Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2007-03-29-Speech-4-166"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20070329.23.4-166"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Unlike the ECSC, which funded itself from own resources in the true sense of the word, the European Union, having virtually ceased, as a consequence of global free trade, to collect customs duties, which now account for no more than 9.8% of its resources, the European Budget is provided for in the same way as any other unremarkable state-funded inter-governmental organisation, that is to say by a cash contribution on the basis of GNP, amounting to 73.8% of the Community’s resources.
Today, the resources have reached a ceiling of 1.24% of GNP, and that is where they are going to stay. It is simply provided that, after 2014, a new system will come into play, one derived from the traditional federal solution of sharing the yield from a tax between the EU and the nation states. A selection of twelve taxes has been proposed to be divided up in this way, ranging from VAT to the Tobin tax and the eco-tax on companies.
It is the system adopted in France between 1791 and 1917, with percentages added to the state tax in order to fund local communities.
If the EU were to have a policy of large-scale investment in health, research, the universities and the railways to replace the Malthusian approach set out in Article 104(c) of the Treaty of Maastricht, the support of the public at nation-state level would make possible either their funding by means of loans or even indeed a hypothecated tax made appetising by its benefit to society."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples