Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-04-24-Speech-4-039"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20080424.5.4-039"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Thank you, Commissioner, thank you, ladies and gentlemen, for your very thorough and interesting contributions. We appreciate that the taxation debate is not closed and I should like just to mention three points at this stage in the discussions.
Firstly, the proportion accounted for by energy taxes. On average they represent 76% of environmental taxation, compared with 21% for transport.
Secondly, domestic consumers, who have to pay by far the largest proportion of environmental taxes, when other sectors of the economy are the biggest consumers of energy, water and transport.
Thirdly, the proportion of GDP of Member States represented by environmental taxes has declined over the past five years. That gives us something else to think about in our future deliberations.
I certainly regret what the EPP is asking for on paragraph 26, in which we were proposing a minimum Community tax on CO
. It seems to me that we need to continue along that path if we want to prevent dumping in the European Union. The idea is not to take over tax powers from the Member States, it is to have minimum tax harmonisation. That is necessary and it has been underlined.
Apart from the fact that Member States are asking for further progress towards tax coordination, I should also like to draw attention to another point in the report. The reduction in taxes on employment cannot be linked only to the reduction in environmental taxes, as the Commission is proposing. In my view, it should be part of a more general reform, with principles of solidarity and social justice. I am well aware that that is not yet a competence of the States, but let us think about it here and give the Member States some information.
The final point that I think is important is the domestic dimension. The measures we take here should not have an adverse effect on households that are already on low incomes and make the position of other households more insecure.
That is what I wanted to say in conclusion. Thank you, Commissioner; I can assure you of our support in drawing up future legislation on these matters."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"2"1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples