WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3563/97 by Graham MATHER to the Commission. Commission communication on tax coordination (COM(97)495)
22. 6. 98 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 196/5 Joint answer to Written Questions E-3548/97 and E-3549/97 given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (6 January 1998) A declaration in the Council minutes concerning Council Directive 92/83/EEC of 19 October 1992 on the harmonization of the structures of excise duties on alcohol and alcoholic beverages (1) states that: The Council and the Commission declare that Member States which have traditionally exempted the production of small quantities of alcohol produced by private individuals for their own consumption may continue to apply such exemptionsí. In accordance with that declaration France has continued to exempt the production of ten litres of pure alcohol per year by individuals who have traditionally been granted that right. Apart from this special case, duty must be charged on all spirits production. There is however, an option under Article 22 of Directive 92/83/EEC permitting Member States to charge the production of small distilleries at a reduced rate. France, along with the majority of Member States, has chosen not to take up that option. France having made that choice, the general rules set out in Directive 92/12/EEC of 25 February 1992 on the general arrangements for products subject to excise duty and on the holding, movement and monitoring of such products (2) should apply so that, with the above exception concerning home distillation, all French distilleries are tax warehouses in which duty payment shall be suspended until the goods produced enter free circulation, and in which losses naturally occurring to the product of the distillery shall be taken into account. Lastly, as regards the Commissionís approach to future harmonization in this area, one reason why the derogations were originally permitted was because › within the parameters laid down › the tax treatment of these small producers was considered to have insufficient effect on the internal market as to demand uniformity at Community level. In the light of the Honourable Memberís complaints, the Commission will keep the matter under review, but it has no present intention of seeking further to harmonize their treatment. (1) OJ L 316, 31. 10. 1992. (2) OJ L 76, 23. 3. 1992. (98/C 196/08) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3563/97 by Graham Mather (PPE) to the Commission (13 November 1997) Subject: Commission communication on tax coordination (COM(97) 495) At the Ecofin meeting of 13 October 1997, this Commission Communication was debated for the first time. The document proposes a package of measures to tackle what it calls áharmful tax competitioní. The Council called on the Commission to bring forward a new Communication, by 12 November at the latest, taking into account the results of this meeting and of the meeting of the Tax Policy Group of 20 October. Ministers unanimously underlined their intention to reach political agreement on this matter at the Ecofin meeting on 1 December 1997. With regard to the taxation of capital income, Point 19 III of the Communication states that áevery Member State should either operate a minimum withholding tax or provide information on savings income to other Member Statesí. Point 19 IV then states that áthe Community should also promote an extension of the agreed solution beyond its bordersí. Through what mechanisms and international organizations does the Commission envisage the promotion 1. of the agreed solution? 2. What means will be used within the context of these organizations and mechanisms?