WRITTEN QUESTION E-2287/99 by Karin Riis-Jørgensen (ELDR) to the Commission. Right to freedom of movement and Danish tax rules.
8. 8. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 225 E/87 Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission (22 December 1999) The Commission proposal on the incineration of waste (1) was adopted on 7 October 1998. The Parliament gave its first reading on 14 April 1999. The Council adopted the common position on 25 November 1999. When preparing the directive the Commission carried out intensive discussions with experts from all Member States as well as all others concerned. These discussions as well as the negotiations in the Council have led to a common position which takes into account the specific requirements of the Nordic Member States. The common position seeks to establish the same requirements for the co-incineration of waste as for the incineration of waste. For combustion plants co-incinerating waste, the emission limit values which apply are generally more stringent than those for plants not using waste. However, the problem is not always related to compliance with tighter emission limit values, but the costs for the measurement requirements of the directive. In order to deal with this the future directive provides for the possibility of obtaining an authorisation to reduce the frequency of the measurements, which should reduce the costs for operators. Article 11 (6) provides for the possibility to apply periodic measurements instead of continuous measurements for hydrogen fluoride, hydrogen fluoride and sulphur dioxide. In addition, Article 11 (7), which was initiated by the Finnish delegation in the Council, allows the frequency of periodic measure- ments of heavy metals and dioxin to be reduced under certain criteria. The Commission is therefore of the opinion that the future directive already takes care of the specific requirements of Finnish waste management systems. Moreover the Commission would consider all new developments which could arise in the second reading in this respect. (1) OJ C 372, 2. 12. 1998 as modified by COM(1999) 330 final. (2000/C 225 E/087) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2287/99 by Karin Riis-Jłrgensen (ELDR) to the Commission Subject: Right to freedom of movement and Danish tax rules (13 December 1999) When a Danish national moves to Spain and thus establishes his place of residence and centre of interests in that country, that personís pension is taxed according to Spanish rules but, should the same Danish national instead choose to set up residence in Portugal, his pension is taxed according to Danish tax rules. In view of the Commission explain how a Danish nationalís lack of opportunity to enjoy freedom of movement in relation to the taxation of pensions is in accordance with the Treatyís fundamental and overriding principle of freedom of movement? laid down in the Treaty, will the fundamental principle of freedom of movement Although no Community legislation has been adopted on the right to tax income from pensions at EU level, is there not a risk in practice, as for instance in the above example, that a fundamental EU rule on freedom of movement is being contravened by national tax rules? Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission (6 January 2000) It is true that in the absence of harmonisation of personal income taxation European citizens are confronted with different tax rules when they take up residence in another Member State. This implies a different level of taxation which may in some cases influence the decision to envisage such transfer of residence. C 225 E/88 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 8. 8. 2000 By virtue of ü mostly bilateral ü conventions, Member States have arranged the distribution of taxing rights for situations which are not purely domestic. These conventions distribute the taxing rights amongst the States concerned according to the results of the bilateral negotiations. A generally followed pattern is the model for a bilateral convention recommended by the Organisation for economic cooperation and development (OECD). Article 18 of that model has been retained as article 18 of the convention between Denmark and Spain of 3 July 1972. It provides, subject to different rules for public remunerations and pensions, that pensions and other similar remuneration paid to a resident of a contracting state in consideration of past employment shall be taxable only in that Member State. The same article was included in the convention between Denmark and Portugal of 3 March 1972. However, this convention has been terminated with effect from 1 January 1995 by Denmark so that Denmark is no longer bound to leave the exclusive right to tax Danish pensions of emigrants to Portugal. Notwithstanding the absence of an applicable tax convention, the two Member States are bound by the EC Treaty principle of free movement within the Community to avoid and eliminate double taxation, at least by imputing a tax paid in the other Member State on their own charge to tax. Cases have come to the knowledge of the Commission in which Portugal has indeed refrained from applying its tax rules to Danish pensions already taxed in Denmark. (2000/C 225 E/088) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2292/99 by Reinhold Messner (Verts/ALE) to the Commission (13 December 1999) Subject: Extension of licences to operate motorways in Italy The Italian government is extending the licences granted to all motorway operating companies. Under the so-called Ciampi-Costa directive (1), licences to operate motorways may be extended on an exceptional basis in order to settle on-going disputes (failure to bring tariffs into line, recognition of work carried out for the 1990 World Cup and the Columbus celebrations in 1992 and any other disputes on which an opinion will have to be requested from the Stateís legal counsel). In this connection, the agreements, i. e. the acts which govern relations between the State and the licence holders, will need to be revised before 31 December 1999. Not taking account of the agreement with Autostrade SpA, the government has so far signed seven extension agreements out of the 19 remaining agreements (2). The agreements are currently being examined by the Court of Auditors. The outline of the standard agreement between ANAS (state- owned national road company) and the companies to which licences are awarded, in which disputes, tariffs, financial plans, investments and contractual clauses are calculated and quantified, has not even been subject to examination by the Court of Auditors! In order to justify the extension of the 19 licences, there are plans to invest 11 418 billion lire in new motorway infrastructure projects, some of which have not even been authorised, and are thus in conflict with Italian law (3), thereby making the overall transport plan, which is in the process of being drawn up, irrelevant. Furthermore, as a result of the extensions, many of the licences will exceed the 30-year limit laid down by the law (4). Moreover, the new law on civil protection requires licence holders to introduce safety measures for motorway tunnels. This will mean that, in the near future, agreements on licences currently being entered into will need to be reviewed (5). 1. Does the Commission not consider that the renewal of the licences breaches the provisions of Directives 92/50/EEC, 93/37/EEC and 89/440/EEC in that no European public invitation to tender was issued for the granting of the licences (6)? Does the Commission not consider that the new infrastructure projects are aimed at justifying the 2. automatic extension of the licences, and as a result, the motorway monopolies? 3. Does the Commission not consider that, before granting any extensions, it is first necessary to reform the Italian motorway operating licence sector in order to implement fully the European legislation in the area of the public procurement (7)?