Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-01-17-Speech-2-241"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060117.21.2-241"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
".
The Commission’s interpretation of the ruling of the ECJ on the Marks [amp] Spencer case is fully in compliance with the ECJ’s ruling. The problem in that case was that while United Kingdom law permits loss relief inside the United Kingdom market, the same is not permitted in the case of other companies or branches of Marks [amp] Spencer in different Member States – one in Germany and one in Belgium. The ECJ ruling, in compliance with the philosophy of the internal market, was in favour of Marks [amp] Spencer and the Commission fully supported that.
The Commission wants to study carefully the budgetary consequences of such rulings and try to take the initiative to have better coordination within the tax policy of the Member States: if not harmonisation, at least coordination is needed in order to avoid such problems.
To conclude, I want to refer to the first question concerning the common consolidated corporate tax base, which would solve the problem. The difficulty is that, as I have already said, in the best case, if everything goes smoothly and well, we will come up with the legislative proposal no earlier than 2008, so we still have two years in which to provide some temporary solution."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples