Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-02-10-Speech-3-271"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20100210.25.3-271"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"(
) It is curious that the European Commission acknowledges that ‘the free movement provisions of the EU Treaty make it difficult for Member States to ask for guarantees for the payment of taxes due on their territory’.
Could we say, then, that instead of adopting rule after rule which later prove to be ‘insufficient’, and bearing in mind the ‘poor results obtained so far’, why not simply go to the root of the problem by changing the rules that relate to freedom of movement?
However, we have doubts about the implementation of the proposal which states: ‘The scope of the mutual recovery assistance should be extended to other taxes and duties than those already covered now, as the non-payment of any kind of tax or duty affects the proper functioning of the internal market. The scope should also be extended to compulsory social security contributions’.
We disagree that the officials of a Member State should be given the authority to act within the territory of other Member States, so we believe that Parliament’s proposal to limit implementation to cases where there is agreement between the Member States is at least the correct approach."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"PT"1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples