Rasmus ANDRESEN

Policy topics Rasmus ANDRESEN is active on

What Rasmus ANDRESEN has said (54)

• 2026-02-23 “P-000734/2026 Answer given by Mr Dombrovskis on behalf of the European Commission The Commission continuously assesses the macroeconomic and social impact of pressing economic issues for the EU and the euro area. The Honourable Member is referred to the analytical chapters of Commission forecasts 1 , the Quarterly Report of the Euro Area 2 , Country reports 3 , in-depth reviews 4 , the Joint Employment Report 5 , analyses of social convergence 6 and other institutional papers and staff working documents 7 . On 25 November 2026, the Commission published its European Macroeconomic Report (EMR), which aims to inform and steer policy discussions to strengthen the EU economy. The EMR underpins the euro area recommendation 8 and complements the Alert Mechanism Report 9 and delves into macroeconomic challenges and vulnerabilities. 1 The Autumn 2025 Forecast https://economy-finance.ec.europa.eu/economic-forecast-and-surveys/economicforecasts/autumn-2025-economic-forecast-shows-continued-growth-despite-challenging-environment_en#boxes--autumn-2025 contained a special issues chapter on the macroeconomic role of the EU Emissions Trading System https://economy-finance.ec.europa.eu/trends-carbon-intensity-and-macroeconomic-role-eu-emissionstrading-system_en, and a box on spillovers to the EU from US tariffs imposed on third countries https://economy-finance.ec.europa.eu/spillovers-eu-us-tariffs-imposed-third-countries-model-basedsimulations_en. The Spring 2025 Forecast https://economy-finance.ec.europa.eu/economic-forecast-andsurveys/economic-forecasts/spring-2025-economic-forecast-moderate-growth-amid-global-economicuncertainty_en included a special issues chapter on the macroeconomic effect of US tariff hikes https://economyfinance.ec.europa.eu/economic-forecast-and-surveys/economic-forecasts/spring-2025-economic-forecastmoderate-growth-amid-global-economic-uncertainty/macroeconomic-effect-us-tariff-hikes_en. 2 The Quarterly Report on the Euro Area https://ideas.repec.org/s/euf/qreuro.html. Recent versions included articles on selected macroeconomic and social aspects of housing affordability https://ideas.repec.org/a/euf/qreuro/0241-02.html, the distributional impact of high inflation and the related policy response https://ideas.repec.org/a/euf/qreuro/0234-02.html and climate change and its implications for prices and inflation https://ideas.repec.org/a/euf/qreuro/0231-02.html. 3 The Country reports https://economy-finance.ec.europa.eu/document/download/fca1ebd8-9670-4482-906dba121c873112_en?filename=AT_CR_SWD_2025_220_1_EN_autre_document_travail_service_part1_v4.pdf. They provide a systematic assessment of economic developments and key policy challenges, innovation, business environment and productivity, decarbonisation, energy affordability and sustainability, and skills, quality jobs and social fairness for all EU Member States. 4 In-depth reviews https://economy-finance.ec.europa.eu/economic-governance-framework/macroeconomicimbalance-procedure/depth-reviews_en provide an assessment of macroeconomic imbalances for selected EU Member States. 5 Joint Employment Report https://employment-social-affairs.ec.europa.eu/joint-employment-report-2025-0_en. 6 Social Convergence Framework https://employment-social-affairs.ec.europa.eu/news/commission-analysessocial-convergence-10-eu-countries-2025-04-11_en. 7 Institutional papers written by Commission staff based on the QUEST model are linked here https://economyfinance.ec.europa.eu/economic-research-and-databases/economic-research/macroeconomic-models/questmacroeconomic-model_en, and based on the Global Multi-Country model here https://economyfinance.ec.europa.eu/economic-research-and-databases/economic-research/macroeconomic-models/global-multicountry-gm-model_en. 8 2026 Council recommendation on the economic policy of the euro area https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-5732-2026-INIT/en/pdf. 9 Alert Mechanism Reports https://economy-finance.ec.europa.eu/economic-governanceframework/macroeconomic-imbalance-procedure/alert-mechanism-report_en.”
  Defence spending · EU fiscal rules and oversight of national budgets
• “Yes. Thank you so much. Also to the rapporteur. I think that I mean, of course, as Greens, we also welcome the proposal and also the aim of it to establish common rules for large multinational corporations to calculate their taxable income across Europe. Also, of course, we support the goal of reducing compliance costs for companies operating on a cross-border level. But I also think that we are also still see some weaknesses also in the proposal. And we are also creating some loopholes. For example, under the new proposal, companies would still file a separate corporate tax returns in each member state. Some of you already mentioned this, and there are, of course lots of reasons for this, I see. But on the other side, comparing this to the former proposal, um, the the formula based approach had much more common criteria on how this should look like. And in contrast, what Buffett is doing right now is to is not to specify such formula and instead suggesting profits be allocated according to different member state proposals. And from our perspective, we are also risking a we are risking that. The approach then will, uh, have a strong divergence among different member states. And this could even go against the goal of what we all want to, uh, want to, um, get out of it. And this I think we also need to address. But of course, as, uh, Evelyn already said, we will have time for further discussions at the level of the shadow meetings. And this I also think we need. And then we also, of course, working in a constructive manner so that we can reach a good and strong compromise.”
  EU competences on taxation
• “Like public statements coming up from business and so on. I think some of the arguments were used by, by, uh, Miss Riddell. Um, and the second question is, uh, what do you expect from the upcoming Trump tax reform in the US? Does this, uh, do you see any impact on on some of the discussions uh, we are having, um, when it comes to the, to the OECD agreement and on Mr. Angel, a bit different question. And I know it's complicated for you to answer, but we got, uh, once more, uh, leaked news from the commission on a digital levy. It was mentioned by my colleague Gonsalves already a bit earlier. Um, I don't want to ask you what your plans are, because I know you will not answer my question, but maybe you could do an assessment on, uh, different kinds of, uh, of how, uh, A digital levee could be designed to, uh, to tax or to to reach out to some of the big tech platforms. We know also, the president of the commission had been quite vocal on in the Financial Times some weeks ago.”
  EU competences on taxation
• “(16:39:49 – 16:42:53): Thank you so much also from our side. From the draft, I think there are some positive elements in it, like, for example, on the side-by-side system, we welcome very much. Also, we agree that some level of harmonization and simplification is required to ensure that complexity is not taking too much space. On the other side, in the language, we can see on the fight against tax avoidance, and here, I can echo what S and T already had said. If I got you right, at least, we are a bit concerned about the language when it comes to this because also for our group, the main priority remains the fight against tax avoidance and aggressive tax planning. I also think we will come with some language amendments to strengthen the language here. On BEFIT, we would like to stick to the proposal, and we are also still calling for fully implementing the global minimum tax under pillar 2. The same is true for the need for a digital services tax where our group is in favor, and I also think that we should take into account some reasoned positioning. We did also hear in the Parliament on the issue of the digital services tax, having in mind the debate on resources and the interim MFF interim reports. I think our response in this report should be linked to what we recently voted. On multilateralism, we fully agree that this is key for corporate taxation, and we always should go for multilateral solutions if this is possible. On the same side, I also think in the time we are living in, we also need to have in mind that the EU is not a weak actor at the global stage, meaning that we should also have some strong position when it comes to multilateral agreements and the negotiations of multilateral agreements. I also think, in general, the Parliament should play a stronger role in calling for the Commission and the member states to agree on some strong solutions there. But, of course, this also needs to be done in the framework of the UN tax convention and so on, but I think that we will also table some amendments here. The last point from our perspective, and I know this is controversial, but I still would like to mention it from our group also, the topic on the windfall profits is still relevant with some experiences we made in the past at EU level, and we will also table some amendments regarding that.”
  Taxation of windfall profits
• “Thank you so much. I'm already getting the floor for the second time, and I'm still waiting for the first question I asked. But you said it will come later, so I will wait with excitement on the own resources package. I would, uh, first of all, welcome that you are putting forward a quite ambitious proposal. And I think the main issue now is to convince the council, as some colleagues already mentioned, and this is very important, and I also think we should send a clear message to the council that they should do more than just shooting some different elements of the proposal down. So if you want to change this, then please come forward with your own ideas and try to find a majority for that. Uh, like with your colleagues. Um, if you ask the Greens, we would have liked you to target more. The tech companies and also financial activity and speculation. This you didn't do you even withdraw as commission in the working program the FTT proposal? That's a pity. But the situation right now. Um, but on the other side, I would like to ask on core, uh, and some legal elements in this because as I understand, there are some legal limitations also in what you can do, for example, on doing a more progressive approach when it comes to core meaning to target some of the real big companies much higher than some of the smaller ones you are targeting right now. Maybe you could elaborate a little bit more on that. And then please don't forget the other question I asked.”
  Own EU resources
• “Yes. Thank you so much and good to see you back in the committee. I would like to ask 2 or 3 questions on the FTT. First of all, you mentioned that, uh, you are calculating with an interesting amount of, uh, revenue. Could you become a bit more concrete on what does that actually mean in terms of figures? And also on what would you like to see added, uh, in the scope of an of an FTT? Um, I fully share your perspective on this, but, uh, you mentioned the high frequency trading, but maybe there are others as well. Or do I understand you right? In some of the replies you already gave that this is like what you would like to concentrate on or would advise us to to concentrate on. And thirdly, on the issue on cryptocurrencies, um, I mean, this was not mentioned. I mean, I came in a bit late. Sorry for that. But as I understand, this was not mentioned until now, but maybe you could elaborate a little bit more on this aspect, because we know that this, of course, also in a global context, is a huge topic right now. So maybe you have some thoughts on this as well.”
  Taxation of financial transactions
• “Paulina and Jonas have a problem for many months. That desperately going around the handbook trying to find a home where they were. The city where they work and study for six months. They've been sent applications. They've looked at lots of homes. Um, often they didn't hear back from the landlord. Paulina and Jonas aren't just some people. They're examples of millions of people in a similar situation because they have a problem to live in a city or in a rural area, and to find an affordable home. Those who have a home suffer from high rent increases and policies of big concerns, which aren't bothered about their home. 1.4 people million homes are available in Germany, but build, build, build isn't the solution. We need to have affordable housing for ordinary families and people. What the EU is to act against speculation and empty properties to make groups. Property groups. Responsibility where the. The majority in this house isn't prepared to do that, but we in the Greens are fighting for people like Paulina Nunez.”
  EU housing policy
• “Yes, that's for sure. I would like to ask a second question on the stablecoin issue. I mean, this had been debated also with you, and we really appreciate also your clear assessment when it comes to stablecoin. Here in the, in the Parliament, but also other in other events and reports. But the issue hasn't been solved because from our perspective, the commission needs to act, and they are a bit reluctant when it when it comes to MCA and how to move forward there and also the maybe now newest development looking into a review of MCA would take some time. So this is why I would like to ask you about what you think should be the issue. In the meantime, if the commission and this seems to be the case won't follow the recommendation, one of your strong recommendations you put forward. What other options do we have to solve this issue? Because we know that the dynamics on the stablecoin issue is quite fast, and the decision taking here is quite slow. Maybe you could add the remark on this.”
  Use of stablecoins
• “The world is falling apart. And quite rightly, we need to strengthen the European Union, move beyond pretty words, and back up those fine words with action through the MFF proposal. We need to ensure social peace across our continent, we need a strong pillar within the EU budget. Over 30% of citizens are struggling to make ends meet, cannot deal with unforeseen major expenses. And that is why it frustrates me to hear that the next EU budget may not have a strong social pillar. We in the Greens will fight for social policies. They must take centre stage in the next budget and those that should pay here should be those with the broadest shoulders big tech companies, financial speculators. We need a brave budget proposal and include an EU digital tax and other taxes. Thank you.”
  Own EU resources
• “Thank you so much. Also to you, Mr. Minister, to attend the committee meeting. I would also like to ask into the defense spending topic. I think that we all can agree on how important it is also to boost investments to the defense sector. So no need for like, convincing us politically, but we would like to get a better understanding of what is actually at the table right now and what kind of measures you are planning to do. So this is why I would like to ask a little bit more into what kind of exemptions of the fiscal rules are on the table in your debate, and would that also include legislative changes, and is this understood, or should we understand this as a substitute for common spending instruments? Because what I've learned is that some member states are especially opposing common spending. And my feeling is that now the exemption of the fiscal rules are an alternative to to common spending tools. Maybe you could elaborate a little bit more on this and also on the time plan of this, because you mentioned some meetings, but will be the they the ones where the decisions will be taken or will they be a further consideration? And maybe politically, you could also explain us why, for the need for an increased defence spending, we are discussing changes of the fiscal rules or exemptions now, but for other security threats like climate change, we are not even considering this, knowing very well that this also has an impact for our security.”
  Defence spending
• “Madam president of the ECB, ladies and gentlemen, now we have a question of crises, attacks on the euro, cryptocurrencies from the US. Financial stability is not going to be achieved only through monetary policy. But monetary policy is essential. It mustn't be blind to these threats. The ECB's entrance policy has to take note of the weaknesses. It's not responsible for the economic weaknesses, but it is important that you do more than just focus on interest rates because you're ignoring the real consequences in the economy of these policies. Central banks are under a lot of pressure globally in the USA. People have said this already that the fed and the relationship between that and the U. The US policies is being renegotiated is being revised totally, and this is important to bear in mind in the coming years, if we have a new staffing of the ECB, monetary policy and central banks and their role will be on the agenda again. So everything is going to be a Reshuffled in the next couple of years. So we have to think about the future of the ECB. Separating the primary and the secondary mandate. Clearly, uh, is something that we need to focus on. We have to accept we have to find acceptance in society of the ECB. And I have to say with regard to the climate and threats to the climate, the risks, for example, of fossil fuel investments, uh, people are just ignoring these risks and we cannot continue like this. So I would like the ECB, especially in terms of green monetary policy, to continue along that path and not to dilute it. Thank you.”
  ECB monetary policy
• “Yes. And I'm substituting our shadow, Kyra Hansen. But I can tell you we have the same opinion on this. And I also can tell you that despite of thanking our rapporteur, there is still a long way to go to find a stable compromise from our perspective. Of course, we can all agree on that. The Energy Tax Directive from 2003 needs an update. And I mean, this is this is completely clear. And we can also see that as it stands now, the energy Tax directive doesn't have any kind of logic, which neither fits to the climate goals already mentioned by some colleagues nor with the current energy system. Also, when it comes to cost efficiency, which is important not just for the companies but also for our Citizens. Also, having in mind on the developments we could see in the past years when it comes to the energy bills, the commission proposal from a green perspective is, uh, quite good. Uh, we always have thoughts on what we would like to see added, but I think that in the structure and the hierarchy, the commission is addressing some of the problems we can see there. And we can also see that, um, um, they are broadening the scope of a wider range of energy products, uh, to ensure comprehensive and fair taxation.”
  Energy (green transition)
• “Around 240 million. Europeans can no longer afford to have a balanced meal anymore. About half of the people in the EU have had to experience their income being whittled away by these high prices. And of course, there's inflation as well. Around half of the price increases in the food sector are due to large retailers in this sector. The good news is that we are not helpless, that we can change things. Large companies such as Nestlé, Coca-Cola, Ferrero, we can ensure that they pay their taxes properly. We can end speculation. This should not be something that happens with, uh, food. So we want the EU to investigate the food sector, to be very transparent and to be very clear about why our consumers are having to pay more at the supermarket.”
  EU policy on farmer–buyer relations in the agri-food supply chain
• “So I would like to step in. He asked me to do so please. Thank you so much. Um, so I will just read his notes. Colleagues. Single market has been the foundation of the European Union since its inception. It enabled movement of workers, investments, businesses and greatly contributed to the prosperity of all member states. However, after 70 years, there are still gaps and barriers to the proper functioning of the market. I welcome the commission's proposal to merge four instruments and simplify existing framework to strengthen the single market.”
  EU Single Market harmonisation
• “Thank you very much. This is not getting rid of bureaucracy. This is a massacre. The EU does have a problem with the bureaucracy, and EU rules are far too complicated for many companies, but the difference between national and European legislation compounds the issue. But just closing your eyes to this and pretending as if the climate crisis and destroying nature or false labour doesn't exist is not a viable answer. The commission president, von der Leyen, has promised to stick to the objectives set out, but to make the rules more practicable. All sounds well and good, but it's not how it's going to be. 90% of companies are going to be taken out of the scope of the main legislation, rather than putting your nose to the grindstone. So we need to ask about better implementation. And here we need to look at transitional measures rather than exemption measures. We need a better distinction between big companies and small craft scale enterprises. But what we have on the table has gone far beyond that. And so we're extremely skeptical. We hope there will be changes during the legislative process that would be possible. Thank you.”
  Overall simplification of regulation in the EU
• “Now, what we're seeing now is between 5 and 6 different streams for one game, and people are trying to find where they can get a streaming on the internet. Amazon, Sky zone, magenta, all sorts of new things coming on Netflix. The offer is phenomenal and the fees are getting higher and higher. The subscriptions are costing more and more. Football is at the top here, and what we're seeing is a commercialization of professional football, which does in fact pose a problem. And this is where you get an illegal office here. But of course you can't expect anything else. They are causing damage. There are there are insecure websites, and we have also a lot of malware which is involved here. And people are damaged by this. So commission politicians and police at national level should be tackling these illegal platforms, but that doesn't is not adequate alone. We have to ensure that we can broadcast this further so that everybody can take part in this. We have to really deal with this. We have to get rid of this particularly in sport, sports events and the illegal streams that are engendered is something we really need to do away with. Thank you. President. Commission.”
  Broadcasting of sports events
• “Yes. Thank you so much. Also from my side. Um, I have one question which goes on the social polarization in our Societies, because I really think that we need to ensure that the MFF at the end delivers also for ordinary people. And I would like to get a better understanding of the minimum share for social objectives you are proposing, as I understand, and especially now, and you have been quite explicit about it now, where the ETS two had been left out on how the Social Climate Fund will be financed in the future. And thirdly, on the issue on the corporate level. First of all, despite other groups here in the House, the Greens think that also the corporate sector, the big the big business, so the bigger part of the sector can pay a bit more and can also contribute a bit more to the budget. But what I would like to understand is the design of it, meaning who will pay this levy at the end, all who will be included in that and more explicitly. What about the big tech companies who have a legal presence in the EU? Will they be part of the design and calculated into it or not? And or are we sending the message to our companies that the European companies have to pay more? But big business, big tech, the big tech companies will be let out. So if you could provide a little bit more details on this, then I would at least become a little bit more than what I am now.”
  Own EU resources
• “Just very briefly, thanks to the colleagues and to the Commission for the first remarks on this. And as the chair already said, I think it will be quite complicated, but also an interesting task to to strike the right balance because on the there is a need for flexibility, especially dealing with, uh, with, uh, foreign policy and, uh, all of the different crises we are facing. On the other side, there is also a risk with not earmarking on not putting like some, some additional criteria in that maybe some of the conflicts and some of the regions, uh, will be forgotten because others are more dominated. And this is what I think we need to, to, to find good compromises. Um, but but thanks to the colleagues, especially them mentioning they are constructive and interested in, in finding good compromises, good and stable compromises.”
  EU foreign policy approach
• “Thank you. Thank you for that question. I will refer to what our vice president said just a couple of minutes ago. I believe that in the next couple of months, it will be extremely important to establish an EU budget that allows us to work on social questions, but also safety and security policy, which has become more important than in recent times. That is certainly something in the Greens group that we agree with. But I also believe that we should do more to tax text the big technology tech companies. I hope that we will see concrete proposals in that direction from the commission next week.”
  Size of EU budget
• “Secondly, we also amended article 24, uh, to propose a ceiling for the provisions. This is basically a recommendation to the Court of Auditors came with. So for the colleagues working on, uh, on global Europe, I think it will be quite important also to read the recommendations the European Court of Auditors made. They already came up with some good assessments. Um, thirdly, we um, um, limited the role of private entities for the, for the different budgetary guarantees. And, uh, on the thematic questions, we are proposing some minimum amounts for some essential policy objectives like humanitarian aid or development or global health. And we also introduced, um, some thematic pillars, for example, for human rights and democracy or civil society organizations. Um, we will insist that decommitments in the amounts that are carried over from unspent funds should be made available again to the budget line of origin, so that we can ensure that the money. There is some flexibility, but we also can can ensure some predictability. So this is, I think, some of the main points we put forward in our assessment. I'm looking forward for the amendments from the different political groups. The deadline for tabling the amendments will be the 17th of April at 12, and the vote in batch should be taking place the 23rd of June. So there is still a bit time to go.”
  EU Development & Humanitarian Aid
• “Thank you so much. I just would like to echo what we just heard also from our rapporteur on the own resources, because I really think that if we are also listening to all of the different remarks from different political groups, that without a strong own resources package, we will not be able to get the Parliament's priorities on the spending side. And this should be very clear. And this is also really important, I think, when it comes to the already the interim report now. Um, and, but also later on in the talks with the council because what, what my feeling is right now that everybody is trying to shoot the proposal on, on resources down, and nobody is really fighting for alternatives. And this is why I'm really supporting the line put forward both by the MFF but also by the own resources rapporteurs. First of all, to stick to the package, but also to come up with some ideas on what else we would like to see if there is a need for an additional own resource. And I think that the text on on big tech companies from the US and other parts of the world is an excellent proposal. We put forward some others, but we really need to fight for a strong package of own resources also in the MFF talks. Otherwise we won't succeed.”
  Own EU resources
• “Yes. Thank you so much also for coming to our committee. Um, it's a good opportunity, I think, especially because tomorrow the Budget Committee will vote on the MFF interim report, which is a very important milestone for the European Parliament. Uh, regarding the different programs and the positioning for the for the further MFF negotiations. And I think that, um, your statement is quite aligned with what a lot of us are also thinking when it comes to strengthening cross border regions, especially also having in mind that in being part of a cross-border region as well, the Danish-german border region. Um, my feeling clearly is that like in Brussels, more people are fighting for cross-border perspective than in many capitals. And this will also be important to prioritize for the MFF negotiations in the in the next months. Um, I think on the good side of it, we can see that, especially looking into Interreg, some of the fights, both civil society, a lot of regions, but also a lot of colleagues here in the Parliament had done in the past already had been a success, because there will be an indirect programme in the next MFF with maybe not enough resources, but still resources to finance projects and cross border regions.”
  Cohesion and rural funding
• “Thank you so much. Also to the experts on all the input you already shared with us. I think this is quite insightful. Also working on the report Mathias will be responsible for. I have three questions I think I would like to start with Mr. Cutter on the idea on on levies, on on shadow banks there. I would like to get you elaborate a little bit more on, because I think this is also a new aspect. We didn't discuss a lot in the parliament before, so maybe you have a little bit more to tell us. That would really be interesting and maybe also not linked. But additionally, I would like to comment you on the question on a levy on bank profits like some of the EU member states already introduced. Maybe you also have have some Have some insights there, which could be interesting also for us and for the. Work here in the Parliament. And to Roberta, I actually would like to ask you because you argued a lot about financial stability. And you mentioned that like undermining financial stability from your perspective. And of course, I agree is a problem. And this is like like for you argument also against the the FTT as I understand.”
  EU policy on banks profits
• “Thank you so much. And I think we can all agree on that. Strengthening defence spending now I'm here is a common exercise for all institutions in the EU and also in the eurozone. So from the green perspective, we are welcoming the debate about the fiscal rules, even having in mind that like it's just like one year ago, the current rules entered into force. But I think that especially having in mind also some criticism on the effects on spending for important topics is also really important for the debate now. And this is also what I would like to continue to address, like some colleagues did it as well on different kind of trade offs we can expect. And I would like to ask a little bit more into what does an increase in the level of defence spending actually mean for other important questions, where we know that they also have an effect for our security, like for example, fighting global warming? For me, it's hard to understand that for defense spending, an exemption could be possible. But for climate, this is not even discussed a lot in the Eurogroup. Or maybe you could you could argue against and and tell me what the current state of play in the debates in the Eurogroup is also when it comes, for example, to climate investments, where the UN is telling us that the global warming is the most urgent security threat we are actually dealing with. And on the other side, I would also like to hear a little bit more on the question of how you define the scope of military spending. Are you actually more or less debating investments in equipment, or are you having a broader security debate on, for example, cyber security personnel and other stuff, which I think also would be important to add?”
  Defence spending
• “I should first of all share the frustration. At least the majority here in the room I think feels. Um. But I also have to admit, Commissioner, that I'm not really sure about if I think that the strategy you have chosen in your first two years, uh, in this mandate had been the right one, to be very honest, because what you basically also said you tested the waters on different proposals. And as I understand, this is also what you will continue to do on the ETD and you would like to do at least this is what I understood in the reply to my colleague Laura Walters. You would do the same on the DST, and then we are always ending up in the same situation that there is no majority, or at least no, uh, especially not an immunity or even not a small group of member states who would move forward. And then we will have the same conversation on some of the proposals you just mentioned. In a year or maybe in half a year, I don't know when, but we will have the same conversation.”
  EU competences on taxation
• “(14:27:56 – 14:30:31): Yes. Thank you so much, also to you, commissioner. I think this draft budget, didn't really come with a big surprise because we all know how limited also the last budget, like in this MFF, is, and this we had known for a long time. Even though, I think it's still important to remember us all on what this limitation also means for our ability to act, in the next months even also with a completely unclear outcome on where we will land on the m m f f negotiations. And this is why I also think it's important to raise it again and also to address the council. Maybe some of them are listening to our debate, respecting the parliament as an important institution. On that also, like, the way, the council normally is acting with the budget, doesn't really help at all in finding some strong priorities and also on, yeah, addressing addressing them for for for the next next time. I would like to raise 2 issues. 1st of all, on the mainstreaming targets on biodiversity and climate, if I get it right, and this is also not a big surprise, to be honest, we will not reach the biodiversity target, but I would like to ask a little bit more into that and also on what kind of of assessment you're you're doing out of or making out of of this effect we had known already before. But but still, would like to to comment you on on this, on on biodiversity, but also on climate and especially also on the difference between commitments and payments when it comes to the climate targets and the experience we made because I still think this is a very relevant point. Secondly, as the batch repiter on on the Global Europe program, I'm also, of course, interested a lot in, the foreign policy part of, next year's budget. You mentioned Greenland and Palestine. Maybe you could elaborate a bit more on those 2 aspects and more in general on how you are dealing also with increasing humanitarian needs we may not know now, but could be there year before we will end up on a solution in the next MFF. So maybe you could also, come with a statement on this.”
  EU Development & Humanitarian Aid
• “Is in the recovery fund. Is in a very difficult economic phase. It's helped us through that phase. And as colleagues have already said, there are many specific infrastructure projects which have been boosted by this, and that contributes to ensuring that our economy is more green and more sustainable. However, even if you want there to be a continuation of this RF, we do need to get to grips with some of the problematic aspects and the implementation sometimes has taken too long. The quality of the projects has sometimes been low, and the monies have too often ended up seeping away in national budgets. In a month, we'll have a proposal on the Multiannual Financial Framework and we should ensure that investment capacity is accompanied by clear goals as regards investment in green and innovative infrastructure, and that we have European added value and not national electoral gifts, and also that we have broad involvement only of Parliament but also of civil society. Thank you.”
  Conditions to access EU budget
• “And I would like to ask you how you are like, um, what your perspective is on, on maybe business models undermining this financial stability, like for example, unsustainable business models like for example, in Brown shares where we know that like on the long term they have a bad effect on on financial stability. Would you define them differently and would you be more open minded looking into also dealing with them differently in our tax system or what's your perspective of this? This would really be interesting to me to to get your perspective. And the second one is on tax reduction. Um, when it comes to tax reduction, my feeling is that they are they are quite costly for the public budgets. I'm also a member of the budget committee and in some parts not very efficient. So I would like to hear you, uh, giving me your perspective on, on on those arguments. So how should they be designed so that they really also have an effect on the ground because like big tax reductions are, I think, not efficient enough. Also having in mind the limitations of public budget these days.”
  Priorities of taxation policy in the EU
• “The EU needs to take action and defend itself against Trump, Putin and the rest. We need a strong budget. We are weak if we don't have a strong budget. And when we're talking about financial policy, I was surprised that Ursula von der Leyen, in her speech, did not say a word about key decisions on the Multiannual Financial Framework. I hope that the Commission at a later stage will say something about that. We also need to look at social cohesion and Trump, Putin and others want to weaken the EU. The heads of state and government, when talking about budget issues are going down the wrong path. They talk about what they have to pay in to the common fund, but they don't talk about all the benefits from EU funding and social cohesion. First and foremost, I would like to see a change here. I would like Chancellor Mertes to change his position and a strong budget.”
  Size of EU budget
• “Thank you very much. The budget for 2026 is a good time to compare and compare. How serious we are when it comes to improvements is specifically for people in the European Union. We Greens are important for social improvements for everybody that we have for Erasmus, for more young people for is accessible also for households with little resources. We are in favor of social housing. Lower rents were in favour of cross border workers, get a better support if they have problems when they work, and we're also in favour of the EU giving more money and not less. On health. We need social progress and the 2026 budget. It doesn't solve everything. They margin that we have is very tight. So to be honest, I'm a bit disappointed that we have a position from council which. Aims at one thing making cuts and not having common priorities, unlike what we're doing in Parliament. I'm happy that we've managed in Parliament to use the margin that we have to have set clear priorities and to stick up for that together. It's important for the budget. It's more important still for the MFF, which is is being talked about in the corridors. So my request would be for tomorrow's vote to all colleagues that we don't do anything silly, that we don't fall into the trap of the far right who are actually not here, and that they're only peddling populism. We're trying to find common solutions.”
  Size of EU budget
• “Thank you. I'd like to know what financial instruments you reject. I understand that you don't want joint European borrowing. So how do you see the priorities of the EU? How do you want to fund defence, for example, I get the idea that you're also rejecting own resources. So only rescheduling the budget Remains as an option. So I'd like to hear from the FTP of an answer because I haven't heard one here or elsewhere.”
  Own EU resources
• “Yes. Thank you so much. My question goes on. The cost of living crisis. Uh, which is still hurting millions of citizens in the EU. And in your confirmation hearing, you committed to a question we asked you back then to assess the practice of unfair pricing related to market concentration. For example, in the food or the energy sector. You committed to explore the application of article 102 of the treaties to price increases in the context of supply chain bottlenecks for essential goods and the development of a framework for enforcing action against unfair pricing practices. So what I would like to ask you is if you could elaborate on the progress you made since we confirmed you as a commissioner, and when we can expect the first assessment on the questions I just mentioned, and also on how the time plan is when it comes to the to the to the different things you committed to in the hearing related to that?”
  EU Competition policy
• “Okay. To strengthen the single market and increase national capacities to tackle fraud and corruption. Proposed instrument. The proposed instrument is relatively small but highly important to achievement of these objectives. Strengthening administrative cooperation between Member States and the EU institutions and digitalisation of the processes are essential for elimination of the trade barriers. Provision of support to SMEs is of pivotal importance. Smes are the backbone of our economy and they must be empowered, not overwhelmed, by the complexity of the single market. We need also to bear in mind looming enlargement. Access to the program of the candidate countries will facilitate their integration to the EU and make the accession smoother. However, we must go further. Enforcement cannot focus solely on removing barriers. It must also safeguard our standards, especially those related to environment, agriculture and food safety. We also need to stop to stop drug trafficking from abroad to preserve health in future for our children. With the level of e-commerce that we have now, costumers role in fulfilling those tasks depend on its capacity and sufficient resources, and smart, innovative tools are key to this. Finally, as scale of global crisis increases, a number of our priorities expands more and more. We need to protect our economy and our budget. Currently 45 billion, which is over two thirds of the estimated damage in the cases that are under investigation of the EPO comes from VAT and customs fraud. We need to increase our capabilities to stop this because we do need this money for our citizens, for social justice, for environment, for energy, for defense, and for many other priorities. I thank for your attention and look forward to the productive for the productive work.”
  EU Single Market harmonisation
• “Yes. Thank you so much. And I can echo what most of the colleagues already said. And I also would like to thank the rapporteur for the draft. Additionally, additionally to what the colleagues already mentioned about predictability, I would also like to stress the question on parliamentary scrutiny, which I think is, uh, important for all of the different assessments we are discussing today. But this is also true for, for the connecting Europe, um, programs. Of course, um, and then for the greens added European value also for this program means a lot so that we are not just like thinking national categories when it's about some of the infrastructure program, uh, projects, but that this is really like also about added European value, meaning cross-border cooperation and so on. This is a very important priority for us when it comes to the file. And this, of course, needs to be covered in some of the other committees as well. But it's true for for the work in our committee. I think as well. Um, and this of course also linked to the goals of, of climate neutrality and the protection of, of biodiversity, which is covering, as Lucy also mentioned, renewable energies especially, but not just, uh, renewable energies, but it goes beyond that.”
  EU transport infrastructure integration
• “So, so I really think also knowing very well the limited, uh, possibilities we have as a Parliament, we should even go a bit further than, like what, what the commission is proposing, um, also to lay the ground for the next steps and the next discussions on, uh, when it When it comes to those kind of taxation elements. Thirdly, on compromise see on simplifying the compliance for companies by streamlining anti-avoidance rules. Uh, um, also with uh to minimise divergences there, I also think we should, uh, find stronger language than what actually is in the compromises right now. And, uh, as the fourth and last point from our perspective on compromise D, where, uh, our group, uh, is calling for limiting the depreciation rules for CO2, uh, intensive, uh, fixed assets. We put some amendments forward, for example, in article 27. And also here we would like to see the compromises moving a bit further in the direction of our amendments. Um, looking forward to the next steps. And, uh, uh, the good spirit we are. We already had in some of the shadow meetings.”
  EU competences on taxation
• “Thank you so much. And also, thanks for the very intense, uh, but constructive, uh, debates we had at the level of, of the shadows and also a technical level. Um, in general, I can echo a lot what, uh, the colleagues from S&P and renew already said, I think additionally, uh, that, uh, for, uh, committee opinions like the econ Opinion. Also, maybe for the next years, it's very important to limit it to the competences of the committee, because at the end and the colleagues already mentioned it, we had a lot of conflicts at the table where we know that this is a conflict in the Budget Committee as well, in Libra, in many other committees. And this I think we don't should not deal with in econ. Um, but in the respective committees where like the colleagues are working on the content. Um, this we managed with compromises somehow to um, to, to um, yeah. Agree on and and not to uh, to avoid most of most of the competition, uh, conflict of competences or conflicts we have in other committees. Um, from our perspective still on aspects like on resources, on social and other horizontal issues, we could have been a bit more ambitious when it comes to the econ opinion, but still we can agree on what had been agreed on. But I also have to echo that I'm a bit concerned about the last days of a debate where our group thought we made a deal with different compromises on different elements, where we all had to stretch a bit.”
  EU political integration
• “The world is in turmoil, and we need to stand together and strengthen the European Union. When you do this, both in terms of economy and also in terms of security, the MFF must be the starting point where we can actually come to political negotiations. We need to be honest about what we can achieve and look at what's failed in the past, where there's populism on the one hand, but we need to, uh. Need to make Europe fit for the future, that our specific challenges. We need to be flexible. Flexible so we can better react. We also need new funding instruments. And we need to say we can't just say that you must achieve this, but then we need to provide the funds for you to do so. And this means we need to have fiscal capacity for the EU. We need to have investments in climate infrastructure. And we need to finance the EU with our own resources. Every recent years that big tech has won has billions and billions. We need we we need to finally put an end to this. And we need to tax big tech in the US.”
  Own EU resources
• “Thank you so. Much. And also thanks to Jonas, but especially to Evelyn for outlining, uh, like the line of the rapporteur and also for the work already, which already had been done, as the colleagues already mentioned. I think we are on a good path to find stable compromises from the perspective of the Greens. There are especially for outstanding issues. All of them were already mentioned from our perspective on the issue, on the significant economic presence we would like to go for, to broaden the scope, especially for companies with digital presence. I think we can find a compromise there. But as it stands now, I think we're not there yet. Secondly, um, the topic of the formulary apportionment already mentioned by by some of the colleagues from our perspective, we need to see this included. This is what basically is about uh, excluding this would mean that like there is nothing much left. And I also think in the position of the Parliament, we could even go a bit further knowing very well that this is a political issue and not a question on technicalities. Uh, because several formulas for uh, for example, already had been tested in the past.”
  EU competences on taxation
• “Thank you very much. A year after the Draghi report on competitiveness was presented, we can see how difficult it is to implement his recommendations. Not much has happened, to be honest. And the proposals from the commission are pretty limited when it comes to implementing his specific recommendations. But his recommendations were very clear. We have to invest more 800 billion annually, private and public investment. And if we don't do that, then the EU will be eaten up by the US and China and we want to stop that from happening. With the Lalucq report, the European Parliament makes a first step and that's a good step. But we could have done more. Unfortunately, debates in the Parliament have seen groups on the right blocking steps towards European integration and a European capital market union. They have muddied the waters and that is very unfortunate. We're not moving forward here in the Parliament or in Council as a result. Yes, we have to cut red tape, but deregulation alone is not the answer. Competitiveness has to serve climate change as well. They shouldn't be traded off one against the other. We should make sure that consumers have faith in the capital markets. So we need consumer protection. And I hope that we can continue to work successfully towards that in the future. Thank you very much.”
  EU Single Market harmonisation
• “We are pleased with the budget negotiations. 10 million more for the live nature program, 20 million more for the horizon research program and over 30 million more for humanitarian aid. These focuses. Show us what happens when European forces stick together. The EPP renew the Social Democrats to the Greens. We've managed to work together on this budget and focus on key areas, and then work towards the conclusion where we can vote on this budget. The other model is what the right wing parties do in this House, which is raised controversy about the budget and not turn up for the negotiations. And act as if the European Parliament and the European Union are a circus. We need to strengthen this cooperation, as we did with these negotiations for this budget. Thank you.”
  Size of EU budget
• “Yes. Thank you so much. I have three questions. Um, first of all, on the different options, did you calculate how much revenues? Um, I want to look at you, but then I have problems with the microphones. I will look in the other direction. Um, what kind of how much revenues you would get with the different options you put forward in in your paper, especially like in the first part of your presentation, there were like a list of of them that would really be interesting also to get figures. Secondly, on the defense spending shortfall Levy, um, do you really think this has a huge impact? Because as I understand, even the NATO countries today agreed on like a technical level on a 5%, uh, target, meaning that close to all of the countries member states will be above the 2%. Meaning what kind of revenues are you really expecting? Or do you think that, like a windfall tax on the big industry, defense industry companies could, uh, make more sense because we now can see that with all of the public spending we are having when it comes to defense, There will be some few very big companies, for example, in my country, in Germany, benefiting a lot of that and and maybe with taxation or kind of own resource like, like we could address this. Maybe you could add some remarks on this. Um, and thirdly, my question goes on taxing cryptocurrencies much more and on an FTT, especially on high frequency trading. What do you think about those options? Yesterday in the Fisc committee, we discussed taxing the financial sector together with, uh, Margaret, who also had been invited to the budget committee many times before, and she explicitly called for this. So this is why I wanted to hear your your remark on this as well.”
  Own EU resources
• “Um, and secondly, I would like to ask, uh, to the other two panelists, uh, a bit more into the question, a question on, on carbon pricing and if, uh, and also on compensation for carbon pricing. We are discussing this a lot in a lot of member states. We also still have an instrument on at the European level with the with the Social Climate Fund on how to address compensation for citizens when it comes to this. And, uh, maybe you have some, some evidence on this, what kind of measures you think would help? Also for the policy debate is a bit broader than the taxation debate, but I think it's still linked. And I would like to hear a little bit more on, on this. And uh, lastly, because madam couple mentioned this on the subsidies issue and harmful subsidies, maybe you could elaborate a little bit more. And if you have policy recommendations on how to reduce harmful, uh, subsidies, for example, on fossil fuels, this would really be in the interest for all of us. The commission promised to reduce them. Um, but as it stands now, we haven't seen any kind of action from the new commission and Commissioner Hoekstra. So this is why I would like to get a better understanding of, uh, if you have recommendations sir.”
  Fossil fuels
• “Yes. Thank you so much. Um, I can echo what most of the colleagues already mentioned. And I think we are quite aligned when it comes to this. First of all, on the consistency of the reports. Of course, this is something to support. The same is true on the remarks made on the independence of the ELC. On the question of um, the scope, um, I also think we should, um, be, uh, we should protect like the character of, of independent research we all know had been quite a good success story in the EU, but also with the with the program in the past years. Now our colleague Lucia is already gone. But I think that horizon in general is quite a success. History like like you can argue for Erasmus and to protect some of the elements which made it strong will be quite important, I think, especially also for the support of, of basic research and to also, um, uh, to, to also have, have this present in the report here and not just in the general regulation, the colleagues already mentioned will be important for us as well. But I think, um, most of the colleagues were quite consistent on, on what we had as priorities. And I'm looking forward to, uh, good compromises for the report.”
  EU research funding
• “Yes. Thank you so much. My first question goes or is regarding securitization and the effect for the housing markets. I mean, in the context of the Savings and Investment Union there is rightly a strong focus on securitization. This had been mentioned before. This is good because it can free up bank balance sheets and fuel additional credit, especially also to the housing sector. But we also have learned the hard lesson back in the financial crisis in 2008, that there are also risks related to that. And I would like to ask you in this context, what's your assessment of the link between the renewed push for securitization and market risks, for example, for the housing sector.”
  Financial regulation
• “(14:27:56 – 14:30:31): Yes. Thank you so much, also to you, commissioner. I think this draft budget, didn't really come with a big surprise because we all know how limited also the last budget, like in this MFF, is, and this we had known for a long time. Even though, I think it's still important to remember us all on what this limitation also means for our ability to act, in the next months even also with a completely unclear outcome on where we will land on the m m f f negotiations. And this is why I also think it's important to raise it again and also to address the council. Maybe some of them are listening to our debate, respecting the parliament as an important institution. On that also, like, the way, the council normally is acting with the budget, doesn't really help at all in finding some strong priorities and also on, yeah, addressing addressing them for for for the next next time. I would like to raise 2 issues. 1st of all, on the mainstreaming targets on biodiversity and climate, if I get it right, and this is also not a big surprise, to be honest, we will not reach the biodiversity target, but I would like to ask a little bit more into that and also on what kind of of assessment you're you're doing out of or making out of of this effect we had known already before. But but still, would like to to comment you on on this, on on biodiversity, but also on climate and especially also on the difference between commitments and payments when it comes to the climate targets and the experience we made because I still think this is a very relevant point. Secondly, as the batch repiter on on the Global Europe program, I'm also, of course, interested a lot in, the foreign policy part of, next year's budget. You mentioned Greenland and Palestine. Maybe you could elaborate a bit more on those 2 aspects and more in general on how you are dealing also with increasing humanitarian needs we may not know now, but could be there year before we will end up on a solution in the next MFF. So maybe you could also, come with a statement on this. .”
  EU Development & Humanitarian Aid
• “Um, so my my question goes more it's more general question on, um, have you assessed maybe to change the strategy or would it maybe be good to have strong statement by the commission president really fighting for some of those proposals, not just giving it to you, mentioning this in committee meetings, but really fighting for this as commission, together with some of the member states where we at least can see that it's not as easy for them to say no to everything, and especially on the GST. This is true, but my feeling is this is also true for some of the other proposals. So maybe we need to see a different kind of approach when it comes to the strategy. Because I really also believe in what you said, that you are as frustrated as we are. I remember very well your your confirmation hearing for example, where really had been committed to many of the proposals which are now being killed by by your own work programme. So this is why my question goes a bit in a different direction than what the colleagues already asked.”
  Von der Leyen
• “A small group of technocrats want to want to manage the whole world. The rich and anybody else have more power than anything. They've managed to buy politics in the US and have Mr. Trump to before. And Europe is next. This is one of the key issues. We want to undermine the situation and bring technocrats to the fore in Europe to a certain extent have been successful, but Europe can defend itself. And it's correct that we use DMA to make sure that we limit the market for the big technocrats, and it works. Apple has said that they're going to end their monopoly and get rid of their fees, and made it possible for small companies to work with their products. But there's still a lot of problems outstanding. Apple is going to continue to dominate the market. The commission can't apply legislation. The companies are making too many profits. And therefore I would say to the Commission to stand strong and do not give in to the big technocrats.”
  EU rules on digital competition
• “And I think this is really important. And, um, there is also a revision or revision also introduces an automatic indexation of, of the minimum tax rates, which I think also makes it a bit more dynamic, uh, for the future. Um, finally, what we think is good in the proposal of the commission is to allow member states also to tax fuels used in Intra-eu shipping and aviation sector. And especially there. We think that the report put forward by the rapporteur sticks uh legs uh level of ambition where we would like to see a little bit more development going in the direction of both. What also, Commissioner Hoekstra, in the past mentioned in meetings we had with him here in the Parliament, but also what we can see, uh, is being discussed because we know that we need to see some more action than actually what is in the proposal right now from the commission. And as we read the report and as it stands now, you are even lacking behind the ambition of the commission. And that's something where we would like to see a shift and where we are constructive in reaching a stable compromise. But as I said before, there is still a bit way to go to get a compromise we at the end can support.”
  EU competences on taxation · Priorities of taxation policy in the EU
• “Paulina and Jonas have a problem for many months. That desperately going around the handbook trying to find a home where they were. The city where they work and study for six months. They've been sent applications. They've looked at lots of homes. Um, often they didn't hear back from the landlord. Paulina and Jonas aren't just some people. They're examples of millions of people in a similar situation because they have a problem to live in a city or in a rural area, and to find an affordable home. Those who have a home suffer from high rent increases and policies of big concerns, which aren't bothered about their home. 1.4 people million homes are available in Germany, but build, build, build isn't the solution. We need to have affordable housing for ordinary families and people. What the EU is to act against speculation and empty properties to make groups. Property groups. Responsibility where the. The majority in this house isn't prepared to do that, but we in the Greens are fighting for people like Paulina Nunez.”
  EU policy on urban development
• “Yes. Thank you so much, commissioners. Um, I actually have two questions. First of all, I would like to start by saying also it's because some of you already referred a lot to the letter. The four main political groups sent to the commission, and then the reply the commission president gave to to the parliament. But what I really would like to understand, and I don't know if this is more a question to the budget commissioner or to Mr. Hansen or to Mr. Fitto in the different roles, but at least Mr. Hansen mentioned the letter. Um, a lot. What are you actually doing to ensure that the proposals you put forward in this letter, the commission president put forward in the letter, actually also will be part of the legislative procedure because, as I understand, there are some good ideas and we can discuss if they are strong enough or not, but it's still not part of the legislative procedure. It's a reply the commission president gave to Parliament, but it's not officially part of it. So I would like to ask you why you haven't proposed changes to your legislative proposals, for example, in my second question goes on. Um, I think one of the biggest threats the union right now is facing the social polarization and economic division. We can see with a lot of problems poverty on the rise, mental health issues, a lot of other, um, questions as well, and the concerns of social organizations, but also trade unions that the mainstreaming target you, Commissioner Seraphine, mentioned in your initial statement, is too weak to ensure that we are ending up with enough money to fight for social cohesion as well. And just because not many colleagues mentioned this part, I would also like to ask you to elaborate a little bit more on the concerns we can see coming from social organizations and the trade unions.”
  EU expenditure on social policy
• “And then afterwards, very shortly before the before the vote tomorrow, things were opened up again. And I have to admit this we cannot accept both. Not when it comes to the way on working method and the procedure before the vote tomorrow. And also, content wise, we have problems with accepting the last changes we got presented. And I also have to say like S&P already did that for us. We will not support the new compromise which were like presented like some few days ago, where actually today, before the deadline of what the rapporteur, uh, put forward, were, uh, gone already. The as I understand, the compromise had put to the vote for the voting list tomorrow. This is not, uh, not the spirit of, uh, work I would like to have in the committee. And I have to be as direct as this. Meaning that, like, if the new compromise will pass, like S and D already said, we will also not support the econ, uh, opinion at the end. So I want to be very clear about that. Maybe we can find a solution for tomorrow to avoid this kind of conflict. But as it stands now, I have to say, uh, um, this is this is not, uh, not good. Uh, and this also undermines the but the constructive work we did in the weeks before. So maybe we can find a solution on this. Otherwise we will not support the new compromise.”
  Transparency requirements of EU institutions
• “Yes. Thank you so much to all the experts. Um, I really also think there were a lot of interesting, uh, statements and and thoughts. Um, I would like to focus my questions on two aspects. First of all, on, uh. Um, how efficient tax incentives actually are because looking into also what scientists are telling us the evidence of like that tax incentives are, uh, leading the way for the green transition, but also for other policy goals are something which is, uh, like a bit more controversial, discussed at least in the scientific world. So I would like to ask a little bit more into that, especially to, uh, Madam Coburn and also Mr. de Souza, what your reply would be on that and also on what kind of conditionalities you think are necessary. I also know that the Hill is doing, uh, and you pointed that out doing a lot on the green transition. Maybe others in the mobility sector are doing less. Um, so so maybe you could also like from the perspective of, of, um, Business Europe, but also from the, um, comment on that and uh, explain a little bit more on on your thoughts. They're also having in mind that at least a lot of scientists, economists are uh, are questioning if, uh, if tax incentives really are doing a big difference when it comes to, uh, the green transition and, and other policy goals.”
  Priorities of taxation policy in the EU
• “Thank you. On a rainy Sunday, you can while away your time gambling online or placing a bet during the football World Cup. We are seeing an explosive rise in online gambling, buying businesses, billions being made across the European Union. So it makes perfect sense to consider whether this wealthy industry that is turning a tidy profit could chip in during these difficult times and help to finance common European priorities. We support this initiative. We believe that online gambling and betting is a cross-border business and needs to be taxed at European level. Tax rates in member states vary from 5% to 40%, and so we need to introduce an online gambling and betting levy as an own resource so that we can finance EU priorities and help small businesses and prevent them having to pick up the tab. Thank you.”
  Own EU resources
• “More than €90 billion. That's the profit for meta, Microsoft, etc. over the last few months. So much profit and hardly any taxation. Certainly not in Europe. In the meantime, small companies in Europe are paying their taxes. Honestly, these corporations are not paying anything. There are many members in this House who protest against this, but it seems to me that the commission isn't doing anything. They're afraid of Trump. They're afraid of Trump raising tariffs or indeed not providing security guarantees anymore. But this is not a sound way forward. We can't really have reliability under these circumstances. And that's why we need to be independent vis a vis the USA. We need to make sure that the influence of these big tech giants is limited. We want fair taxation for these big corporations in the digital field. They're making billions in profits. It's time we tax them. Thank you.”
  EU competences on taxation