda ändringen jämfört med nuläget är att tidsfristen enligt artikel 14 i EG-fördraget stryks och att till satsen, enligt vilken bestämmelser vid behov kan antas för att säkerställa att den inre marknaden fungerar, fogas som tilläggsvillkor även för att undvika snedvridning av konkurrensen.”

The ratification bill in Swedish can be accessed at:

http://www.finlex.fi/sv/esitykset/he/2008/20080023.pdf

My comment: At this stage, take notice of two things. First, Article 113 TFEU has been charaterised as a provision on different forms of indirect (not direct) taxation. The added words ‘and to avoid distortion of competition’ have been described as a clarification or as an added requirement.

But I have understood that Article 113 TFEU has been a fountain for much debate (more or less factual). In a wider context, the proposals of the European Convention and their fate during the IGC 2004 are intriguing. Both seem to call for a second posting on the subject of EU tax harmonisation.


Ralf Grahn

Friday, 6 June 2008

EU TFEU: Prohibited remissions, repayments and countervailing charges

According to Article 112 of the EU Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), the Council could, for a limited period, approve remissions and repayments in respect of exports to other member states or countervailing charges in respect of imports from member states. Otherwise they are prohibited.

As far as I know, exceptions concerning these forms of direct taxes on the basis of current Article 92 of the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC) have never been granted, so the prohibition has stood unassailed.

***

Article 112 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) is found in the consolidated version of the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, published in the Official Journal of the European Union, OJ 9.5.2008 C 115/93:

Part Three ‘Union policies and internal actions’

Title VII Common rules on competition, taxation and approximation of laws

Chapter 2 Tax provisions

Article 112 TFEU
(ex Article 92 TEC)

In the case of charges other than turnover taxes, excise duties and other forms of indirect taxation, remissions and repayments in respect of exports to other Member States may not be granted and countervailing charges in respect of imports from Member States may not be imposed unless the measures contemplated have been previously approved for a limited period by the Council on a proposal from the Commission.

***

In Article 2, point 78 of the Treaty of Lisbon (ToL) the IGC 2007 amended Article 88 of the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC) and in point 79 it dealt with Article 93 TEC. This means that no specific amendments were made to Article 92 TEC. Cf. OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/69.

***

The TFEU table of equivalences tells us that Article 92 TEC first became Article 92 TFEU (ToL) in the original Treaty of Lisbon, but later renumbered Article 112 TFEU in the consolidated version (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/211).

***

The current Article 92 of the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC) is found under Title VI ‘Common rules on competition, taxation and approximation of laws’, Chapter 2 ‘Tax provisions’, in the latest consolidated version of the treaties in force (OJ 29.12.2006 C 321 E/79).

Although thee was no specific amendment, we notice the disappearance of the words ‘acting by a qualified majority’ from Article 112 TFEU according to horizontal amendment 2(d) of Article 2 of the Treaty of Lisbon (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/41), when we look at the wording of Article 92 TEC:

Article 92 TEC

In the case of charges other than turnover taxes, excise duties and other forms of indirect taxation, remissions and repayments in respect of exports to other Member States may not be granted and countervailing charges in respect of imports from Member States may not be imposed unless the measures contemplated have been previously approved for a limited period by the Council acting by a qualified majority on a proposal from the Commission.

***

We have now seen that 92 TEC in force and 112 TFUE are the same, except for one horizontal amendment. .

Still, for the sake of systematic comparison, we look at the arcana of the Article during the intervening treaty reform stages.

First, we turn to the European Convention, the closest thing to a constituent assembly EU citizens have had. The Article in question is located in Part III ‘The policies and functioning of the Union’, Title III ‘Internal policies and action’, Chapter I ‘Internal market’, Section 6 ‘Fiscal provisions’.

Article III-61 of the draft Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe differed from Article 92 TEC slightly, without altering the substance. The word ‘measures’ was replaced by ‘provisions’, the act of approval was categorised as ‘by a European decision’ and the draft Constitution consistently used ‘Council of Ministers’ instead of ‘Council’ (OJ 18.7.2003 C 169/38):

Article III-61 Draft Constitution

In the case of charges other than turnover taxes, excise duties and other forms of indirect taxation, remissions and repayments in respect of exports to other Member States may not be granted and countervailing charges in respect of imports from Member States may not be imposed unless the provisions contemplated have been previously approved for a limited period by a European decision adopted by the Council of Ministers on a proposal from the Commission.

***

In the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe the tax provisions were located in Part III ‘The policies and functioning of the Union’, Title III ‘Internal policies and action’, Chapter I ‘Internal market’, Section 6 ‘Fiscal provisions’.

The IGC 2004 created Article III-170 with three paragraphs by housing Articles III-59, III-60 and III-61 of the draft Constitution under the same roof (OJ 16.12.2004 C 310/73. Cf. OJ 18.7.2003 C 169/37–38).

Article III-170(3) of the Constitutional Treaty was the same as Article III-61 of the draft Constitution, except for the ‘Council’ reappearing in shorter form:

Article III-170 Constitution

1. No Member State shall impose, directly or indirectly, on the products of other Member States any internal taxation of any kind in excess of that imposed directly or indirectly on similar domestic products.

Furthermore, no Member State shall impose on the products of other Member States any internal taxation of such a nature as to afford indirect protection to other products.

2. Where products are exported by a Member State to the territory of another Member State, any repayment of internal taxation shall not exceed the internal taxation imposed on them whether directly or indirectly.

3. In the case of charges other than turnover taxes, excise duties and other forms of indirect taxation, remissions and repayments in respect of exports to other Member States may not be granted and countervailing charges in respect of imports from Member States may not be imposed unless the provisions contemplated have been previously approved for a limited period by a European decision adopted by the Council on a proposal from the Commission.

***

What has anyone been able to say about Article 112 TFEU, with the wording practically unchanged from the current Article 92 TEC?


United Kingdom

Professor Steve Peers covered the Treaty of Lisbon in a number of Statewatch Analyses. ‘EU Reform Treaty Analysis no. 3.3: Revised text of Part Three, Titles I to VI of the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC): Internal Market and competition’ (Version 2, 23 October 2007) includes the current Title VI Common rules on competition, taxation and approximation of laws.

Peers indicated the changing numbering of Article 92 TEC and TFEU (ToL), to be renumbered Article 112 TFEU in the consolidated version, without comment (page 29).

The analysis 3.3 and other useful Statewatch analyses are available through:

http://www.statewatch.org/euconstitution.htm


***

The Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) offers a convenient source of brief annotations on Lisbon Treaty amendments in ‘A comparative table of the current EC and EU treaties as amended by the Treaty of Lisbon’ (Command Paper 7311, published 21 January 2008). It offers the following comment on Article 112 TFEU, Article 92 TFEU (ToL) in the original Lisbon Treaty (page 12):

“Unchanged from Article 92 TEC.”

The FCO comparative table is available at:

http://www.official-documents.gov.uk/document/cm73/7311/7311.asp

***

The UK House of Commons Library Research Paper 07/86 ‘The Treaty of Lisbon: amendments to the Treaty establishing the European Community’ (published 6 December 2007) discussed taxation on page 60 (although the heading ‘2. Taxation’ continued with (tax) harmonisation from page 60 to 61).

Having found at least one general comment in English, we gratefully reproduce the text on Articles 90 to 93 TFEU (ToL), later renumbered Articles 110 to 113 TFEU in the consolidated version:

“Articles 90–93 (Constitution Articles III-170 – III-171) concern taxation. They incorporate the existing tax provisions set out in Articles 90 to 93 TEC. There is a considerable body of European law concerning the harmonisation across Member States of indirect taxes: that is, VAT and excise duties on alcoholic drinks, hydrocarbon oils and tobacco products. At present the Treaty base for this legislation is Article 93 TEC, which states:

The Council shall, acting unanimously on a proposal from the Commission and after consulting the European Parliament and the Economic and Social Committee, adopt provisions for the harmonisation of legislation concerning turnover taxes, excise duties and other forms of indirect taxation to the extent that such harmonisation is necessary to ensure the establishment and the functioning of the internal market within the time limit laid down in Article 14. (122)

The new Article 93 (Constitution Article III-171) has one substantive change. Legislation for harmonising indirect taxes may be adopted (emphasis added) “provided that such harmonisation is necessary for the establishment or the functioning of the internal market and to avoid distortion of competition.” It remains the case that any such legislation must be agreed by the Council acting unanimously.”

---
Footnote 122 stated: Article 14 refers to the establishment of the single European market on 1 January 1993.
---

The Library Research Paper 07/86 is available at:

http://www.parliament.uk/commons/lib/research/rp2007/rp07-086.pdf

***

The House of Lords European Union Committee report ‘The Treaty of Lisbon: an impact assessment, Volume I: Report’ (HL Paper 62-I, published 13 March 2008) is a valuable resource on the Treaty of Lisbon, but I found no reference to Article 112 TFEU (Article 92 TEC and ToL).

The report is accessible at:

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200708/ldselect/ldeucom/62/62.pdf

In case anyone wants to dig deeper, taxes, unanimity and harmonisation are discussed ‘passim’ in Volume II of the report ‘Evidence’.


***

Sweden

The consultation paper ’Lissabonfördraget’ is still valuable as a description of the Lisbon Treaty amendments, and it is available at:

http://www.regeringen.se/content/1/c6/09/49/81/107aa077.pdf

The Swedish government’s draft ratification bill ‘Lagrådsremiss – Lissabonfördraget’, was published 29 May 2008 and sent to the Council on Legislation (Lagrådet) for an expert opinion. The draft deals with the EU’s internal policy areas in Chapter 23 ‘Unionens interna åtgärder’, and section 23.1 presents the internal market (Inre marknaden), on pages 175 to 181.

Tax provisions are dealt with on page 179 in a section called ‘Bestämmelser om skatter’. The government of Sweden remarks on the essentially unchanged nature of the tax provisions in general and it then explains the clarification of Article 93 TFEU (ToL):

”Bestämmelser om skatter

Bestämmelserna om skatter är i princip oförändrade. I artikel 93 i EUF-fördraget om harmonisering av lagstiftningen om omsättningsskatter, punktskatter och andra indirekta skatter eller avgifter på den inre marknaden görs ett förtydligande. Som nödvändig förutsättning för att harmonisera lagstiftning anges som tillägg “att undvika snedvridning av konkurrensen”. Rådet ska, i likhet med nu gällande EG-fördrag, fatta beslut med enhällighet i skattefrågor efter att ha hört Europaparlamentet. (Se artikel 2.79 i Lissabonfördraget.)”

The draft bill ‘Lagrådsremiss – Lissabonfördraget’ can be downloaded through:

http://www.regeringen.se/sb/d/5676/a/106277

***

Finland

The Finnish ratification bill, ‘Hallituksen esitys Eduskunnalle Euroopan unionista tehdyn sopimuksen ja Euroopan yhteisön perustamissopimuksen muuttamisesta tehdyn Lissabonin sopimuksen hyväksymisestä ja laiksi sen lainsäädännön alaan kuuluvien määräysten voimaansaattamisesta’ (HE 23/2008 vp), under the heading Provisions on taxes and charges (Veroja ja maksuja koskevat määräykset), offers a brief statement on the unchanged nature of Article 92 TFEU (ToL), renumbered Article 112 TFEU (page 208):

”92 artiklaa (uusi 112 artikla), jonka mukaan välillisistä veroista ei vapauteta tai niitä ei palauteta jäsenvaltiosta toiseen tapahtuvan maastaviennin yhteydessä ilman neuvoston määräaikaisia toimenpiteitä koskevaa päätöstä, ei muuteta.”

The Finnish ratification bill is available at:

http://www.finlex.fi/fi/esitykset/he/2008/20080023.pdf


The Swedish language version of the ratification bill ‘Regeringens proposition till Riksdagen med förslag om godkännande av Lissabonfördraget om ändring av fördraget om Europeiska unionen och fördraget om upprättandet av Europeiska gemenskapen och till lag om sättande i kraft av de bestämmelser i fördraget som hör till området för lagstiftningen’ (RP 23/2008 rd), makes the same remark under ’Bestämmelser om skatter och avgifter’ on the unchanged nature of Article 92 TFEU (ToL), the future Article 112 TFEU, on page 211:

”Artikel 92 (blivande artikel 112), enligt vilken befrielse och återbetalning i fråga om indirekta skatter vid export till andra medlemsstater inte får medges utan att rådet beslutar om åtgärder för en begränsad tid, ändras inte.”

The ratification bill in Swedish can be accessed at:

http://www.finlex.fi/sv/esitykset/he/2008/20080023.pdf

My comment: Here the drafters of the Finnish government bill seem to have made a mistake, missing the meaning of ‘other than’ the forms of indirect taxation mentioned, which translates into charges of a direct, not an indirect, nature.


Ralf Grahn

Thursday, 5 June 2008

EU TFEU: Prohibited tax subsidies on exported goods

Article 110 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) prohibits tax discrimination against products from other member states, and Article 111 offers a mirror view in that it forbids direct or indirect tax subsidies on products exported to another member state.

These rules apply within the internal market, but not in relation to third countries.

We look at the prohibition on tax subsidies for exports in the light of the EU Treaty of Lisbon.

***

Article 111 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) is found in the consolidated version of the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, published in the Official Journal of the European Union, OJ 9.5.2008 C 115/93:

Part Three ‘Union policies and internal actions’

Title VII Common rules on competition, taxation and approximation of laws

Chapter 2 Tax provisions

Article 111 TFEU
(ex Article 91 TEC)

Where products are exported to the territory of any Member State, any repayment of internal taxation shall not exceed the internal taxation imposed on them whether directly or indirectly.

***

In Article 2, point 78 of the Treaty of Lisbon (ToL) the IGC 2007 amended Article 88 of the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC) and in point 79 it dealt with Article 93 TEC. This means that no specific amendments were made to Article 91 TEC. Cf. OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/69.

***

The TFEU table of equivalences tells us that Article 91 TEC first became Article 91 TFEU (ToL) in the original Treaty of Lisbon, but later renumbered Article 111 TFEU in the consolidated version (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/211).

***

The current Article 91 of the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC) is found under Title VI ‘Common rules on competition, taxation and approximation of laws’, Chapter 2 ‘Tax provisions’, in the latest consolidated version of the treaties in force (OJ 29.12.2006 C 321 E/79).

No specific amendment and no horizontal amendment; the wording of Article 91 TEC is exactly the same as Article 111 TFEU.

***

We have now seen that 91 TEC in force and 111 TFUE are exactly the same.

Still, for the sake of systematic comparison, we look at the arcana of the Article during the intervening treaty reform stages.

First, we turn to the European Convention, the closest thing to a constituent assembly EU citizens have had. The Article in question is located in Part III ‘The policies and functioning of the Union’, Title III ‘Internal policies and action’, Chapter I ‘Internal market’, Section 6 ‘Fiscal provisions’.

Article III-60 of the draft Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe reworded Article 91 TEC slightly, without altering the substance (OJ 18.7.2003 C 169/37):

Article III-60 Draft Constitution

Where products are exported by a Member State to the territory of another Member State, any repayment of internal taxation shall not exceed the internal taxation imposed on them whether directly or indirectly.

***

In the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe the tax provisions were located in Part III ‘The policies and functioning of the Union’, Title III ‘Internal policies and action’, Chapter I ‘Internal market’, Section 6 ‘Fiscal provisions’.

The IGC 2004 created Article III-170 with three paragraphs by housing Articles III-59, III-60 and III-61 of the draft Constitution under the same roof (OJ 16.12.2004 C 310/73. Cf. OJ 18.7.2003 C 169/37–38).

Article III-170(2) of the Constitutional Treaty was exactly the same as Article III-60 of the draft Constitution:

Article III-170 Constitution

1. No Member State shall impose, directly or indirectly, on the products of other Member States any internal taxation of any kind in excess of that imposed directly or indirectly on similar domestic products.

Furthermore, no Member State shall impose on the products of other Member States any internal taxation of such a nature as to afford indirect protection to other products.

2. Where products are exported by a Member State to the territory of another Member State, any repayment of internal taxation shall not exceed the internal taxation imposed on them whether directly or indirectly.

3. In the case of charges other than turnover taxes, excise duties and other forms of indirect taxation, remissions and repayments in respect of exports to other Member States may not be granted and countervailing charges in respect of imports from Member States may not be imposed unless the provisions contemplated have been previously approved for a limited period by a European decision adopted by the Council on a proposal from the Commission.

***

What has anyone been able to say about Article 111 TFEU, unchanged from the current Article 91 TEC?


United Kingdom

Professor Steve Peers covered the Treaty of Lisbon in a number of Statewatch Analyses. ‘EU Reform Treaty Analysis no. 3.3: Revised text of Part Three, Titles I to VI of the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC): Internal Market and competition’ (Version 2, 23 October 2007) includes the current Title VI Common rules on competition, taxation and approximation of laws.

Peers indicated the changing numbering of Article 91 TEC and TFEU (ToL), to be renumbered Article 111 TFEU in the consolidated version, without comment (page 28).

The analysis 3.3 and other useful Statewatch analyses are available through:

http://www.statewatch.org/euconstitution.htm


***

The Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) offers a convenient source of brief annotations on Lisbon Treaty amendments in ‘A comparative table of the current EC and EU treaties as amended by the Treaty of Lisbon’ (Command Paper 7311, published 21 January 2008). It offers the following comment on Article 111 TFEU, Article 91 TFEU (ToL) in the original Lisbon Treaty (page 12):

“Unchanged from Article 91 TEC.”

The FCO comparative table is available at:

http://www.official-documents.gov.uk/document/cm73/7311/7311.asp

***

The UK House of Commons Library Research Paper 07/86 ‘The Treaty of Lisbon: amendments to the Treaty establishing the European Community’ (published 6 December 2007) discussed taxation on page 60 (although the heading ‘2. Taxation’ continued with (tax) harmonisation from page 60 to 61).

Having found at least a general comment in English, we gratefully reproduce the text on Articles 90 to 93 TFEU (ToL), later renumbered Articles 110 to 113 TFEU in the consolidated version:

“Articles 90–93 (Constitution Articles III-170 – III-171) concern taxation. They incorporate the existing tax provisions set out in Articles 90 to 93 TEC. There is a considerable body of European law concerning the harmonisation across Member States of indirect taxes: that is, VAT and excise duties on alcoholic drinks, hydrocarbon oils and tobacco products. At present the Treaty base for this legislation is Article 93 TEC, which states:

The Council shall, acting unanimously on a proposal from the Commission and after consulting the European Parliament and the Economic and Social Committee, adopt provisions for the harmonisation of legislation concerning turnover taxes, excise duties and other forms of indirect taxation to the extent that such harmonisation is necessary to ensure the establishment and the functioning of the internal market within the time limit laid down in Article 14. (122)

The new Article 93 (Constitution Article III-171) has one substantive change. Legislation for harmonising indirect taxes may be adopted (emphasis added) “provided that such harmonisation is necessary for the establishment or the functioning of the internal market and to avoid distortion of competition.” It remains the case that any such legislation must be agreed by the Council acting unanimously.”

---
Footnote 122 stated: Article 14 refers to the establishment of the single European market on 1 January 1993.
---

The Library Research Paper 07/86 is available at:

http://www.parliament.uk/commons/lib/research/rp2007/rp07-086.pdf

***

The House of Lords European Union Committee report ‘The Treaty of Lisbon: an impact assessment, Volume I: Report’ (HL Paper 62-I, published 13 March 2008) is a valuable resource on the Treaty of Lisbon, but I found no reference to Article 111 TFEU (Article 91 TEC and ToL).

The report is accessible at:

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200708/ldselect/ldeucom/62/62.pdf

In case anyone wants to dig deeper, taxes, unanimity and harmonisation are discussed ‘passim’ in Volume II of the report ‘Evidence’.


***

Sweden

The consultation paper ’Lissabonfördraget’ is still valuable as a description of the Lisbon Treaty amendments, and it is available at:

http://www.regeringen.se/content/1/c6/09/49/81/107aa077.pdf

The Swedish government’s draft ratification bill ‘Lagrådsremiss – Lissabonfördraget’, was published 29 May 2008 and sent to the Council on Legislation (Lagrådet) for an expert opinion. The draft deals with the EU’s internal policy areas in Chapter 23 ‘Unionens interna åtgärder’, and section 23.1 presents the internal market (Inre marknaden), on pages 175 to 181.

Tax provisions are dealt with on page 179 in a section called ‘Bestämmelser om skatter’. The government of Sweden remarks on the essentially unchanged nature of the tax provisions in general and it then explains the clarification of Article 93 TFEU (ToL):

”Bestämmelser om skatter

Bestämmelserna om skatter är i princip oförändrade. I artikel 93 i EUF-fördraget om harmonisering av lagstiftningen om omsättningsskatter, punktskatter och andra indirekta skatter eller avgifter på den inre marknaden görs ett förtydligande. Som nödvändig förutsättning för att harmonisera lagstiftning anges som tillägg “att undvika snedvridning av konkurrensen”. Rådet ska, i likhet med nu gällande EG-fördrag, fatta beslut med enhällighet i skattefrågor efter att ha hört Europaparlamentet. (Se artikel 2.79 i Lissabonfördraget.)”

The draft bill ‘Lagrådsremiss – Lissabonfördraget’ can be downloaded through:

http://www.regeringen.se/sb/d/5676/a/106277

***

Finland

The Finnish ratification bill, ‘Hallituksen esitys Eduskunnalle Euroopan unionista tehdyn sopimuksen ja Euroopan yhteisön perustamissopimuksen muuttamisesta tehdyn Lissabonin sopimuksen hyväksymisestä ja laiksi sen lainsäädännön alaan kuuluvien määräysten voimaansaattamisesta’ (HE 23/2008 vp), under the heading Provisions on taxes and charges (Veroja ja maksuja koskevat määräykset), offers a brief statement on the unchanged nature of Article 91 TFEU (ToL), renumbered Article 111 TFEU (page 208):

”91 artiklaa (uusi 111 artikla), jonka mukaan tuotteita toisen jäsenvaltion alueelle vietäessä sisäisten maksujen palautus ei saa olla sisäisesti perittyjä maksuja suurempi, ei muuteta.”

The Finnish ratification bill is available at:

http://www.finlex.fi/fi/esitykset/he/2008/20080023.pdf


The Swedish language version of the ratification bill ‘Regeringens proposition till Riksdagen med förslag om godkännande av Lissabonfördraget om ändring av fördraget om Europeiska unionen och fördraget om upprättandet av Europeiska gemenskapen och till lag om sättande i kraft av de bestämmelser i fördraget som hör till området för lagstiftningen’ (RP 23/2008 rd), makes the same remark under ’Bestämmelser om skatter och avgifter’ on the unchanged nature of Article 91 TFEU (ToL), the future Article 111 TFEU, on page 211:

”Artikel 91 (blivande artikel 111), enligt vilken återbetalning av interna avgifter för varor som exporteras till någon annan medlemsstats territorium inte får ske med belopp som överstiger de interna avgifterna, ändras inte.”

The ratification bill in Swedish can be accessed at:

http://www.finlex.fi/sv/esitykset/he/2008/20080023.pdf



Ralf Grahn

Wednesday, 4 June 2008

EU TFEU: Tax provisions

The EU Treaty of Lisbon leaves the tax provisions (fiscal provisions) of the current Treaty establishing the European Community essentially unchanged.

Article 110 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union prohibits tax discrimination within the internal market and imposes a requirement of neutrality on the member states’ governments.


***

Article 110 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) is found in the consolidated version of the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, published in the Official Journal of the European Union, OJ 9.5.2008 C 115/93:

Part Three ‘Union policies and internal actions’

Title VII Common rules on competition, taxation and approximation of laws

Chapter 2 Tax provisions


Article 110 TFEU
(ex Article 90 TEC)

No Member State shall impose, directly or indirectly, on the products of other Member States any internal taxation of any kind in excess of that imposed directly or indirectly on similar domestic products.

Furthermore, no Member State shall impose on the products of other Member States any internal taxation of such a nature as to afford indirect protection to other products.

***

In Article 2, point 78 of the Treaty of Lisbon (ToL) the IGC 2007 amended Article 88 of the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC) and in point 79 it dealt with Article 93 TEC. This means that no specific amendments were made to Article 90 TEC. Cf. OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/69.

***

The TFEU table of equivalences tells us that Article 90 TEC first became Article 90 TFEU (ToL) in the original Treaty of Lisbon, but later renumbered Article 110 TFEU in the consolidated version (OJ 17.12.2007 C 306/211).

***

The current Article 90 of the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC) is found under Title VI ‘Common rules on competition, taxation and approximation of laws’, Chapter 2 ‘Tax provisions’, in the latest consolidated version of the treaties in force (OJ 29.12.2006 C 321 E/78).

No specific amendment and no horizontal amendment; the wording of Article 90 TEC is exactly the same as Article 110 TFEU.

***

We have now seen that 90 TEC in force and 110 TFUE are exactly the same.

Still, for the sake of systematic comparison, we look at the arcana of the Article during the intervening treaty reform stages.

First, we turn to the European Convention, the closest thing to a constituent assembly EU citizens have had. The Article in question is located in Part III ‘The policies and functioning of the Union’, Title III ‘Internal policies and action’, Chapter I ‘Internal market’, Section 6 ‘Fiscal provisions’.

Article III-59 of the draft Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe was exactly the same as Article 90 TEC (OJ 18.7.2003 C 169/37).

***

In the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe the tax provisions were located in Part III ‘The policies and functioning of the Union’, Title III ‘Internal policies and action’, Chapter I ‘Internal market’, Section 6 ‘Fiscal provisions’.

Even if the first paragraph of Article III-170 was the same as Article III-59 proposed by the European Convention, the IGC 2004 created an Article with three paragraphs by housing Articles III-60 and III-61 of the draft Constitution under the same roof (OJ 16.12.2004 C 310/73. Cf. OJ 18.7.2003 C 169/37–38):

Article III-170 Constitution

1. No Member State shall impose, directly or indirectly, on the products of other Member States any internal taxation of any kind in excess of that imposed directly or indirectly on similar domestic products.

Furthermore, no Member State shall impose on the products of other Member States any internal taxation of such a nature as to afford indirect protection to other products.

2. Where products are exported by a Member State to the territory of another Member State, any repayment of internal taxation shall not exceed the internal taxation imposed on them whether directly or indirectly.

3. In the case of charges other than turnover taxes, excise duties and other forms of indirect taxation, remissions and repayments in respect of exports to other Member States may not be granted and countervailing charges in respect of imports from Member States may not be imposed unless the provisions contemplated have been previously approved for a limited period by a European decision adopted by the Council on a proposal from the Commission.

***

What has anyone been able to say about the unchanged Article 110 TFEU?


United Kingdom

Professor Steve Peers covered the Treaty of Lisbon in a number of Statewatch Analyses. ‘EU Reform Treaty Analysis no. 3.3: Revised text of Part Three, Titles I to VI of the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC): Internal Market and competition’ (Version 2, 23 October 2007) includes the current Title VI Common rules on competition, taxation and approximation of laws.

Peers indicated the changing numbering of Article 90 TEC and TFEU (ToL), to be renumbered Article 110 TFEU in the consolidated version, without comment (page 28).

The analysis 3.3 and other useful Statewatch analyses are available through:

http://www.statewatch.org/euconstitution.htm


***

The Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) offers a convenient source of brief annotations on Lisbon Treaty amendments in ‘A comparative table of the current EC and EU treaties as amended by the Treaty of Lisbon’ (Command Paper 7311, published 21 January 2008). It offers the following comment on Article 110 TFEU, Article 90 TFEU (ToL) in the original Lisbon Treaty (page 12):

“Unchanged from Article 90 TEC.”

The FCO comparative table is available at:

http://www.official-documents.gov.uk/document/cm73/7311/7311.asp

***

The UK House of Commons Library Research Paper 07/86 ‘The Treaty of Lisbon: amendments to the Treaty establishing the European Community’ (published 6 December 2007) discussed taxation on page 60 (although the heading ‘2. Taxation’ continued with (tax) harmonisation from page 60 to 61).

Because this blog post is an introduction to the tax provisions, we reproduce the comments on Articles 90 to 93 TFEU (ToL), later renumbered Articles 110 to 113 TFEU in the consolidated version:

“Articles 90–93 (Constitution Articles III-170 – III-171) concern taxation. They incorporate the existing tax provisions set out in Articles 90 to 93 TEC. There is a considerable body of European law concerning the harmonisation across Member States of indirect taxes: that is, VAT and excise duties on alcoholic drinks, hydrocarbon oils and tobacco products. At present the Treaty base for this legislation is Article 93 TEC, which states:

The Council shall, acting unanimously on a proposal from the Commission and after consulting the European Parliament and the Economic and Social Committee, adopt provisions for the harmonisation of legislation concerning turnover taxes, excise duties and other forms of indirect taxation to the extent that such harmonisation is necessary to ensure the establishment and the functioning of the internal market within the time limit laid down in Article 14. (122)

The new Article 93 (Constitution Article III-171) has one substantive change. Legislation for harmonising indirect taxes may be adopted (emphasis added) “provided that such harmonisation is necessary for the establishment or the functioning of the internal market and to avoid distortion of competition.” It remains the case that any such legislation must be agreed by the Council acting unanimously.”

---
Footnote 122 stated: Article 14 refers to the establishment of the single European market on 1 January 1993.
---

The Library Research Paper 07/86 is available at:

http://www.parliament.uk/commons/lib/research/rp2007/rp07-086.pdf

***

The House of Lords European Union Committee report ‘The Treaty of Lisbon: an impact assessment, Volume I: Report’ (HL Paper 62-I, published 13 March 2008) is a valuable resource on the Treaty of Lisbon, but I found no reference to Article 110 TFEU (Article 90 TEC and ToL).

The report is accessible at:

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200708/ldselect/ldeucom/62/62.pdf

In case anyone wants to dig deeper, taxes, unanimity and harmonisation are discussed ‘passim’ in Volume II of the report ‘Evidence’.


***

Sweden

The consultation paper ’Lissabonfördraget’ is still valuable as a description of the Lisbon Treaty amendments, and it is available at:

http://www.regeringen.se/content/1/c6/09/49/81/107aa077.pdf

The Swedish government’s draft ratification bill ‘Lagrådsremiss – Lissabonfördraget’, was published 29 May 2008 and sent to the Council on Legislation (Lagrådet) for an expert opinion. The draft deals with the EU’s internal policy areas in Chapter 23 ‘Unionens interna åtgärder’, and section 23.1 presents the internal market (Inre marknaden), on pages 175 to 181.

Tax provisions are dealt with on page 179 in a section called ‘Bestämmelser om skatter’. The government of Sweden remarks on the essentially unchanged nature of the tax provisions in general and it then explains the clarification of Article 93 TFEU (ToL):

”Bestämmelser om skatter

Bestämmelserna om skatter är i princip oförändrade. I artikel 93 i EUF-fördraget om harmonisering av lagstiftningen om omsättningsskatter, punktskatter och andra indirekta skatter eller avgifter på den inre marknaden görs ett förtydligande. Som nödvändig förutsättning för att harmonisera lagstiftning anges som tillägg “att undvika snedvridning av konkurrensen”. Rådet ska, i likhet med nu gällande EG-fördrag, fatta beslut med enhällighet i skattefrågor efter att ha hört Europaparlamentet. (Se artikel 2.79 i Lissabonfördraget.)”

The draft bill ‘Lagrådsremiss – Lissabonfördraget’ can be downloaded through:

http://www.regeringen.se/sb/d/5676/a/106277

***

Finland

The Finnish ratification bill, ‘Hallituksen esitys Eduskunnalle Euroopan unionista tehdyn sopimuksen ja Euroopan yhteisön perustamissopimuksen muuttamisesta tehdyn Lissabonin sopimuksen hyväksymisestä ja laiksi sen lainsäädännön alaan kuuluvien määräysten voimaansaattamisesta’ (HE 23/2008 vp), offers an introductury comment on taxes and charges (Veroja ja maksuja koskevat määräykset) and a brief statement on the unchanged nature of Article 90 TFEU (ToL), renumbered Article 110 TFEU (page 208):

”Määräykset koskevat veroihin ja maksuihin sovellettavia pääperiaatteita sekä neuvoston toimivaltaa niiden osalta ja ne vastaavat määräysten sanamuodon teknisiä tarkistuksia lukuun ottamatta pääasiallisesti nykyisen EYsopimuksen kolmannen osan VI osaston 2 luvun määräyksiä samoin kuin perustuslakisopimuksen III-171 ja III-172 artiklan määräyksiä.

90 artiklaa (uusi 110 artikla), joka kieltää jäsenvaltioita määräämästä muiden jäsenvaltioiden tuotteille korkeampia välillisiä tai välittömiä sisäisiä maksuja kuin kotimaisille tuotteille, ei muuteta.”

The Finnish ratification bill is available at:

http://www.finlex.fi/fi/esitykset/he/2008/20080023.pdf


The Swedish language version of the ratification bill ‘Regeringens proposition till Riksdagen med förslag om godkännande av Lissabonfördraget om ändring av fördraget om Europeiska unionen och fördraget om upprättandet av Europeiska gemenskapen och till lag om sättande i kraft av de bestämmelser i fördraget som hör till området för lagstiftningen’ (RP 23/2008 rd), presents the same introductory remark on fiscal provisions under ’Bestämmelser om skatter och avgifter’ and the comment on the unchanged nature of Article 90 TFEU (ToL), the future Article 110 TFEU, on page 211:

”Bestämmelserna gäller de huvudprinciper som ska tillämpas på skatter och avgifter samt rådets befogenheter i fråga om dem och de motsvarar de tekniska anpassningarna av bestämmelsernas ordalydelse med undantag i huvudsak för bestämmelserna i avdelning VI kapitel 2 i det nuvarande EG-fördragets tredje del liksom även bestämmelserna i artiklarna III-171 och III-172 i det konstitutionella fördraget.

Artikel 90 (blivande artikel 110), som förbjuder medlemsstaterna att direkt eller indirekt på varor från andra medlemsstater lägga interna skatter eller avgifter som är högre än de skatter eller avgifter som direkt eller indirekt läggs på liknande inhemska varor, ändras inte.”

The ratification bill in Swedish can be accessed at:

http://www.finlex.fi/sv/esitykset/he/2008/20080023.pdf



Ralf Grahn