WRITTEN QUESTION E-0511/00 by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission. Disrespect for EU law by Member States.
C 374 E/94 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 28. 12. 2000 The Commission views the above mechanical simulations as upper limits on the likely scope for sustained inflation divergence in EMU. Nevertheless, in the economic management of the euro area it is very important to recognise that persistent inflation differences may be warranted in view of longer-term structural forces. The Commission welcomes the Parliamentís interest in this important topic and would be glad to discuss further these issues with the Honourable Member. (2000/C 374 E/109) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0511/00 by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission (28 February 2000) Subject: Disrespect for EU law by Member States In the light of the answer to Written Question E-2230/99 (1) (3 December 1999) and to the picture of sustained and increasing disrespect for European Union law, particularly by France, how does the Commission propose to improve matters? Does the Commission recognise that its existing efforts to curb infringements are inadequate? Does it believe that the system of penalties should be reinforced against persistent law-breakers, and will it bring forward proposals to that effect in the forthcoming Intergovern- mental Conference? (1) OJ C 203 E, 18. 7. 2000, p. 153. Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission (10 April 2000) The Commission considers that the existing infringement procedure in Article 226 (ex Article 169) of the EC Treaty has proved its efficiency for years. Therefore the Commission does not intend to propose a reform of this procedure. The largest proportion of infringement proceedings initiated by the Commission is solved before any action is taken in the Court of justice, the Member State having brought the infringement to an end. As an illustration of this efficiency, in 1999 only 16,5 % of infringement cases having been subject to a prior letter of formal notice had to be submitted to the Court by the Commission. The possibility of a second action in the Court of justice with financial penalties (Article 228 ex Article 171 EC Treaty) introduced by the Treaty on European Union has again reinforced the efficiency of this procedure. Moreover, in order to ensure a more and more systematic review of the implementation of Community law by the Member States, the Commission constantly improves its operational procedures in that field. The Honourable Member is invited to refer to the forthcoming 17th report for an outline of these new operational measures. This will be made available to the Parliament in the coming weeks. (2000/C 374 E/110) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0516/00 by Michael Gahler (PPE-DE) to the Commission (28 February 2000) Subject: Nationality in relation to double taxation A German and an Austrian are employed at the Frankfurt branch of the Austrian Chamber of Commerce, a public body. Whilst the Austrian, as an employee of a public body, is treated as having his permanent residence in Austria, the German employee comes under the double taxation agreement between Austria and Germany. Pursuant to that agreement, he has limited tax liability in Austria unless, in accordance with the judgment of the European Court of Justice in the Schumacker case, he applies for unlimited tax liability