Jussi SARAMO

Policy topics Jussi SARAMO is active on

What Jussi SARAMO has said (60)

• 2026-01-14 “E-000122/2026 Answer given by High Representative/Vice-President Kallas on behalf of the European Commission International law and the principles of territorial integrity and state sovereignty enshrined in the UN Charter must be upheld under all circumstances. Members of the UN Security Council have a particular responsibility to uphold these principles. This message was underscored in the 4 January 2026 statement by the High Representative/Vice-President supported by 26 Member States, as well as by President of the European Council and President of the Commission in their public reactions to the US intervention in Venezuela. The EU has repeatedly stated that Nicolás Maduro lacks the legitimacy of a democratically elected president and has advocated for a Venezuelan-led peaceful transition to democracy in the country, respectful of its sovereignty. The right of the Venezuelan people to determine their future must be respected. The Commission is in close contact with the US, as well as regional and international partners to support and facilitate dialogue with all parties involved, leading to a negotiated, democratic, inclusive and peaceful solution to the crisis, led by Venezuelans. The EU remains ready to continue engaging constructively with the US on all issues of common interest. The EU continues to support an inclusive, rules-based multilateral system anchored in the principles of the UN Charter. The EU will continue to uphold the sovereignty, territorial integrity, and inviolability of borders together with other fundamental tenets of international law.”
  EU-US relations · EU-Venezuela relations
• 2026-01-13 “Answer given by Mr Dombrovskis on behalf of the European Commission 30.3.2026 Written question In 2022, Statistics Finland revised the statistical treatment of the interest subsidy loans granted by the Finnish Housing Finance and Development Centre (ARA). This revision did not apply to the separate loan guarantee scheme administered by ARA under the Act on State Guarantees for Rental Housing Loans (856/2008). As a result, these State Guarantees are not included in Finland’s Maastricht debt. They are reported separately for information, as contingent liabilities not impacting debt. The revision was agreed with the Statistical Office of the European Union, which confirmed that the statistical recording complies with the rules on sector classification under the European System of Accounts (ESA 2010) and the Manual on Government Deficit and Debt.”
  EU fiscal rules and oversight of national budgets
• “Thank you Madam Chair and thank you for all the speakers. Actually question was about UN convention and that's now I'm trying to get myself actually. I feel like we should go back to the basics after listening to many speeches today because like why do we have taxes, why do we have European business, why do we have European Parliament? It's to make people's lives better. All these man made structures and then if we watch which countries are the happiest, best for the people in the world, they are actually European countries that have relatively high taxation and very good public services and actually they also have a very good competitive businesses usually. But the problem is that the competition is unfair and the multinationals they are winning and that's the main problem. The Hungarian example here was mentioned. Well the Autobahn gets twenty seven percent VAT from all the people and even the CIT rate is nine percent. It's not like they are getting a lot of investment outside so clearly the Hungarian model is not working. We don't want to be China definitely, we don't want to be China and we cannot be the United States printing dollars and we don't want to be the United States. So what should we do and now it's clear that Donald Trump doesn't want to do anything like it's in the end we are not going to get a fair system with Donald Trump so we should act not wait with UN. I don't know. Well Trump is taxing the trade surplus with tariffs but we are saying that we don't want to tax the service surplus because Trump doesn't want us or the European business doesn't want us to do that. So what can we do? I think the Commission answered in the oral question in the plenary that we need a multilateral system and that there might be something going on and there should be something go or with pillar one. So I'm asking what can we do without United States like if we want to cooperate with the rest of the world because the other option is actually that we are not really doing nothing just five more lost years. Thank you.”
  EU-US trade relations
• “Thank you, Madam Chair and rapporteur. I would like to thank you for producing such a balanced draft. We support many elements on this draft, such as the parts about the European Union being the global leader in sustainable finance, and furthermore, we welcome the critical tone towards the current drive to weaken reporting requirements in the name of competitiveness. The first compromise text also acknowledges the lessons of the 2007 2008 financial crisis, namely, that prudent regulation is necessary to ensure a stable economic environment. Naturally, there is some room for criticism. Criticism to the calls to improve the position on retail investors seems a bit hollow given the direction of the retail investment strategy, which is, of course, a different procedure going on. We also oppose any initiative that would undermine labour law or financial stability in the name of judicial judicial harmonization. Uh, what was said about, uh, 28 regime? We consider it a bit big threat. And importantly, we remain skeptical that reviving securitization would improve Europe's economic situation. Lawmakers should understand that securitization is not a means of financing the real economy, but rather a mechanism for banks to clean up their balance sheets. And furthermore, securitization competes with well-established European capital instruments. But still, I want to thank you that the draft itself is very good, and I'm sure that we will find together good compromises on these issues that I raised at the end. Thank you.”
  Financial regulation
• “Mr. president, Commissioner, if you give in to the one who corrupts you, they come back. And that's what Donald Trump does. If we don't protect our democracy, we will just give more power to just a couple of US companies. 100 years ago, people and small and small companies were protected by breaking down monopolies that was industry, oil industry, etc. but Google is much deeper embedded in our society. It controls what we see, what we hear, what we know, or at least what we think we know. To break laws. In addition to that, the the big techs don't pay taxes on their profits. We don't bow to Trump anymore because in addition to money, power is concentrated to only a few hands. The market capitalism is a good servant, but not a good mayor. We have to stick to the legislation.”
  EU rules on digital competition
• “So thank you. Well, the first one is like, um. If we don't do anything. Do you have an opinion where we are going? Like what happens in, let's say, ten years? Uh, then when we talk about wealth and, uh, taxes for inheritance and gifts, uh, I wonder, what do you think about the exit taxes, uh, harmonizing them? What is the importance of that? And then the maybe the longest question. I even wrote it down, um, since, uh, in your study, you highlighted, uh, that the fragmentation of wealth taxation across EU member states. It creates a significant compliance challenges. Um, so given that the European Commission advocates for simplification, and now it's like the big thing here. Uh, what do you think about the radical approach, uh, such as eliminating all the exemptions in wealth taxation and adopting a uniform taxation. It would be, uh, of taxable wealth, including both personal and professional assets, as suggested by economist Gabriel Tuchman. Do you think this kind of simplification, uh, would how much it would help to to improve the tax collection and enforcement, not only for wealth taxation, but also for other types of taxation about the EU member state in future?”
  Wealth taxation
• “Thank you, Madam Chair. I would have wanted to ask about the. Because it's. You said that there is no need for urgent action, that we should monitor the development. But I was wondering, like if we are not doing anything and just waiting with the digital euro for, I don't know, years maybe. Is it like that then it's too late to act? Or how do you see that the, the, the schedule is should we uh, like if not urgently, but should we go on quite quickly if we want to be a player on this game or do we sleep over the like. What is your analyze how quickly the new, let's say new world will be shared?”
  Digital euro
• “Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you. The speakers very interesting. Behind the US hegemony there has been, uh, decisions that only economical decisions and structural decisions as you have been, as you have been telling us. And they had a willingness to to run enormous trade and fiscal deficit with the rest of the world and indeed, in order to ensure a sufficient supply of safe assets. The country or area issuing those assets must be willing to run considerable fiscal and trade deficits. Probably. However, the EU economic model has been based on export competitiveness, trade surpluses and fiscal framework geared towards austerity. I would like to ask if you think such a macroeconomic framework is fit for a political community aiming to improve the international activeness of its currency. And then another question with regard to the global role of the euro, do you consider the fact that such major economies as Poland and Sweden still have their own currency? Do you think it's a big problem? It's something that we didn't actually touch yet on this debate. And because it's quite wide. Maybe if I can ask if all of them could answer. Thank you.”
  EU fiscal rules and oversight of national budgets
• “Thank you, Madam Chair. I said in drug report, it is not wise to use a huge amount of money to support foreign arms industry. We use most of our money to support our an arms industry in the countries we cannot even trust. Most importantly, the United States and Israel. A good example about Israel was when Russia attacked Ukraine. Uh, the, uh, Israel said that you cannot use their weapons to protect Ukraine. And how can we buy you so much money to buy weapons of these kind of countries? It is bad for our security. It is bad for our economy. It's bad for employment and our unity. And now, with the NATO target of 5%, it is totally unacceptable to continue using supporting so much the US arms industry. As a Finnish person, I know that we have a very aggressive neighbor and we have to defend ourselves. But the answer it cannot be the destruction of green transition and cohesion. Climate change is still our biggest security threat, and without welfare, we don't have anything to defend in Europe. So we will make amendments also about the overall security for, for example, on mobility, which will benefit for the whole society and not just for arms industry. Thank you.”
  Defence spending · EU-US relations
• “Thank you, Madam Chair. Commissioner, China has skillfully led us to a trap. China controls 70% of the mining of rare earths and 90% of their separation and processing. 90%. Without these metals, we are not going to be able to make iPhones, energy weapons, almost anything at all. Europe did not make sure that it was safe. We believed in the free market, but we are not weak if we want to make use of our winning cards. The main reason, or rather, the access to the European market is valuable and very much wanted. Without the markets, these minerals don't have much of a value. The more Cai and Trump dictate the terms for us, and the more they will blackmail us with rare earths or weapons or fuels. The more we must free ourselves from dependencies and invest in the green transition. We need circular economy instead of rare earths, domestic energy production instead of fossil fuels. The EU cannot, of course, be self-sufficient in everything. We must remain open to the entire world. Our destinies are globally intertwined. But the strategic dependencies must be cut off. Autocratic leaders in the East and in the West are abusing us. The Commission and the Member States idea of competitiveness has remained in the 1990s. We cannot afford that. We need investments. Also called for in the Drudge Report, not and not just tinkering with omnibuses and increasing the corporate profits.”
  Trade relations with China
• “Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you, all the speakers for your important work and the presentations. Uh, I will speak in Finnish because it's a very rare opportunity to address Mr. Lehkonen. Um. Now, I hope that the interpreters have had time to change language. International standards with regards. Are essential. They are an essential part of the of global finances and the economy. And as you mentioned, these technical standards are. Uh, they can be part of cultural wars and geopolitics. And as you have seen, um, the Trump administration has taken a very negative stance on international sustainability standards. And as was mentioned elsewhere, the situation looks brighter. Is there a risk that the international finance system will become more fragmented? Is there. Something that would lead to us believing that there would be a further fragmentation, that the United States will try to get more countries on their side, for example, with regard to their approach on sustainability, that they refuse to collaborate if people don't take their view on sustainability matters. If the United States indeed work in this way, what does that mean for us in the future? Thank you.”
  EU-US trade relations
• “Thank you, Mr. Chair. And it's happy to join the choir and thank the rapporteur for the good work so far and for the meeting we had yesterday, which was very good. The draft is a very good basis for our work. We think that the simpler, stronger and leakproof text base we have, the fairer the system for individuals, for the European companies and for the welfare states funding. Just to react a little bit to what's been said already, we already have a very good functioning systems in European Union digital systems, actually. And what was said here, I was very pleased that the committee got to know, and we visited Estonia and Finland to, to to learn from the digital systems in Estonia and Finland. The other one is based on the simple taxation, but the other one is actually more complicated taxation. But for the users, the system is working very well and and user friendly, so we could learn from each others and we are learning, which is very good. But also there are some things, smaller issues that maybe we have to think about, like the commission idea to to cut. Cut the regulation. But there are already many countries where there is like no extra regulation. Actually we we would need a bit more regulation to, to make the tax system more fair and more, as been said here, that we need a system that is that everybody has a equal playing field. And now when we have these, uh, threats outside from the Europe on this geopolitical situation, of course, we need to defend ourselves and defend the European companies, defend the European welfare states from the unfair competition coming from the US and after us, uh, Putting the tax treaties, rejected tax treaties. We need to act. And I think it's very important that we also get these points that's already existing in the draft. But we we would like to find ways to make it even, even stronger. But but in the end I'm sure that we will find a very good compromise. So thank you for everyone this far.”
  EU competences on taxation
• “President, a few US companies know everything about us because of our mobile phones and our payment transactions. As a result, the US administration also knows everything about us more than our own governments, maybe more than we do ourselves. Do we really want to surrender this power outside of Europe? It's also a question of the economy. On each of my purchases. The US card duopoly takes its cut from European companies. And at the end of the day, from European people. It seems absurd that politicians who call themselves patriotic in this case oppose attempts to restore control to the European nations common central Bank, which is under democratic control. The digital euro is not about replacing cash with digital money. It's about replacing digital money controlled by a few European corporations with a European democratic alternative.”
  Digital euro
• “Every way of funding the EU is the wrong way. In the opinion of some member states, and the right wing populists think that always to fund the European Union is wrong. The member states right to tax should, of course not be compromised by transferring taxation rights to the EU, but in front of the US digital giants, for instance, individual states are helpless. It is only natural that the taxation of digital services and imported goods be carried out at the EU level. Also, taxation of stock exchange transactions and private flights could be done at EU level. When it comes to gambling and betting, the situation is not so clear because many member states already collect revenues through license fees and taxes. However, taxing gambling at the EU level would make sense because companies are concentrated in low regulation countries, and that would also encourage member states to tackle harmful gambling more than now.”
  EU competences on taxation
• “President, our tax system does not reflect the realities of this century. It is based on physical presence, which is becoming less and less important in the economy. The largest and richest companies often pay no taxes at all in the countries where they make their profits. As a result, there is not enough money for schools and hospitals. Countries are getting into debt inequalities growing, and giant companies that compete unfairly are winning in the market. That's why seven years ago, the commission decided to start taxing digital giants. The digital tax, however, was put on hold when it was replaced by an even better OECD agreement on the fair taxation of all big companies. Well, then Trump came along. His first move was to throw the new tax agreements in the trash bin, and Trump's billionaire friends are laughing at us. Now we have to go back to the original plan. But the right wing commission actually obeys Trump's orders at the time when Typekit digital taxes should be even higher even than originally planned to counterbalance the tariffs Trump has imposed on us, it's high time to tax Musk, Zuckerbergs and other friends. And that is the same level as European companies. Thank you.”
  EU taxation policy (political compass)
• “Thank you Mister Chair and thank you everyone. It's been a very interesting discussion actually. I have the same thematics than here here. I I don't know how the European entrepreneurs and European companies can can really compete with the American ones since we have countries like the Netherlands, Ireland, Luxembourg who make it possible for these US companies don't pay anything when they're working here. So it's like a very unfair situation already even if we forget the tariffs Europe. We have been living in this neoliberal dream of open markets and tax competition at the same time the US and China they have pursued their own interests all the time and we are losing the economic competition big time if we continue as we are doing now we are losing. We have an advantage as we we know that we are a super power of the quality of life but it requires sufficient tax levels. It requires us closing tax havens inside Europe and defending ourselves from external attacks and Trump he's attacking us more and more fiercely as it was said rightly he's taxing our surplus of of our goods with tariffs but we are we are not we are afraid of tax the US digital giants at all. Same time I want us to remember that we promised to buy to finance hundreds of billions of arms purchases from US and and then we have the growing pension spending. We have several countries that did not tax the pension funds on time so how can we how can we pay all this it's it's just this is impossible equation. So my question is that do you see any way to build a sustainable tax system to pay all of this without you gaining some power to secure the whole and how do you see the the work of UN tax convention? Thank you.”
  Tax Havens
• “Yeah. Thank you, Mr. Chair. And thank you very much. It was such a clear presentation that I didn't have a lot to ask, but actually, I want to take an example. I was working in the with the Finnish government in 2011, 2014 when the R&D deduction was introduced, and within two years we noticed that actually all the changes happened in the paper in the accounting business, but not actually in the work of the companies. And so in the paper, it looked like there is much more R&D, but actually they just changed the way they are presenting their, uh, their accounts. So, uh, personally, I believe that the broader tax base we have and the less deductions we have, the better the system for everyone, for the system, for the companies, maybe not for the tax account business, but everybody else. But, uh, so my question is kind of, is your research going so far that you would know, uh, like in the real life, what's really can can you see that there are results that the R&D is really growing? Or is it just like we know that in paper it's it's growing.”
  Priorities of taxation policy in the EU
• “Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you for the rapporteur. I'm speaking on Canadian was supposed to be here, but she couldn't. So as we construct energy independence in the Union, there are few things we need to keep in mind. For us in the left, our priorities are with low and middle income households, who disproportionately carry the burden of rising energy prices and with unwavering support to Ukraine, energy independence must mean that we take steps away from Russian oil and gas and move towards renewable energy sources. With Trump in the white House, it is also clear that we cannot rely on American energy as an alternative to Russia. We must instead construct resilience in Europe. The new strategy for energy independence must take the varying conditions of the member states into account differences in energy sources varying degrees in connectivity. Geographical differences must be allowed to influence the price to make sure that populations in Europe can benefit from previous investments. The EU clearly needs to modernize pricing mechanisms to make sure that members are not punished when contributing to European market, and that high degrees of renewable energy contribute to lower prices for consumers. Households and companies across the continent require predictability and affordability when it comes to the price of energy. And let me be very clear our shadow. On this important file. We will propose a complete ban of Russian oil and gas. Our support for Ukraine must also mean that we stop funding the Russian war effort. In this regard, we should do more to stop the Russian shadow fleets and we should work in a comprehensive and structured way to readapt our energy infrastructure away from Russian dependence. And last but not least, the future of energy dependence require public intervention and public responsibility for our common security. The EU must allow for greater public interventions and change rules related to state aid and green investments. The energy in our sockets are as much a part of our homes and businesses as the water in our taps. Making sure that access to energy for warm and safe homes and companies is a public undertaking. Thank you.”
  EU approach to energy security (home-made vs import sources)
• “Thank you, Madam Chair. I also agree that taxonomy works, but under the new rules, the scope of companies required to report would shrink by 80% and less information. It would be available to investors and to policymakers. To us, it would be more difficult to track sustainability, and this could discourage companies from aligning with the EU taxonomy altogether. So how is such an amendment still compatible with the EU's climate and sustainability goals? That's the first question. And then as a fin, I have to intervene on the discussion about the nuclear energy. We have many old reactors and one of the latest and biggest reactors plants in the world, and it's obvious that taxonomy has no impact on nuclear power and new nuclear power. It's too slow and too expensive to be any kind of solutions. What we really need to scope now is to find answers to real questions we are having. And now it seems that we have this ideological idea of taking red tape and not really find solutions how to proceed. So but I would like to know more about the climate and sustainability goals. How are we going to achieve them?”
  Green Taxonomy
• “Thank you very much. Actually I wasn't supposed to be here yet, but it was very interesting. So I'm happy I managed to come. Actually all my questions were answered, but. So this is a comment. But it might be a question. Also, should we incentivize the equity in Finland, the the owners of unlisted companies, they they pay very low tax on dividends in exchange of a high equity without any need to explain anything so they don't need to do this kind of practices. But I can tell you that that is not working either. As a result, the business owners, they they maximize their low tax dividends and they focus on tax planning instead of making solid investments for the future. So companies they don't grow on productivity in Finnish companies develops very poorly. And so more loopholes to fix the old ones that was set by Tuva is the harmful race to the bottom? So I think this kind of competition does not make us more competitive, but the the opposite. Thank you.”
  Priorities of taxation policy in the EU
• “Thank you, Mr. Vice Chair. I will speak in German. Thank you very much, miss, for your report and for coming here. Great to see you in the committee. A lot of information there. This has come out previously. There was a reference to Eurostat previously in terms of independence and the methodology that you use that you were talking about in Eurostat. And the issue is how does Eurostar use the central figures to do with. Doesn't. The statistics and so on. Um to do with debt, but that they use proper transparent methodology. And then secondly, on methodology and what concrete areas have there been methodology adjustments. I'd like to get information on that. Justments. That might have big impacts on central indicators. And how does Eurostat make sure that if this happens, that there is proper transparent, transparent communication about those changes?”
  Accounting and auditing of EU budget
• “Thank you, Mr. Chair. The sovereignty is a very, extremely important and it's easy to agree. What has been here said that it's it's not about protectionism but it's about safety. And we also think that all the data should always be kept in the European Union. And it should be secured and all public money should be used on EU. When we talk about public procurement, I think we think that we should have some kind of carrots, some kind of support for the member States to use the money in EU. I was shocked when Giorgia meloni went to the United States and promised billions of euros to to Elon Musk's space space programs. I think this kind of because we have European systems, so we should use them, and we should find ways from the EU to to push the Member States to act responsibly, to have responsibility for the EU as a whole, and not just optimizing their own money use and trying to to get diplomatic friends or from our competitors on the these no matter if it's China or if it's USA. But when, when we have this strategical, um, uh, autonomy, then we really need to keep it in in Europe. Of course we need to make trade, we need to make cooperation.”
  "Buy European" provisions
• “Thank you madam chair and thank you for the information. I believe that Russian state and all its oligarchs must pay for the destruction they caused in Ukraine. That's clear. I guess most of us here agree. And of course we must ensure that we do not turn into a bandit regime ourselves and we must also not sacrifice the credibility of the euro currency. That would only benefit Trump and Putin, not Ukraine. But things we can do easily, I think, are the most acute. What Mr. Hainaloma mentioned was the anti money laundering lists and we know most of the money laundering from the Russian oligarchs it doesn't go through Moscow but it goes through Dubai. And now when we made it easier for Russian money flows to Russians to launder money when we delisted Arab Emirates.”
  EU-Russia relations (from March 2022)
• “Thank you, Mr. Chair. And thank you for the good draft for the rapporteur. I think the analysis is very good. It's very easy to agree what it's written. But I want to go to one solution that is topical, even though I understand the position we are. As was said, the financial sector remains structurally undertaxed due to that exemption. But I think and we think we need to ensure that it contributes fairly compared to the rest of the economy. So financial transaction taxes are a great way to do it, because they correct the existing tax distortion created by the VAT exemption. They provide a stable and meaningful source of public revenue while also having redistributive effects. They help curb highly speculative activities such as high frequency trading. This is the classic sand in the wheels argument without affecting long term investments or productive capital allocation. In practice, an FTT would not penalize long term investors, but would primarily target short term speculative behavior and are what the EU should act collectively by moving forward with. An EU wide originally commissioned commission was proposing the 0.5 FTT, which sounds actually quite good, and I'm a bit sad how things are evolving now. A coordinated European approach is to be preferred and far more effective than fragmented national initiatives, and would strengthen tax fairness within the single market. All in all, at a time of growing inequalities and pressing investment needs, the EU should be reopening the political debate of the FTT rather than quietly abandoning it as the Commission wants to do. So I wish that we could even have this debate when we are having this draft but also wider in this Parliament. I think now it would be time to, to talk about the issue before we make decisions that we are going to to feel sorry in the future. Thank you.”
  Taxation of financial transactions
• “Thank you. President Europe's capitulation agreement. This is what Trump's and von der Leyen's deal is about. The United States has no moral right to demand that EU support their industry, and the Commission had no legal right to promise such a thing. Trump's Trump justifies the tariffs, saying that US, the USA, buys more goods from Europe than it sells there, but for services, the opposite is true. And yet, Trump forbids the US from taxing, as a countermeasure, the US digital giants for the profits they make here, and the right obeys humbly. Trump is the worst bully in the schoolyard. He picks on everyone in turn. Orban, Meloni and the rest of the right who wage their culture war clap their hands even though Trump takes their pocket money too. We must not accept this. You should never give in to blackmail. The more money and support we promise to pour to the US, the more they demand from us. Thank you.”
  EU-US trade relations
• “Thank you very much. Actually I wasn't supposed to be here yet, but it was very interesting. So I'm happy I managed to come. Actually all my questions were answered, but. So this is a comment. But it might be a question. Also, should we incentivize the equity in Finland, the the owners of unlisted companies, they they pay very low tax on dividends in exchange of a high equity without any need to explain anything so they don't need to do this kind of practices. But I can tell you that that is not working either. As a result, the business owners, they they maximize their low tax dividends and they focus on tax planning instead of making solid investments for the future. So companies they don't grow on productivity in Finnish companies develops very poorly. And so more loopholes to fix the old ones that was set by Tuva is the harmful race to the bottom? So I think this kind of competition does not make us more competitive, but the the opposite. Thank you.”
  Priorities of taxation policy in the EU
• “Madam president, the world will not become a better place if we close our eyes. That's why it's important that the effects, for instance, of climate change on monetary policy risks are observed. Large areas of monetary policy will be preserved. But in tomorrow's vote, we will hopefully give an important message to everyone. The following public money. Cash is getting more and more rare out of the way of US private money. Payment cards, as well as as well as the growing dollar denominated cryptocurrencies are decided on in the US. We are already blackmailed by them. And this is a multi-layered problem for Europe's security and future. What is downright stupid, stupid is that when we buy a European product from a European shop, we pay a share to a US cartel. It is dangerous that our payment system depends on on a leader of a country that is unreliable and increasingly drifting away from democracy. Already now President Trump is using his power to prevent, for instance, judges investigating war crimes from booking tickets and hotels in Europe. We have fallen in a trap and we have to get out of it. Among the ten biggest paying intermediaries, there are only US and Chinese one Indian service providers. We need to secure European public alternative on which Europeans can build private services if they so wish. The ECB has recognised the need for a digital euro for many years ago. It should be implemented already. Parliament must now put an end to this slowing down and let the ECB to do its work. We must not let us decide on European monetary policy. Thank you.”
  Digital euro
• “(11:41:50 – 11:43:14): The removal of unnecessary barriers to the internal market is, of course, worthwhile, but the right wing line that has risen to the leading position, namely focusing on the reducing regulation, is at best a useless exercise. At its worst, the only thing that makes Europe attractive, namely well-being and quality of life, will now be destroyed. This, should be our main objective. Europe's competitiveness is measured vis a vis to the rest of the world. China is a ruthless market economy where workers or minorities have no rights. The state control reaches everybody. Externally, China operates systematically and takes 1 industrial sector at a time in its possession. It's already trapped us with earth minerals. And The United States is also aggressively pursuing its own interests. American democracy was never a praiseworthy, but now it has been completely on hold. Presidents, funders are building digital monopolies mon monopolies and control them everywhere. Thank you. The next speaker Thank”
  Overall simplification of regulation in the EU
• “Mr. Trump's war increases the cost of transportation and heating homes at a time when many Europeans are already suffering the consequences of Putin's war. Those who oppose the green transition are impoverishing Europe. Putin is grateful when oil money flows into his war chest. The most horrific situation is, of course, for the Iranians, whom we must find more ways to help. They are being killed from within by their own criminal leaders and from without by criminal states. The fascist regime in Iran must be treated as criminals, just as we have already decided with IRGC. Bombing schools and hospitals, however, will not help Iranians. The goal of Israel and the US is not free Iran. We have seen elsewhere how these two kill innocents without any restraints. I am ashamed of European leaders who do not renounce violations of international law. It is time to defend justice and humanity.”
  EU-Iran relations
• “Thank you, Mr. Chair. And thank you for the good draft for the rapporteur. I think the analysis is very good. It's very easy to agree what it's written. But I want to go to one solution that is topical, even though I understand the position we are. As was said, the financial sector remains structurally undertaxed due to that exemption. But I think and we think we need to ensure that it contributes fairly compared to the rest of the economy. So financial transaction taxes are a great way to do it, because they correct the existing tax distortion created by the VAT exemption. They provide a stable and meaningful source of public revenue while also having redistributive effects. They help curb highly speculative activities such as high frequency trading. This is the classic sand in the wheels argument without affecting long term investments or productive capital allocation. In practice, an FTT would not penalize long term investors, but would primarily target short term speculative behavior and are what the EU should act collectively by moving forward with. An EU wide originally commissioned commission was proposing the 0.5 FTT, which sounds actually quite good, and I'm a bit sad how things are evolving now. A coordinated European approach is to be preferred and far more effective than fragmented national initiatives, and would strengthen tax fairness within the single market. All in all, at a time of growing inequalities and pressing investment needs, the EU should be reopening the political debate of the FTT rather than quietly abandoning it as the Commission wants to do. So I wish that we could even have this debate when we are having this draft but also wider in this Parliament. I think now it would be time to, to talk about the issue before we make decisions that we are going to to feel sorry in the future. Thank you.”
  Taxation of financial transactions
• “Thank you, Mr. Chair. Russia's war on Ukraine has been going on for 11 years. And this full force attack for almost four years. This is the largest and deadliest war in Europe since the World War II. Every single day, every single night, Ukrainians live in fear of missiles and drone attacks. And after all these years, we still finance this killing by buying Russian gas and oil. There has been good development as crude oil purchases have declined, but EU remains the largest buyer of Russian gas. Member states bought 22 billion of Russian oil and gas in the third year of the full scale war. The amount greater than the 19 billion. The EU allocated to Ukraine in financial aid in 2024. Enough is enough. It is time to make a full stop in buying Russian fuels. And it's time to stop the Russian imperialism.”
  EU-Russia relations (from March 2022)
• “Madam president. Commissioner. Authoritarian leaders in China, the United States and Russia are increasingly pursuing their own interests. They want a weak and fragmented Europe. So we have to remain determined and build up a fair single market. But obviously, a single market can only be fair and work if the workers and the environment can be protected by common rules for those who swear by deregulation. Then in that case, the remaining regulations have to be more effective. And we have to think in terms of quality, not quantity. Because if we end up in a race to the bottom with China and the United States, then we are sure to lose. I think the letter report is right when it talks about having common rules for the capital and energy market to allow for investment and fair competition. But the report perhaps is not right. By saying that turning the telecoms market into a cartel of just a few giant companies would make it more competitive. For example, the success of digital services in the US has happened.”
  EU Competition policy
• “But when we talk about strategical issues, then we cannot rely on foreign powers. Um, also, we should support the research and implementation of critical technologies. Here. We know that we have huge amount of research already in European Union, but the big beneficiaries are few US and maybe 1 or 2 Chinese companies. So we have to find ways to keep the research made in Europe, in Europe. Um, then of course, uh, taxation and tariffs, all this discussion going on is one big element. Now these big companies, huge companies, they don't pay any taxes to Europe. And there is no level playing field, no matter if we talk about media or if we talk about technological issues. Um, we still remember the Apple case in Ireland and so on. So we have to talk more widely of this issue because now Europe is clearly losing. And then the digital systems, they should be as much as possible based on an open source code. And yeah. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I think the draft is not a very good start for the work, but I think we will find a way to have a big majority for a common line. Thank you.”
  EU digital & tech sovereignty
• “Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Minister, I think Draghi is right. China and the US are outperforming us and we need green investments to the transition. It's not just a question of climate change and biodiversity of course. It's also that we already see people dying in Europe because of the environmental crisis. But it's also economical question because we don't have the fossils that are on the hands of dictators outside Europe. We also need investments to digital transition. We need autonomy of US giants. They are not even paying taxes to Europe. We need investments to more autonomous defense. It's stupid that we give all our money to United States military complex. But all of this comes to build more united, more cohesive Europe, more united Europe. So I want to ask, what have you done to increase the cohesion against somebody would say useful idiots or the fifth column inside the European Union working against the common strategies? And what are your plans to do on this issue? And another thing I wonder how how we can be competitive in the European Union if some states they don't respect the rule of law, especially your country Hungary, where our all our common money EU money goes to the the corruption and in the in the hands of the political elites not respecting the rules in the European Union. So how can you divide the economic policy from the rule of law and cohesion building. Thank you.”
  Rule of law in Hungary
• “Thank you, Madam Chair. And I also want to thank the rapporteur. We have been losing huge amounts of money, and we keep losing huge amounts of money every day. But it's not just about United States against European Union. It's not just not only about the geopolitics. It's also about democracy and about money as a public good. And the rapporteur was saying that there is only one legitimate reason to have a digital euro. But I would like to ask that isn't it very legitimate reason to have a public cash public money in the future. Also very important for our democratic system. Thank you.”
  Digital euro
• “Thank you, Madam Chair. Usa has taken a long lead by supporting their own economy. And we in Europe, we have this structural problem that we can distribute money almost as the U.S., but we cannot collect it back in a way that they did in the IRA. But we have to play with the cards we have. And without investments, Europe doesn't have any future. So we see that the USA is starting to be more aggressive. And China, they will have to answer. So one thing is a must that we cannot surrender okay. We need transparency. We need rule of law. To be honest, we have corrupt leaders in Europe stealing our common money. So we need to have nationality. And do we have ambition to collect our own resources, to pay the loans to finance the RF? There are very legitimate and useful sources for us, for example, for the digital giants that at the moment they don't pay almost any taxes to Europe or by the carbon tariffs that would level the playing field for the European companies industry and encourage the whole world to fight climate change as we are. I think we also need deadline extension, probably increased flexibility for the member states. They have huge problems with their administrative capacity, under-resourced public sectors cannot make miracles, and the major beneficiaries like Italy and Spain, have significant pressure to efficiently allocate their substantial share of the fund. And nobody, I guess, wants to commit money to be used in a hurry. And the last thing is the MFF adjustments. Recalibrating both the MFF and the MFF would be very important to better align resources and ensure efficient use of the funds. Thank you.”
  Own EU resources
• “Yes. Thank you. I try to be very short because I actually got all my. You already had very good answers to the questions I had in mind. Actually, what you were saying in the last About us leaving the the the the common. Um, um, plans. We have the. How do you think that the problem in the EU level like of course we should have as global as possible systems. But what do you think about like what is the problem in the EU level? Because I think we should look further. Even we know that there is a political problem that was mentioned that in EU level we cannot we need everybody and there is always a problematic countries who don't agree. But if we could look further, how do you think how big is the problem of of of of of that we have such a like uh, we have so many systems. We know we know that like what they can do in us competitiveness was already mentioned. We are talking about competitiveness in every discussion in this House. We are having now what we see, what they did in the Biden Times in the US. They they did IRA. So they were pushing a lot of money to the markets, but then they could collect it back because they have a common tax policy and because we are lacking it. What do you think that, uh, if we could look further, what should we be doing? And how big is the problem of the, the. And then one point, I think the lack of the investments in the real economy, what was also the competitiveness talk like when we're talking about such a small small taxes here. It's for me, it's hard to understand the logic how these small taxes could, uh, be problems for the real investments or how they could be the problems for stability. That's another question. Thank you.”
  EU competences on taxation
• “Thank you, Madam Chair. Warming up relations between the EU and UK is, of course, very important in the current geopolitical situation. But at the same time, however, it is important that we defend the unity of the European Union. There can be no common market without common rules to protect fair market workers, environment and public finances. Our group would like to thank the rapporteur for his work on the draft opinion. It addresses many of our group's priorities, such as taking a coordinated approach to anti-money laundering efforts and regulating cryptocurrencies in future. We could take a stronger position against the ambition to boost competitiveness through deregulation and rolling back prudential rules. Nevertheless, we are looking forward to the negotiations between the groups. Thank you.”
  Anti-money laundering regulation · Regulation of crypto
• “Yes. Thank you. Thank you, dear chair. And Miss Kosova, in your answer, you said that nothing has been changed on the rules of statistics but the Finnish system, it has been built for 80 years almost. And there was no changes in the system until two years ago. Only the statistics change. And suddenly the public debt raised six percentage points in one night. Even the reality didn't change, so there must be a change somewhere. You said that you are happy to explain, so I really would like to hear the explanation because in the system there was no change.”
  EU fiscal rules and oversight of national budgets
• “Thank you. Madam president, Europe is beginning to lag behind China in the green transition technologies. And we are already lagging behind the US in the digital services. In a tightening global situation, strategic dependencies are dangerous. We must not be dependent on authoritarian leaders in China, in the US or in the oil states. The r f has helped Europe with its transition to the future, but we do not know much of the results, however, yet we can only assume we can unfortunately also assume that part of the money has been misused. But the actual problem is that if the only tool EU has is to inject new money into economy, and that is something that may be needed. But differently from the US and China, our hands are tied as far as other aspects are concerned. Under the USA, money was collected back also by imposing taxes on companies, and that is necessary because of the inflation and the public economy's needs instead of debt. We also need own resources, for example from the digital taxes. And we must also close tax paradises inside the EU as well. The EU's limitations can be overcome only by ambition and cooperation, and that entails overtaking those who only look at their rear mirrors. We simply cannot afford cancelling the green transition and returning to dependence from Russia from as the far right seems to want here. When droughts, heat, floods and storms make farming unbearable in parts of Europe, we also have an obligation to act towards the future generations.”
  Own EU resources
• “The removal of unnecessary barriers to the internal market is, of course, worthwhile, but the right wing line that has risen to the leading position, namely focusing on the. Reducing regulation is at best a useless exercise at its worst. The only thing that makes Europe attractive, namely well-being and quality of life, will now be destroyed. This should be our main objective. Europe's competitiveness is measured vis a vis to the rest of the world. China is a ruthless market economy where workers or minorities have no rights. The state control reaches everybody. Externally, China operates systematically and takes one industrial sector at the time in its possession. It's already trapped us with earth minerals, and the United States is also aggressively pursuing its own interests. American democracy was never praiseworthy, but now it has been completely on whole. Presidents. Founders are building digital monopolies. Monopoly and control them everywhere. Thank you.”
  Sourcing of critical raw materials
• “Thank you, Madam Chair. And thank you, Mr. Cipollone. I I'm also sorry that this parliament has been unable to deliver, uh, already five years ago. I think there were very good reasons, very good reasons to build a digital euro. And after that, uh, after attacks of Trump administration and development of the stablecoins, there are more and more vital reasons to have the European public digital money. I don't agree with the banks what they are saying, private banks. But if we really wanted to force people to keep their money on on their bank accounts, uh, is there a way to do it? Is there any reason you can think that digital euro is a bigger threat than the stablecoins or any other way to to withdraw your money from the private banks. Thank you.”
  Digital euro
• “Thank you chair. And thank you very much. I think this is very interesting report and it gives us tool actually even in the national level. But of course in the EU level also, uh, the smaller the actors, the less they have means to, to use tax specialists. And of course, it's also to, to give a level playing field if we have harmonization of, of rules. Uh, I think the pressure from the US is very hard even also in the level of taxation now. And so actually I have three questions, but I hope it's okay because it's not so many of us here.”
  EU competences on taxation
• “(16:42:58 – 16:44:45): Thank you, mister chair, and thank you, the rapporteur for the valuable groundwork. It is important that harmful tax competition is identified and action is taken against it at the EU level. Member states are way too small to be actors on this. So even though it was said that it's the member states that are still in the future deciding about the taxation, without EU cooperation, we have lost this game. Europe cannot be competitive or prosperous if large and foreign companies do not pay the fair share of their profits that they make here. We think actually that they should do it everywhere, not just in Europe, but in Africa, to have healthy economics globally. It is important for the global situation in particular that it has been identified where after a very good development, there has been a setback, especially due to the current US administration. Of the OECD agreements, pillar 1 is dead and pillar 2 is wounded. In our opinion, side-by-side should not have been approved. To relate it in detail, it is very important that the UN tax negotiations are taken into account even though we don't know how it's going there, but we definitely need global solutions. Maybe before that, we need European-wide solutions, but this is way too important a thing to leave just to very vulnerable member states. Thanks to the work so far, and we will, table amendments. Thank you, Jose. I think if you want to have your final words on these comments.”
  EU competences on taxation
• “Thank you, Mr. Chair. And thank you for your. I have to say, frustrating answers because, well, we are all frustrated and most of us are. And the frustration is also in the national level. I can say this in the as a former MP in the National Parliament Tax Committee and the Ministerial Committee of Economics, everybody very frustrated over the years ago. Now we don't have FTT, no GST, no pillar one, we have corrupted pillar two. Uh, the money is accumulating to the digital sector that it's mostly in the US and we are under a big attack from the United States in everything also in the level of taxation. And as you said, we are lacking political will for FTT. That's clear. Uh, and this problem, as you also said, that it's in all the other issues too, in taxation. The, the the commitment to find a European solution. So tobacco and VAT, they are not the answers to the big challenges. So maybe just like pragmatic thinking, does it help if we take things out of the table or if we should put as much as possible things onto the table? Uh, like if we still keep the FTT there and we try to make the like, as was said, my colleague before me, that we need to have really big political push to find any solutions without thinking and choosing beforehand. Thank you.”
  Taxation of financial transactions
• “Vice president. President. The objectives laid out here are good. We need to swiftly transition so that we have greater and more reliable connectivity. Digital connectivity is a chief example of how markets will only work if they're regulated for the common good. Because the freedom freedom on the markets can lead to monopolistic tendencies with very high prices. This is what we see noted in the Draghi and the letter reports. Now if. Big companies were doing well, we wouldn't have the situation we're currently seeing in Germany and the US. Those two countries aren't shining examples of connective of connectivity. And uh, you can't, uh, get good results though if you have poor policy making. Here in Brussels, we have high prices and quite poor connectivity. We must also look at satellites here. The Commission's proposal gives us scope to act. Satellites are increasingly important in civilian and military terms. But we must fear dystopia because it's the US companies that are providing the software and other services. So it would be irresponsible if we were to fail to act and if we were to act like. Uh, Miss Maloney, miss Maloney isn't using, um, the European possibilities afforded to her. I said she's investing in Musk's technologies. So we must look at consumers and our security. Look at China. China no longer allows European, um, um. Providers to act in China, but we don't do the same. We've always been a cutting edge when it comes to connective and connectivity technologies, but we need to protect our jobs and our future. We must ensure our own security. Our resilience is so important. Thank you very much, Madam Commissioner, for this proposal that you put forward, which is balanced, much more balanced than we've seen in the past. It establishes conditions for big operators, and that's a good thing. It is good that we should or we mustn't consolidate towards monopolies. And now I am waiting to hear from Commissioner Ribera on these points.”
  EU digital & tech sovereignty
• “Capital markets Union channel savings into investments plays an important role in the Turkey report. Indeed, Europe needs investments to revive its economy, accelerate the green transition and reduce dangerous dependencies. The Capital Markets Union's plan, however, includes elements that are insufficient at best and potentially dangerous at worst. Analysis suggests that financial markets could, in the very best case, cover only a third of the EU's essential investment needs. Moreover, the plan aims to revive some of the very same instruments that were at the heart of the great financial crisis of 2007 and 2008. The capital markets union is a poor substitute for a proper fiscal policy and stronger public investment. Instead of offering endless incentives to asset managers, the EU must rethink its fiscal rules and build a true fiscal firepower to address the investment crisis.”
  EU fiscal rules and oversight of national budgets
• “So my question is that is there already a plan to gather all the responsible forces? Not maybe just in EU, but wider to fight for tax justice and, uh, and how we could do this as soon as possible. And then, then just a few more. Are you, um, defending the, uh, the anti-tax avoidance directive and the DAC? Uh, because I think it's even more important than ever now to keep the good European practice and go further and not just try to. Think this a little bit strange concept of to be in competitive, which we are already talking all the time and like to give up everything and think then, then, then the market would work for benefit of all. Because it's clear that if we watch what China and us are doing, that they are really much securing their markets. Uh, when we talk about taxation, everything, and if we give up on these issues, the Europe is surely going to lose. Thank you.”
  EU competences on taxation
• “Thank you, chair, and I welcome to the econ committee on behalf of my behalf as well. Madam, my question concerns housing, which you highlighted as an important improvement in statistics a few years ago. Eurostat introduced a statistical change that reclassified interest subsidy loans used to develop affordable housing as government debt. This applies even when public bodies have merely acted as guarantors for these loans, with no additional fiscal burden on the public purse. This technical reclassification has very significant implications. My home country of Finland is a prime example. It is currently experiencing high unemployment, a lack of economic growth and rising level of indebtedness fuelled by excessive fiscal austerity. Adding insult to injury, the statistical reclassification is jeopardising the construction of self funded non nonprofit housing loan guarantees are now counted as debt, even though the value of the supported buildings will always be multiple compared to the amount of the supported loans. So this both distorts the assessment of the state of public finances and prevents needed new housing production. So my question is straightforward what is Eurostat doing to reverse this unjustified decision and support the construction of affordable housing? Thank you.”
  EU housing policy
• “Thank you, Mr. Chair, and many thanks for the excellent presentations. I would have wanted to know if you if you can have an estimate. A range Much of the losses of the tax avoidance to the public sector in Europe, how much money we are losing due to corporate tax avoidance. We know that Apple's tax planning through Ireland cost us billions. Only one company then talking about individuals and forgetting the wealth. Taxes. Do we know how much more could we collect if capital income was taxed as much as wages? We know already that in many countries, the the workforce is transformed in some kind of pseudo entrepreneurs because of many reasons, because of then they don't have to collect pensions, so they are more competitive in the market. And so it's really a. Bad things happening. And taxation is part of this because in many countries capital income is not taxed as the labor. And then one more thing. It would be also interesting to get an estimate of all of this to to European competitiveness because, um, these transnational companies, they often already have a dominant position in the market. So we are not really having a fair market competition under European small and middle sized companies. They really cannot compete. And taxation, of course, is only one part of this. But, uh, what do you think is the the taxation, the cost of this or just, uh, just one factor that strengthens the situation that, uh, killing the market competition, that the multinationals now don't pay their fair share. Thank you.”
  Tax Havens
• “Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you for our very good answers also. Coming from a member state, that where 80% of payments are already digital and almost all of them are in the hands of two US companies. I thought the digital euro is a no brainer. Why would we want to pay so much for a foreign cartel? But in the past months, I've understood that there is a huge conspiracy theory going on in the social media, and this campaign is working. Even in Finland, even we have one of the best media literacy in the world. And I know that the situation in many other countries is much worse. And there are a lot of politicians who are using this as a tool and claiming that the digital euro will kill cash and it will be a tool to to suppression and. It's a bit crazy. People are ready to give all their information to a few global companies and add more and more authoritarian state of the United States, but they are afraid of European Union that it's going to be somehow totalitarian. And well, for us it's a bit like a joke. We see how every day here, how combining all our views takes a lot of resources and time. But as we know, Europe is under attack from many directions and the opposition for the digital euro is one way to undermine our security and our sovereignty. So my question and request, both the ECB and the Commission is how will we show not not just buy information because it's something that people not don't believe in this kind of campaigning, but in legislation that digital euro is not against cash, not against freedom, but against a private cartel and foreign threats. Thank you.”
  Digital euro
• “Thank you, Mr. Chair. And I also want to thank the rapporteur for a very Constructive and, uh, good work, good approach. And also, I want to thank the shadows. We had a good working atmosphere and and I'm very happy about this. Of course, always there are. I guess for the other groups there are some things we would like to improve or some things that we made compromises of. But I would say that the the result is, is balanced and and fair considering the, the, the, the, the parliament, uh, composition say uh, for the left, the, the transparency is very important also in the, in the field of taxation. I also think that a very good slogan for taxation, taxation is the simple the better. I think the, the more complicated taxation we have, uh, the worse for the companies, worse for the public, uh, finances. And, and this is something that, uh, I think in the future, we, we still have to find ways to to harmonize taxation in the even. Everybody here thinks that it's still a national issue to make decisions about taxation, but we must find ways to harmonize instead of fragmentation we are having, because it's it's something that Europe is. Europe, um, is in a weaker position if we compare ourselves to United States or China or we are uh, uh, too much, uh, making things, uh, problematic for ourselves. And taxation is one of the most important tools we have. Uh, and and now we are not, uh, our situation is worse than the other big, uh, economies.”
  EU competences on taxation
• “(16:22:31 – 16:24:04): Thank you, mister chair. Well, it's clear that 27 different tax regimes is a problem in a single market area. But the questions that we had are: will it help to have one more? Does it make it simpler or more mixed? Will it allow harmful tax competition? That was maybe the biggest point for us. But, yeah, we need harmonization, common rules, and ways for businesses to grow inside Europe and our borders. Inside Europe, common digital systems and one-stop shops are needed. So a lot of good stuff inside. Actually, in the end, it's about the content inside and not the title. But to admit yet, of course, it also matters that we take a very critical view on the broader idea of the '28 regime, which this is part of. The text has important safeguards, especially on anti-abuse, real economic substance, shell companies, and workers' rights. So there is a lot of good stuff. The hard part is that it's still very positive about the '28 regime and open to a broader regime at the time in the future. We feel that the risk remains that simplification becomes a pretext for harmful tax competition. But I think in the end, we had very good cooperation. So I want to thank the rapporteur and the shadow rapporteurs for very constructive work and a very good atmosphere. Thank you.”
  EU Single Market harmonisation
• “Thank you, Mr. Chair. Since struggle report was published, the situation has become increasingly worrying. Europe has been living in some kind of neoliberal delusion. While other big economies, especially China and the United States, have increasingly protected their own economies. Now the US has a president who is ready to go very far in his blackmail, both in trade and security policy. There is much to support in the Commission's objectives. The Commission wants to invest in retraining workers and develop the EU budget in a direction that enables, among other things, greater investments in the green transition. But there is also a lot to criticize in the compass. The Commission hopes that EU investments will be financed by deregulating financial markets that would increase instability and crises, not competitiveness. A democratic and socially sustainable transition requires a greater role for public investments than it looks that you are planning in the commission. I'm wondering the same question than the previous speaker. How are we going to have more private money without more productivity? Because that's what we are lacking. The United States, they have already left from the Paris climate agreement and promised that the fossil energy production in the US will grow even more. Many in Europe have drawn the conclusion from this that Europe must also ease regulation and relax its climate targets. I think that would be very short sighted for the for the climates, our economy and our jobs. Eu does not have gas and oil, but the whole world suffers from burning them. Of course, sometimes deregulation can be appropriate, but Europe must not embark on the path of Trumpian politics in the name of competitiveness. On the contrary, Europe must accelerate green investments that support wellbeing, competitiveness and self-sufficiency. Our strong position comes from the quality of life, and that is something that we can build on our competitiveness, not in the race to the bottom. Thank you.”
  Climate efforts
• “Madam chair, We must distinguish knowledge from wishful thinking. Climate change is the greatest threat also to our economy. Southern Europe is drying up to the point of being almost unlivable. And it's not looking good anywhere else either. Both financially and morally, it is better to act now than wait to repair the full destruction. Fortunately, the solutions to both climate crisis and competitiveness come together. The sooner we move to a fossil free economy, the sooner we also stop pouring money into foreign fossil fuels. No gas and oil from Russia, the United States or Middle East. We must not let China take over the sustainable production market. The necessary steps for change won't happen with us just waiting. The market won't save us. Returning to the previous millennium won't save us. It's time we take leadership to save ourselves. It is only possible if the moderate right stops cooperating with the far right.”
  Climate efforts
• “Thank you, Mr. Chair. And thank you, Mr. Hoekstra. Um, it seems that everybody is worrying and wondering the same stuff, which is, of course, good that we have a it looks that we have a strong European perspective of the things we should do. But the problem is that there is this, um, like Trump is trading us with everything about NATO tariffs, taxation, even attacking Greenland and so on. So it's like, uh, I think it would be naive to look each of these things separately. And I think that if we just give up, then we're going to secure the good relations. And because it's clear that it's not going to happen like that. And I want to thank you. What you said in the hearings that, uh, that if we don't find global solutions, then then you will find with the ministers, you will you will find a European or other solutions. And so I think even the possible trade war, it would be very expensive, but it would be more expensive to give up with Trump and his oligarchs who are now inside the government. And it's clear that they don't want to pay taxes, but they are also attacking our democracy at the moment already, the European democracy and free speech.”
  Foreign interference in Europe
• “Uh, we also, we think it's very important to fight tax avoidance and tax evasion and for this, even if we don't have harmonisation, as much as I would like to see, we also need a robust cooperation between the member state and tax administration and these things. Uh, the the report, the draft has been, um, since the beginning. The draft was quite good, but I think that the negotiations took it even even better in many ways. Uh, we see that this geopolitical situation, the, the, the OECD pillars. Uh, we have huge problems now in the geopolitical situation. And I'm a bit afraid that we have to, uh, this is not the end, but the start. Maybe quite soon. We have to talk about taxation again. Uh, but, uh, at the situation where we are now, I think the, the, the work we have done is already a good, good start. And and we we need more answers, uh, to, to, uh, global taxation that we are having now considering the what's happening with pillar one and two and, uh, well, so much to say, but maybe I conclude this, uh, but we want to say the importance of transparency and reporting. And that's very crucial for, for our group. And we have seen progress in the previous mandates in the European Parliament. And we want to see, uh, progression in the future. Also. Thank you.”
  Tax Havens
• “(15:48:41 – 15:50:10): Thank you, Mister Chair, and thank you all for your very interesting speeches. In Finland, we have the saying that everybody loves taxes because we get a great happiest welfare state in the world, but actually it's not that much anymore. Guess that it's individualism is growing. But we also had some tax fraud, especially have had and still have, especially in the construction business, and then reverse VAT has been actually a big success on this. But today, we heard that in terms of quantity, VAT fraud is not the biggest problem, maybe and most of it happens in small scale. But we have heard before in some hearings that the traditional organized crime is using and it will say today are also that they are using the money they are getting from here, they are using the same money for a very very trash traditional crime. The most terrible things we see in Europe, human trafficking, drugs, everything. So just like it was said that in fair competition, which was an important point in terms of crime, we cannot measure this only in money. So my question is that, do we have and should we have, different ways to work and attack the small operators and the organized crime on the other hand? Thank you.”
  Anti-money laundering regulation
• “Thank you very much, Madam President. When I was young in the 1990s, there was huge unemployment as a result of banking crisis. The, um, many of the parents of my friends were excluded from society as a result of people paying for the failure of the banks. In 2007, economic crisis again, many people had to pay for the failure of the banks once again. The banking union has worked, and We need to look at competitiveness and how we can close holes with a report. We have the Basel three standards which are mentioned as well. But obviously this is important and there's dividends as well which have gone up with the ECB interest rates. So we need to try and secure jobs in the real economy. It's not just trying to create fast profits for banks.”
  European Banking Union
• “China has shown with raw materials that we are dangerously dependent on it. But China is also dependent on us. When Trump's United States openly attacks both the EU and China, it would be tempting to leave the US to fight with itself. However, China shows every day that it cannot be trusted by supporting Putin's Russia to kill the people of its neighboring countries. Nor must we turn a blind eye to China's own shocking human rights violations, for example, in Xinjiang. Since our destinies are intertwined in many ways, China cannot and should not be isolated. However, all strategic dependencies must be broken and the support for killing must end. The EU must also look in the mirror to be credible in the world stage. Europe itself must stop supporting the genocide in Palestine. Time. Now we are considered hypocrites. And for a good reason.”
  EU-China relations