Pasquale TRIDICO

Policy topics Pasquale TRIDICO is active on

What Pasquale TRIDICO has said (80)

• 2026-06-15 “(17:42:53 – 17:44:04): colleagues, well, if we genuinely want to build European strategic autonomy, we shouldn't simply be reacting in a knee jerk fashion to the next crisis. Every crisis, as it emerges, means we have to deal with it. But that's not a long term strategy. We've known what to do for a long time, but we never actually do it. Let's look at the digital euro. For years, the project's been blocked. Today, it's finally been relaunched. In a few weeks, it will be here with us in parliament. But let's tell the truth. We've needed a geopolitical crisis to move forward with this. So why do we wait for emergencies in order to deal with our vulnerabilities? Let's try and establish a more solid future. Currently, we face a challenge in terms of monetary issues, but also in terms of our digital sovereignty. We need investments, public and private investments in AI to deal with that in an increasingly multipolar world. If we don't boost our independence, it will be other large powers that will determine the margins of our democracies and our freedoms. Strategic autonomy isn't just a slogan. It's something that will enable Europe to select its own future. Thank you.”
  EU digital & tech sovereignty
• 2026-01-21 “Answer given by Executive Vice-President Mînzatu on behalf of the European Commission 18.3.2026 Written question 1. The Commission is aware of Rheinmetall’s plan. 2. The Commission does not monitor corporate strategies of individual companies and has no legal powers to intervene in discussions between management and worker's representatives on restructuring plans. However, the EU legal framework provides for minimum requirements on social dialogue within undertakings, including about obligations to inform and consult workers at national or transnational level in the process of restructuring. Directive 98/59/EC ] requires employers that contemplate collective redundancies to consult staff representatives in good time with a view to an agreement and to notify the competent public authority to seek solutions to the problems raised by redundancies. 3. As regards monitoring tools, under the Clean Industrial Deal [1] , the Commission will launch in March 2026 a European Fair Transition Observatory (EFTO), a two-year pilot project to support policy monitoring and strengthen the evidence base on the impact of industrial transformation and the transition to climate neutrality. It focuses on employment trends and transition management, quality of jobs and broader social and distributional impact of industrial change. Specifically, as set out in the Automotive Action Plan, EFTO also aims to pinpoint expected future ‘hot spots’ of employment dislocations and inform forward-looking interventions to address them. One of the thematic reports produced as part of the project will be dedicated to this topic. EFTO can help [2] provide evidence on actions and best practices needed to ensure that transitions are aligned with EU industrial policies and clean transition objectives. EFTO aims to have a detailed sectoral dimension, covering also the automotive sector. [1] https://commission.europa.eu/topics/competitiveness/clean-industrial-deal_en. [2] Through policy mapping, best practice identification and quantitative data collection.”
  EU policy on screening foreign investment in strategic sectors and critical infrastructure · EU industrial funding · Ownership of strategic assets
• 2026-01-14 “E-000128/2026 Answer given by Ms Roswall on behalf of the European Commission While information on the Florence airport masterplan is publicly available on the website of the Italian Minister for the Environment and Energy Security 1 , to date the Commission has not received from the Italian authorities a notification under Article 6(4) of the Habitats Directive 2 . For this reason, the Commission is not in a position to comment as to whether the conditions to obtain a derogation under Article 6(4) of the Habitats Directive have been met. Such a notification is required in cases where plans or projects are found to have a significant negative effect on a Natura 2000 site, where there are no alternative solutions and where they must be carried out for imperative reasons of overriding public interest. The Commission systematically examines any such notification to assess whether the requirements of Article 6(3) and (4) of the Habitats Directive were duly respected, including an assessment of the imperative reasons of overriding public interest that would justify the realisation of the plan or project in question. The assessment is based on the requirements set out in the Directive as well as on the Commission guidelines on the provisions of Article 6(3) and (4) of the Habitats Directive 3 . 1 https://va.mite.gov.it/it-IT/Oggetti/Documentazione/9937/14638?RaggruppamentoID=1137. 2 Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, OJ L 206, 22.7.1992. 3 Commission notice - Assessment of plans and projects in relation to Natura 2000 sites – Methodological guidance on the provisions of Article 6(3) and (4) of the Habitats Directive 92/43/EEC, OJ C 437, 28.10.2021.”
  Nature protection and restoration in the EU · EU policy on permitting for renewable energy projects
• 2025-10-02 “E-003848/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Mînzatu on behalf of the European Commission The Commission does not monitor corporate strategies of individual companies and has no legal powers to intervene in restructuring discussions between management and workers' representatives. Directive 98/59/EC 1 requires employers to consult staff representatives to reach an agreement and to notify the competent public authority to seek solutions to the problems raised by redundancies. The agreed revision of the European Works Council Directive 2 re-affirms the commitment of the Commission and the co-legislator to act in the interest of democracy at work. As announced in the Clean Industrial Deal, the Commission will engage with social partners to modernise the Quality Framework for anticipation of change and restructuring 3 , focusing on earlier anticipation of change, faster intervention and stronger workers’ rights to information and consultation. The main instruments to support workers affected by restructuring are the ESF+, which helps in an anticipative way, and the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund for Displaced Workers (EGF) 4 , which offers one-off reactive assistance in case of major restructuring events. Italy can assess whether there are possibilities to introduce an application under the EGF 5 or to fund specific operations under the ERDF 6 or ESF+ co-funded regional programmes 7 . The Commission is committed to strengthening research on the impact of AI on skills and the labour market through Horizon Europe 8 . The European Partnership on Social Transformations and Resilience set out in the Horizon Europe Strategic Plan 2025-2027 will provide further funding opportunities, among others on issues such as the future of work and the impact of 1 Council Directive 98/59/EC of 20 July 1998 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to collective redundancies, OJ L 225 12.8.1998, p. 16 - https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/1998/59/eng. 2 Directive 2009/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 May 2009 on the establishment of a European Works Council or a procedure in Community-scale undertakings and Community-scale groups of undertakings for the purposes of informing and consulting employees, OJ L 122, 16.5.2009, pp. 28–44 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2009/38/oj/eng. 3 Communication from the Commission ‘EU Quality Framework for Anticipation of Change and Restructuring’, COM(2013) 882 final, adopted on 13 December 2013 - https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:52013DC0882. 4 The EGF is directed at supporting active labour market policy measures and personalised services that aim to support workers’ job transitions, helping them to reintegrate into decent and sustainable employment. 5 Regulation (EU) 2021/691 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 April 2021 on the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund for Displaced Workers (EGF) and repealing Regulation (EU) No 1309/2013, OJ L 153, 3.5.2021, p. 48–70 - https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/691/oj/eng. 6 European Regional Development Fund. 7 Regulation (EU) 2021/1060 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 June 2021, OJ L 231, 30.6.2021, p.159-706 - https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/1060/oj/eng. 8 The Horizon Europe topic ‘Assessing and strengthening the complementarity between new technologies and human skills’ has funded six projects: https://cordis.europa.eu/search?q=contenttype%3D%27project%27%20AND%20programme%2Fcode%3D%27 HORIZON-CL2-2024-TRANSFORMATIONS-0111%27&p=1&num=10&srt=/project/contentUpdateDate:decreasing.”
  EU regulation on worker representation in company decisions · European Globalisation Adjustment Fund
• 2025-07-26 “E-003109/2025 Answer given by Ms Roswall on behalf of the European Commission The agglomeration of Rende, province of Cosenza in Calabria, which has a total generated load of 293.636 population equivalent (p.e.) is concerned by the judgment C-251/17 of 31 May 2018 1 by Court of Justice of the European Union for a breach of Article 3 of the Urban Wastewater Treatment Directive 2 . In a letter to the Italian authorities dated 25 October 2019, the Commission acknowledged that part of the agglomeration had achieved compliance during the second semester after the Court’s ruling (the period between 1 December 2018 and 31 May 2019), as the Italian authorities had demonstrated that 234 908 p.e. of the load was collected and treated in the Rende Contrada Volpe plant. The penalty was therefore reduced proportionally. According to the latest information sent by the Italian authorities, compliance for the remaining load (58 728 p.e.) would not be reached before December 2026, with the upgrading of the treatment plant and the construction of new sewer collectors. It is for the Italian authorities to determine the measures required to achieve compliance and to allocate the necessary financial resources. In this context, the Commission does not have competence to monitor the use of national public funds. The Commission will continue to monitor the situation of the Rende agglomeration in the framework of infringement procedure INFR(2004)2034 3 until full compliance is achieved, and to request the periodical payments of the fine corresponding to the part of the agglomeration pending compliance. 1 https://curia.europa.eu/juris/liste.jsf?num=C-251/17. 2 Council Directive 91/271/EEC of 21 May 1991 concerning urban waste-water treatment, OJ L 135, 30.5.1991, pp. 40–52. 3 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_16_4212.”
  Water pollution · EU policy on water management
• 2025-07-17 “E-002954/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Séjourné on behalf of the European Commission 1. The Commission is aware of the suspension of the Termoli gigafactory project and its potential implications for the EU’s strategic battery manufacturing capacity. The Commission is in regular contact with the industry, including through the European Battery Alliance, and closely monitors developments across the battery value chain to ensure alignment with EU objectives. 2. The Clean Industrial Deal State Aid Framework 1 enables Member States to easily support the development of clean technologies. It is for Italy to decide whether to support the investment on that basis. The Commission has deployed several support instruments to strengthen the EU battery value chain. Under the Innovation Fund, EUR 3 billion have been allocated to battery manufacturing, with EUR 1.8 billion still available. The Battery Booster, under the Automotive Action Plan 2 , is exploring the inclusion of EU content requirements for batteries as well as direct production support, alongside other measures aimed at enhancing the competitiveness of the industry. 3. The region recently submitted a modification proposal of the Regional Programme Molise 2021-2027, to introduce two new priorities dedicated to investments that contribute to the objectives of the Strategic Technology Platform for Europe (STEP) 3 referred to in Article 2 of Regulation (EU) 2024/795 4 : ‘Priority 11 Deep, digital and technological technologies’ and ‘Priority 12 Clean technologies’. This was justified by the need to improve the strategic autonomy of the region Molise and to increase the competitiveness of the regional industrial system, in particular clean and digital technologies and biotechnologies. The total amount, which will be invested in these two new priorities, is EUR 43 774 210. 1 https://competition-policy.ec.europa.eu/about/contribution-clean-just-and-competitive-transition/cleanindustrial-deal-state-aid-framework-cisaf_en. 2 https://transport.ec.europa.eu/document/download/89b3143e-09b6-4ae6-a826932b90ed0816_en?filename=Communication%20-%20Action%20Plan.pdf. 3 https://strategic-technologies.europa.eu/index_en. 4 Regulation (EU) 2024/795 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 February 2024 establishing the Strategic Technologies Platform for Europe (STEP) (OJ L 2024/795, 29.2.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/795/oj).”
  EU industrial funding · Battery supply chain: EU gigafactory sovereignty vs. reliance on Asian suppliers · State Aid
• 2025-07-16 “E-002941/2025 Answer given by Mr Hoekstra on behalf of the European Commission The Commission has welcomed the Court of Auditor’s Special Report 08/2025 on valueadded tax (VAT) fraud and has started working on its recommendations, including on closer monitoring of the national implementation of VAT collection and control procedures. The Import One Stop Shop (IOSS) framework allows for the exclusion of traders who fail to meet their obligations, with automatic exclusion from all schemes for two years and invalidation of the VAT number. While full harmonisation on tax representatives has not yet been achieved, further progress has recently been attained 1 by ensuring that non-EU traders not using the IOSS must appoint a tax representative to guarantee VAT payment. The Commission is currently collecting more information on the practices of invalidation of VAT numbers and is working on a revision of Council Regulation (EU) 904/2010 on administrative cooperation and combating fraud in the field of value added tax. This will include the sharing of fraud signals with all relevant authorities, reinforcing the multidisciplinary approach. Moreover, the Customs Reform proposal 2 includes the creation of an EU Customs Authority and an EU Customs Data Hub, collecting and analysing financial and logistical data before arrival of the goods at the EU-border. Once agreed, they will support customs authorities in optimizing co-operation with the relevant authorities, notably tax authorities. 1 Council Directive (EU) 2025/1539. 2 Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the Union Customs Code and the European Union Customs Authority, and repealing Regulation (EU) No 952/2013 (COM/2023/258 final).”
  EU competences on taxation · VAT harmonisation
• 2025-06-18 “E-002470/2025 Answer given by Mr McGrath On behalf of the European Commission The Commission has no specific information on the situation referred to by the Honourable Members. Actions by national authorities for the purpose of maintaining law and order and safeguarding internal security remain the responsibility of the Member State concerned. Consequently, policing matters, such as the one referred to fall within the remit of the national authorities. The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union applies to Member States when they are implementing EU law 1 . Outside those situations, it remains the competence of Member States, including their judicial authorities, to ensure that fundamental rights are effectively respected and protected in accordance with their national legislation and international human rights obligations. Specific matters of fundamental rights and policing also do not fall within the scope of the Rule of Law report. The Honourable Members should rest assured that the Commission closely monitors the functioning of the justice systems of all Member States, including in Italy. Reference can be made to the 2025 EU Justice Scoreboard published by the Commission in July 2025 2 . The Commission will also continue to work with the Italian authorities to promote the rule of law within the framework of the comprehensive annual rule of law cycle. The 2025 Rule of Law Report, published on 8 July 2025, presents developments and recommendations related to the rule of law in the Member States 3 . 1 Article 51(1) EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. 2 2025 EU Justice Scoreboard, COM(20245) 375 final, https://commission.europa.eu/document/download/51b21eff-a4b0-4e73-b46106bd23b43d4e_en?filename=2025%20EU%20Justice%20Scoreboard_template.pdf. 3 https://commission.europa.eu/publications/2025-rule-law-report-communication-and-country-chapters_en.”
  Surveillance equipment & spyware · EU Supervision of the Rule of Law · Rule of law and democracy in the EU (political compass)
• 2025-01-27 “E-000343/2025 Answer given by Commissioner Tzitzikostas on behalf of the European Commission 1. On 13 November 2024 the Italian Ministry of Environment and Energy Security issued the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) for the project, with several recommendations. The Commission is currently in contact with the Italian authorities to assess how the provisions of EU law applicable to the present case, in particular Directive 2011/92/EU 1 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment and Directive 92/43/EEC 2 on the conservation of natural habitats and species, are being implemented. Overall, it is the responsibility of the authorities and expert bodies in Italy to assess the technical feasibility of the project considering the regional environmental conditions. 2. The above assessment concerns also provisions on the consultation of the public. On the contrary, questions regarding expropriations are not in the scope of the Directives. 3. The Commission adopted on 7 October 2024 its decision on the selection of projects following the 2023 calls for proposals under the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) 3 . The decision includes EUR 24.75 million CEF funding (50 % of the project’s total eligible costs) for a study on the executive design of the railway link between Calabria and Sicily and its connections with the existing network. Only once the final design documents are available cost-benefit considerations can be made. The project’s Grant Agreement between the European Climate, Infrastructure and Environment Executive Agency and the beneficiary (Stretto di Messina S.P.A), entered into force on 10 October 2024. The beneficiary needs to ensure that all procurement rules and other applicable legislation are duly respected. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:32011L0092 2 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:31992L0043 3 Commission Implementing Decision C(2024)6940 final of 7.10.2024: https://transport.ec.europa.eu/document/download/744ad3f3-22e7-411f-9f0465b20170a1c0_en?filename=C%282024%296940.pdf”
  EU transport infrastructure integration · EU funding for transportation
• 2025-01-21 “E-000239/2025 Answer given by Ms Lahbib on behalf of the European Commission Under the United Nations Convention on the rights of persons with disabilities (UNCRPD) 1 , Parties, including the EU and all its Member States, shall guarantee persons with disabilities can effectively and fully participate in the conduct of public affairs without discrimination 2 , and address the specific challenges and needs of women with disabilities, as subjects to multiple discrimination 3 . The Commission recalls the importance to ensure gender equality and rights for all women in the EU. This includes achieving gender balance in leadership positions, in line with the Commission’s Gender Equality Strategy 4 , and through the adopted Gender Balance on Corporate Boards Directive 5 . The Commission has been leading by example by ensuring gender-balance in its middle-management 6 . Moreover, the Commission adopted a new Human Resources Strategy to boost employment of staff with disabilities to foster diversity and inclusiveness 7 . Furthermore, the Strategy for the rights of persons with disabilities 2021-2030 8 promotes an intersectional perspective, addressing specific barriers faced by persons with disabilities. The Commission is working on a progress report to assess the implementation of the Strategy. The National Guarantor Authority for the rights of persons with disabilities is not subject to specific EU law imposing a particular composition of its board. However, the Commission encourages Member States to ensure gender equality and the inclusion of persons with disabilities in decision-making. 1 The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) is the first international, legally binding instrument setting minimum standards for rights of people with disabilities. For the EU, the convention entered into force on 22 January 2011. All EU Member States have signed and ratified the convention. 2 United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Art.29 – Participation in political and public life:https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/convention-rights-persons-disabilities 3 United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Art.8 – Women and girls with disabilities:https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/convention-rights-personsdisabilities 4 A Union of Equality: Gender Equality Strategy 2020-2025, p. 13:https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52020DC0152 5 Directive (EU) 2022/2381 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 November 2022 on improving the gender balance among directors of listed companies and related measures: https://eurlex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2022/2381/oj/eng 6 The European Commission has 48% of women in senior management positions; 49% in middle management positions; and 51% in middle management in Executive Agencies. 7 Communication to the Commission - A new Human Resources Strategy for the Commission: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_22_1783 8 EU’s Strategy for the Rights of Persons with Disabilities 2021-2030 covers all areas of the UNCRPD: https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/3e1e2228-7c97-11eb-9ac9-01aa75ed71a1/language-en”
  EU policy on disability inclusion & accessibility · Gender roles, equality and inclusion
• 2024-12-11 “E-002874/2024 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Fitto on behalf of the European Commission 1. The Commission has been informed by the competent national authorities of the signature on 29 November 2024 of the cohesion agreement between the Italian government and the Apulia. Given that the agreement concerns exclusively national and regional authorities and refers to national programmes (Development and Cohesion Fund programmes) and national financing instruments (Development and Cohesion Fund), the Member State is solely competent to manage and control the implementation of these initiatives, with reference to the consistency with the national legal framework. 2. The integration and complementarity of nationally funded activities with EU regional programmes is ensured by the managing authority of the Apulia regional programme, as indicated in the programme approved by EU decision. The management and control system set up by the regional authorities is adequate to avoid any risk of overlapping and double funding. 3. The Commission considers that the current EU cohesion policy regulatory framework is sufficient to ensure consistency between European and national programmes.”
  Cohesion and rural funding
• 2024-12-04 “E-002756/2024 Answer given by Ms Roswall on behalf of the European Commission 1. The competent authority may only authorise a landfill site if strict environmental and health requirements of the Landfill Directive 1 are complied with. The characteristics of the site, or the corrective measures to be taken, shall indicate that the landfill does not pose a serious environmental risk 2 . The location of the landfill must take into consideration requirements relating to e.g. distance to residential and recreation areas, waterways, water bodies, agricultural or urban sites; the existence of groundwater, coastal water or nature protection zones in the area; the geological and hydrogeological conditions in the area; and the risk of flooding, subsidence, landslides or avalanches on the site 3 . Regional waste policy and measures to improve environmentally sound waste management are set out in the Calabria Region’s waste management plan of March 2024 established under the Waste Framework Directive 4 . 2. As a result of the recently revised Industrial Emissions Directive 5 , Best Available Techniques reference documents will be developed for landfills, starting mid-2025. 3. Member States have a primary responsibility to monitor the application of the relevant legal provisions and to take the necessary steps for enforcement. In its role as guardian of the Treaties, the Commission monitors the situation and may decide to take appropriate action. The Commission aims to swiftly follow up on systemic issues involving the application of EU law in EU countries. However, one-off instances of this are better dealt with at national level, as long as there are available remedies, including judicial ones. In these cases, it is up to the national courts to apply and enforce rights under EU law 6 . 1 Council Directive 1999/31/EC of 26 April 1999 on the landfill of waste, OJ L 182, 16.7.1999, p. 1–19, amended by Directive (EU) 2018/850 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2018, OJ L 150, 14.6.2018, p. 100–108. 2 Annex I, Section 1.2 and Article 8 of the Landfill Directive. 3 Annex I, Section 1.1 of the Landfill Directive. 4 Article 28-33 of Directive 2008/98/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 on waste and repealing certain Directives, OJ L 312, 22.11.2008, p. 3–30, as amended by Directive (EU) 2018/851 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May, OJ L 150, 14.6.2018, p. 109–140. 5 Directive (EU) 2024/1785 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 April 2024 amending Directive 2010/75/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council on industrial emissions (integrated pollution prevention and control) and Council Directive 1999/31/EC on the landfill of waste, OJ L, 2024/1785, 15.7.2024. 6 As set out in the Communication of 19 January 2017 (EU law: Better results through better application C/2016/8600, OJ C 18, 19.1.2017, p. 10–20) and in the Communication of 13 October 2022 (COM(2022) 518 final - Enforcing EU law for a Europe that delivers).”
  Water pollution · Environmental crimes and justice
• 2024-11-01 “E-002386/2024 Answer given by Ms Roswall on behalf of the European Commission The Waste Framework Directive 1 (WFD) mandates Member States to prohibit the uncontrolled management of waste. It also establishes the waste hierarchy where landfilling is the least preferable step. Permits for landfills may only be issued in accordance with the strict requirements of the Landfill Directive 2 . Also, as per Article 13 of the WFD, waste management must be carried out without endangering human health or harming the environment and without adversely affecting the countryside or places of special interest. The Industrial Emissions Directive 3 contains general requirements for emissions and the Best Available Techniques (BAT) Conclusions provide sector specific requirements 4,5 . Such BAT Conclusions are already available inter alia for waste treatment and the development of those for landfills will start in 2025. The Commission monitors compliance and has taken action against Italy for over 240 landfills (cases C-135/05, C-196/13, and C-498/17), including over 40 in Calabria of which 3 remain unregularised. Without prejudice to the Commission’s role as guardian of the Treaties, Member States are primarily responsible to ensure compliance with EU law. This is because they are best placed to examine the characteristics of any specific landfill site. The Commission therefore invites the Honourable Members to contact, as a first step, the relevant national authorities. 1 Directive 2008/98/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 on waste and repealing certain Directives, OJ L 312, 22.11.2008, p. 3–30, as amended by Directive (EU) 2018/851 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May, OJ L 150, 14.6.2018, p. 109–140. 2 Council Directive 1999/31/EC of 26 April 1999 on the landfill of waste, OJ L 182, 16.7.1999, p. 1–19, amended by Directive (EU) 2018/850 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2018, OJ L 150, 14.6.2018, p. 100–108. 3 Directive 2010/75/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 November 2010 on industrial emissions (integrated pollution prevention and control) (recast); OJ L 334, 17.12.2010, p. 17–119. 4 Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2018/1147 of 10 August 2018 establishing best available techniques (BAT) conclusions for waste treatment, under Directive 2010/75/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council; OJ L 208, 17.8.2018, p. 38–90. 5 Directive (EU) 2024/1785 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 April 2024 amending Directive 2010/75/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council on industrial emissions (integrated pollution prevention and control) and Council Directive 1999/31/EC on the landfill of waste; PE/87/2023/REV/1; OJ L, 2024/1785, 15.7.2024. General information on the revised Directive: https://environment.ec.europa.eu/topics/industrial-emissions-andsafety/industrial-and-livestock-rearing-emissions-directive-ied-20_en”
  Energy (green transition)
• “Thank you. Chair. Thank you, Mr. Dombrowski. We were so happy about the recovery and Resilience facility as we are today, so unhappy and so disappointed with the change. The project was created in a spirit of solidarity. It was meant to help member states to recover from the pandemic, strengthen public services, support the fair, green and digital transition. And now we end up with something completely different. We support giving Member States more flexibility to complete key investments, especially where delays stem from structural challenges or external factors. Nonetheless, your communication of 4th June and I disagree with some colleagues that were speaking before here from ECR. Your communication of 4th June was does not reflect the European Parliament position. In fact, where it was expressed in the report by Muresan and Negrescu, adopted by Econ and Budget Committee, that the extension of 18 months was to finalize the project under way. And now we are speaking about this project and to divert one part of this project to EDP funds, rather to cohesion funds. How the Commission can justify this diversion of funds established by the economic recovery and social cohesion, initially now to military spending. Fundamentally undermining the Recovery and Resilience facility in in its original intent, in its original spirit. I think that this needs to be justified, at least politically, if not as well, from a legal basis. Thank you.”
  Defence spending
• “Mr. president, colleagues. League's commissioner. Trump's trade policy does, in fact follow a logic whereby a deficit is a threat. The US imported around €157 million of goods from the EU. But let's look at services. It's the US that has a similar surplus in that field. Shows us how complicated economics is. We have to look at it as a whole. Tariffs have been suspended at the moment, but US companies, digital in particular make exorbitant profits. It's a question of justice. We need a level playing field for this situation. And that's why we need a tax on digital services. Plus the EU should be extending its trade links with other emerging countries, the BRICs countries, and shouldn't depend on the unilateral choices of Trump. We shouldn't forget either. The Repercussions of tariffs on goods. So we should also be encouraging an increase in domestic consumption. Europe needs to react strongly vis a vis the next round of negotiations in Washington.”
  EU-US trade relations
• “Thank you. It's not really a catch the eye because we are not in the, in the, in the, in the proper institution of the catch the eye. But if there are comments from other map. Then I would make my comment, my question to to you, which is very simple. And because I really like the study, I read the PowerPoint, the slide. I'm looking forward the entire, uh, study. And um, and we know that tax incentives are, are, are good policy for, for for uh, for market failure. Yeah. If we consider in particular public goods as innovation research, which most of us were probably all of us consider good then then tax incentives are considered intuitively a very good thing. However, we see that there may be some problems, some distortion, some failure as well in the public policy. So to say. So I wonder whether you identify a sort of border between what is good to, to, to incentivize to, to, to and what is not within the sphere of, of, of research and development, whether this is more of a matter of field, segment of, of production or is a matter of country. I don't know if you have evidence as well at country based level. Thank you.”
  Priorities of taxation policy in the EU
• “Will add. I will add something, then we will close, uh, one from a logical point of view and another one from a content. Realistically, what do you think will be the risk, actually, of, uh, capital flight from Europe in case of, um, of a wealth tax at 1% as you simulated. And the second one will be on the VAT gap, which has been used as a proxy to estimate, uh, the, the, the, the efficiency to collect taxes as well for the financial asset and for the crypto asset. Why is that? Why did you choose this, uh, this proxy for for this objective. Yeah. Thank you.”
  Wealth taxation
• “Thank you very much. I think we are at the end now of this very interesting session, which I again, I would finish, like I started quoting the, the, the number, the data of yesterday in this joint meeting with the committee as well. We were speaking about VAT, more specifically tax avoidance and tax evasion on, on VAT. And the main argument after the court brought us the number, which were huge. As I said at the beginning, €90 billion of tax avoidance, tax evasion in terms of VAT. The best solution, basically, that the court proposed or advanced was basically harmonisation, harmonisation of the rules among member states, because this means as well simplification for for cross-border in particular import export VAT. This is the most crucial thing. Thank you very much. Thank you to the speaker. It was really very, very interesting. Thank you for coming here. Thank you to all of you for participating. We have three minutes break before starting the new session. Thank you. We will go with that.”
  VAT harmonisation
• “Thank you. I, I will be very short because Maria told us already everything. I really thank you, all of you, all the experts. I think they are still a issue which goes beyond VAT, which need to be addressed. The question. The last two questions with the Catch the Eye by Regina and Fernando showed, in fact, that they are. Things that in particular we as subcommittee in fiscal and in econ working. We would be interested in which what are the better policy to foster? Domestic industry competitiveness within the industry, not creating a hazard issue and of increasing of price and controlling as well. That problem. So thank you very much. We will come back to that. I think it was very interesting. Thank you. We have we second part with within 2 minutes or 2 minutes break. And then we have the report by our rapporteur.”
  VAT harmonisation
• “Thank you, Madam Chair. President Lagarde, the Italian government has introduced an amendment to the budget law declaring the gold reserve of the Bank of Italy to be property of the Italian people. This concerns about approximately 2.5 tons of gold worth about €300 billion, which the governing majority would like probably to to make available to cover some gaps in the public budget. Actually, in your legal opinion on the case of Italy, on the gold of Italy, you state that the proposal interfered with the institutional functional independence of the Bank of Italy. You also conclude that the concrete purpose of the provision is unclear, that authority cannot influence or direct how a central bank manages reserves on this basis. You invite the Italian authorities to reconsider the draft provision. But actually, the government is going ahead. And the gold held by the Bank of Italy represents a strategic national reserve. Could you explain, for the benefit of those who may have still some doubts, why such reserve cannot be used directly to finance, for instance, public spending or reduce debt, and what the role they play in the euro system in the ensuring financial stability. Thank you.”
  EU fiscal rules and oversight of national budgets
• “This time, the focus was more on removing administrative costs for financial institutions and ensuring legal certainty. Now, from the Commission, we expect a new attempt in his mission letter. Commissioner Hoekstra, we will have him later today. His task is to identify innovative solutions for a coherent tax framework for the EU financial sector that helps further integrate the EU financial sector, facilitate cross-border operation, and foster digitalization and innovation. In order to anticipate the Commission proposal, the Fisc subcommittee has decided to draw up an own initiative report on this matter, where we will assess the situation and make recommendations to the Commission. The aim of today's hearing, with the two distinguished guests, is to discuss the problem that we are facing and possible solution. We are asking ourselves what innovative solution would help further integrate the EU financial sector and facilitate cross-border operation? Can we consider some of the already introduced a national financial transaction? Financial activity or windfall taxes as best practice? How can we address the challenges stemming from the current VAT exemption from the financial services? Before giving the floor to you both? I would like to explain some practical rules. You will have seven times seven minutes. Sorry for your remarks and then I will give the floor to the Member of Parliament who already asked for two minutes each, and then you will have three minutes each for the answer after each question. Thank you very much. So I will start now with Miss Roberta Posa. The floor is yours. Thank you very much.”
  Taxation of financial transactions
• “Okay. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Mr. Dombrowski, the consequence of the energy crisis are visible and concrete to everybody in Europe. Two straightforward questions. Do you see any margin for the windfall tax for additional profit in the energy sector, which are largely due to speculation in the in the sector? And second, do you see any margin. Politically speaking and as well from an economic point of view to suspend the stability pact in the current crisis? Thank you very much.”
  EU approach to electricity market and prices
• “We can start. Thank you. Yeah. So thank you. It has been a very exciting and very interesting morning for us, for many of us, for the previous hearing and the previous workshop, in fact. And now we go to a very. I can say hot issue, meaning that it's very popular, at least in this, in this chamber, in this commission. It is very important. It is very debated, very disgusted. We know that there are all different constraints, which goes well beyond our power and our will here. But anyway, it is very good to speak in this, very good to speak with the right people, with the right person, with the expert. The issue will be the implementation of the pillar two framework in view of international development and the EU US relation, and we will have a very distinguished guest. We know very well Manal Corwin, because actually she has been here always very willingly to speak, uh, to, to contribute. So I really thank you for not only for today, but for all the cooperation that we are having with you, with OECD for the past months, with me, but for the past years, probably with the with the commission director of, uh, Center of Tax Policy and Administration at the OECD. Then we will have a professor Peter Jansky. Professor Jansky was supposed to be here in present, but at the end he had some family issue. So he will be online. Professor of economics at the Charles University in Prague. And then we have here Professor Nadine Riedl, professor and director of the Institute for Public and Regional Economics at the University of Münster. From the commission we have our colleague, our friend here, Benjamin Angel, who has contributed as well very much to this debate. Now the floor is yours for seven minutes, as usual. You know the rule, basically, because you have been here several times, you can start, please.”
  Priorities of taxation policy in the EU
• “And finally, the fifth point, the following. The structured dialogue held on nine and 10th February in Strasbourg with Oxford. With the Commissioner, Oxford coordinates decided to comment in the form of a letter to the proposed withdrawal of five taxation files in the Work Programme 2026. Please note that the proposal that we will discuss now, in fact, is among these five proposals. So let's move now to the discussion, then to the public hearing on equity debt bias in taxation. We have with us three distinguished speakers, starting with Professor Michael de Vere, emeritus director of at Oxford University Centre for Business Taxation. Then we have Mr. Paolo Ludovici, regional representative, member of the Invest Europe tax Committee. Then we have a miss Tove Maria Ryding, senior policy analyst advocacy manager at Eurodad. As you already have been here, you know that you have seven minutes each, starting with Mikhail. And then we go to the question of the members for two minutes each and then the reply back of the speakers. Mikhail, I will give you now the floor for seven minutes to illustrate your relation. Thank you very much for being here.”
  Taxation of financial transactions
• “But we are. We are sure that in the next future will find an equilibrium in this in this different view, because it is necessary. Europe is at a crossroad today between international tax cooperation and strategic autonomy in taxing as well digital services. We are working in Europe on many issues, which gives us strategic autonomy. The digital euro, for instance, is one of them. And not only we realize as Europe as a single market to be a big player in the global scenario. Now, should the EU focus on reaching a solution within the OECD or engage on more fronts? When will the time be mature for considering alternative EU level solutions? If not, credible, international agreement is reached. I am sure that Secretary General Mathias Cormann from CDC will give us very important Insight about that in the session on the digital taxation. And then we are going as well through the day on the second session, which is exactly on pillar two. Exactly. On the global minimum taxation that we have tried to introduce together with OECD. And there is as well a discussion going on at the United Nations level. Now we remain within the. So far, we remain the within the the the the OECD framework. And we have found an agreement on 2021 at 15%. We have done some step forward and in particular in the last year in the in the last very few days, actually on five of January, the OECD, together with the United States and Europe, formed a final equilibrium trying to combine the side by side package asked by United States with the pillar two, which was signed before.”
  EU competences on taxation
• “So actually, I say the eating, but in fact, we are about to present the consideration of the evening report. Colleagues, please, can you sit down? We start. Thank you. So we have this consideration by Matthias Eck on a current tax framework for the EU financial sector. Mathias, you have four minutes to present them and then we listen. The rapporteurs Regina Roberts is not here. Then we have to Gilles Boyer Rasmus Andersen is six is sick. He told us so then we'll have a you see Mathias, four minutes. The floor is yours. Thank you.”
  Taxation of financial transactions
• “Thank you. Thank you very much. I just own one, one single question to to my colleague from Louvain. I just will say like that, well, there is a tension between member states and the European Union concerning tax policies. Tax policy is considered to be. Well, it is a national member state policy, while a member states are very jealous for for for, for that. Now, I always say that while. National tax policies and national member States policy multinational are not national. So we need. I think I believe personally that we really believe a European approach concerning in particular multinational taxation, concerning in particular, digital taxation concerning in particular high hat worth, individual. And today we learned a lot. So I really thank you, Filip and Joseph for their wonderful insight. We understood one thing which is a common ground, Probably the European social model is a special one. This need to be anyway defended, meaning that we need to. We know what are the disadvantages of this model today. We know what are the gaps today, the lack of growth. We. We see competitiveness and innovation being strong in the United States with all the limitations that even Philippe recognized. Idea, but we know what are the advantages of that. Education, health, life expectancy, which is the highest in the world, and so on and so forth, which makes your report that I mentioned before, Joseph, the report beyond GDP, the real progress or measurement of the of, of the progress of, of, of individuals, very valid still today. So there is something else than GDP which makes human life better. Thank you to all of you for being here today with us.”
  EU competences on taxation
• “Commissioner Today, we're discussing investing at a time when Europe is called upon to safeguard its position in the world as we move towards a peace for Ukraine and Russia. But there's some dissonance. We have a conflict here when we're talking about building our own industrial future and strategic autonomy. The indicators tell us that Europe is losing ground to the US, to China, their investment, investing in data centers, infrastructures where we are facing delays and we are late. We do not have an autonomous strategy in digital services to have the right resources and to strengthen our own productive capacity. Think about competitiveness and but stagnation of GDP is a reality if the world is running, we can't just stand by. Technologically speaking, and in terms of capital mobility, we have to make sure that we have critical infrastructures in Europe. Thank you.”
  EU digital & tech sovereignty
• “And in establishing, together with the OCD, the global minimum tax at 15%. We have tried as well to find a new solution for the digital economy. We know that this is a sector which is growing so much, and actually it is probably today the source of the major growth. And for many people, well, for few people, I would say there is it is a source as well of accumulation of wealth, which many people consider too much, which goes beyond the productivity of the same labor that they do. So the digital transformation has posed very important question, very important challenge, because in a way, we are not in front of the normal process of production that we had before with labor and capital. Artificial intelligence is part of technology, of course, but it creates factor of production itself. And as you know, most of the wealth which is created in the sector is not taxed or at least is not taxed at the quarterly or is not taxed everywhere in the same way. That's why the European Parliament tried a few years ago already to fix an agenda on the so-called pillar one, which is the basically, the solution should be a solution to tax the digital sector. And many member States on their own have introduced the digital service tax. Of course, we do have a controversy here. We do have different view among member states, among global players, and the view are different as well between Europe and states, United States.”
  EU competences on taxation
• “Okay. Good morning everybody. Thank you. We are going to start in just a minute. Yeah. Okay. Thank you very much. Morning, everybody. So we start this meeting, which is actually which will be a joint set of public hearing. But let me start as an ordinary meeting for the Fisc committee. As usual, languages are available here in 12 different languages. So thank you very much to our interpreters. And as usual, the meeting documents are online. Following our policy for paperless project. On the Fisk website, the meeting is web web streamed on the European Parliament website as well. Just a few words on the agenda that was mailed to members Fisc members on 18th June 2025. If no objection, the agenda is adopted. Thank you. Now, few due announcement on three of June. Fiscal coordinator took the following decision. They agreed on the work programme for public hearing during the second half of 2025. The topics will be first taxation of full to high net worth individuals to tax implications of Trump administration policy. On 23rd September, the free taxation of digital activities at national international level on 16 of October and this meeting will take the format of an Interparliamentary Committee meeting with the participation of members of National Parliament for tackling tax obstacles in the single market on 20th November 2025. The coordinators and those endorsed the appointment of the Fisc Standing Team of MEPs for relations with the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine. They agreed on the timeline to raise an oral question to the European Union Commission as regards taxation on digital services. Coordination coordinators also approved the draft programme for the Fisc mission to Nicosia, Cyprus on 1517 September 2025 and finally coordinator agreed to reschedule the Fisc mission to Dublin, Ireland on 2120 3rd 23rd July 2025. So these were new announcement. And now we go to the European Defence Union tax matter. They joined say the Fisc public hearing. And I will leave the floor to chair to Maria Zimmermann. Thank you.”
  EU fiscal rules and oversight of national budgets
• “And finally, the fifth point, the following. The structured dialogue held on nine and 10th February in Strasbourg with Oxford. With the Commissioner, Oxford coordinates decided to comment in the form of a letter to the proposed withdrawal of five taxation files in the Work Programme 2026. Please note that the proposal that we will discuss now, in fact, is among these five proposals. So let's move now to the discussion, then to the public hearing on equity debt bias in taxation. We have with us three distinguished speakers, starting with Professor Michael de Vere, emeritus director of at Oxford University Centre for Business Taxation. Then we have Mr. Paolo Ludovici, regional representative, member of the Invest Europe tax Committee. Then we have a miss Tove Maria Ryding, senior policy analyst advocacy manager at Eurodad. As you already have been here, you know that you have seven minutes each, starting with Mikhail. And then we go to the question of the members for two minutes each and then the reply back of the speakers. Mikhail, I will give you now the floor for seven minutes to illustrate your relation. Thank you very much for being here.”
  EU competences on taxation
• “Okay. Good afternoon everybody. Thank you for being here. We start now. So today we have a first for eating eating some free issues. And then we will have the coordinator's meeting. So languages are available here as usual in 12 interpretation are available in 12 languages. So thank you for the work of the interpreter. The documents are available on the European Parliament as usual on the Fisc website. And the meeting today, as usual, is web streamed on the European Parliament website. Now we are going to adopt the agenda. Which was mailed to members on 12th of February. If no objection, the agenda is adopted. Let me say two things concerning the work of the coordinators before. Us. First, the decision of the coordinators for the draft programme, which was adopted on 27 of January. Second, the request to the European Court of Order to include the following audit in its 2027 Work Programme. Effectiveness of effectiveness of small and medium enterprise VAT scheme. Divergence in capital gains taxation. Implementation and effectiveness of minimum effective corporate tax. Third, the mission to Paris on 18 19th June. The programme was is prepared by the Secretariat. Fourth, the request to authorise ad hoc Commission to participate as observers in the sixth session of United Nations negotiations for an international tax Convention in December this year.”
  Priorities of taxation policy in the EU
• “So good morning everybody. Thank you again for being here. It is really a pleasure to host this meeting today, the first interparliamentary meeting of the new legislature of the Parliament since 2024 this year. The title is the taxation of digital activity at national level, at international level, in light of ongoing development at OECD NG20. It's something on which we are working very much as a committee, as a fiscal committee. We do have all languages available with interpretation, so thank you very much to our interpreters here. We do have many delegations from member states, so thank you again for being here. As usual, the meeting is in web streaming now. The title of the meeting, the theme of today, has been very much discussed at the policy level, at member state level, but as well at EU level, even during the last negotiation with US administration. This topic has raised very much interest at national level as well. Today we have twenty-seven members of parliament from chambers from national chambers from thirteen member states. Our committee, FISC subcommittee on tax matter, has been always very much interested in creating networks with member states. Today's meeting actually will help us, member states as well of European Parliament, to better understand national position in the European debates. I am convinced that this meeting will help all of us. All of us will learn something from charters, best practice from member states. Actually, we are working really at the frontier of the development. Member states are always looking for supporting economic activity but as well to make sure that everybody pays an equal and fair amount of tax that should be paid. We had the last tax symposium in March 2024 which actually has been as well interested to this topic of today: digital service taxes, artificial intelligence developments. The next symposium, to which I already invite all of you, will be on seventeenth of March here at the Parliament, actually to be in the plenary in Brazil. The agenda is still not completed but I'm sure that this topic will be as well part of the discussion. Now, the current international tax system was designed for a pre-digital era when companies relied on physical office and tangible asset to operate. Today we live in a fast evolving data-driven and platform-based economy and the existing rules have become increasingly inadequate to deal with this new reality. Digital giants have an enormous influence on our society, including the political sphere. We have responded to this reality through regulatory initiatives such as the Digital Service Act which strengthen user rights online, but tax rules have not kept pace. We must ensure that taxation reflects the real economic presence and value creation processes of companies. As Oliver Wendell Holmes said, taxes are the price we pay for a civilized society. Public goods such as healthcare, education, infrastructure, justice system, public administration all have a cost. Traditional business and employees already pay their fair share. Think about any traditional company in your country, manufacturing or building construction. Think about workers and owners of this company. We do have in Europe average wage of about forty thousand euros more or less on average. We pay on that forty thousand euros social transfer contribution, income taxes. In the end, worker net wage is about twenty thousand euros which is a low middle income. The firms and workers complain rightly that the weight of the tax is excessive. At the same time, we do have companies today in the world, probably mostly multinationals, which have big bill turnover and in proportion to the bill that they produce they use very little amount of workers. Now, since our tax system is mostly based on a tax base which follows workers and firm tangible asset, we build our asset public goods on the base of what we collect from firms and from workers, on the base of their income, on the base of the labor costs. So there is no space there to basically extract more taxes. That's why we think, well, many of us think that there is a room for exploring radical change in the tax system in order to equilibrate the system in the weight of taxation: less on the base of workers and firms which have traditional goods and are already excessively paying taxes, and more probably on digital activity which are basically producing a big huge bill with as well artificial intelligence and less and less worker. So capital intensive, capital intent intensive activity is able to produce higher returns in terms of capital but actually in proportion of what they pay there is a disequilibrium. And this is basically the frontier today of the academic research I've seen and read many papers. The last one by Mindy Herzl from University of California which is actually stating that eighty percent of government revenue in the United States is coming from traditional firms, workers and firms which have an excessive weight of taxation but actually more and more of the revenue is escaping this tax system because it is produced through artificial intelligence. Now think about your pension system. Pension system rely very much on pension contribution on social transfer which are paid by workers. If you don't have a worker, actually the sustainability of the pension system in the IT is as well very much at risk, at least in the perspective of having more and more artificial intelligence in the substituting process. Now today we will discuss about all that. We'll ask our speaker, we will ask to our speaker to offer their perspective. We are lucky today to have a different perspective starting from the Commission and I would like to welcome our distinguished speaker Benjamin Hansel from the Commission, Director of Direct Taxation, Tax Coordination, Economic Analysis and Evaluation, Tax Suite, European Commission. Then we have the perspective of Spain from Maria Jose Garde, Director General of Taxation at the Minister of Finance. Then we have the perspective of Italy from Marco Juvinale, Director of the European and the International Tax Relation Directorate. Then we have the perspective of Portugal from Marisa Ribero Ribeiro Houro, Tax Counselor at the Center for Tax and Customer Studies. Then we have as well independent experts such as Giulia Alibrandi, Research Economist EU Tax Observatory, and Christina Hennanje, Economist at Tax Foundation in Europe. So we would like to ask you some questions in your speech. Of course you are free to speak about everything but we would be very much interested to know how do you assess the current state of OECD negotiation, particularly with respect to Pillar One. In the absence of a final agreement on Pillar One, what do you think of a coordinated EU level approach to digital service taxation, taking its potential economic and geopolitical implication? If you represent a country that has introduced a digital service taxes, what are the revenue of these taxes? Has this tax been passed to consumers? What difficulties have you encountered in implementing such a tax? And finally, if you represent a country that has not yet or has not introduced such a tax, what are the reason for that? What would be the disadvantage of introducing a digital service tax? In the recent months, we have repeatedly been faced with the threat of retaliation by US president should the EU or member state move forward with digital service taxes. This put us in a delicate situation where we need to find a balance between upholding our own values and principle and avoiding further economic and political tension with our partner from the other side of the Atlantic. So the floor is open, the stage is open now for our speaker and after that our members and the guests that we have are invited to take the floor to say what they think and to contribute to this debate. Thank you very much for being here and now I leave the floor to Benjamin Angel for his speech. Thank you.”
  Priorities of taxation policy in the EU
• “Thank you. President. Commissioner. The commission working program raises many concerns. It's very dark and not very clear. You mentioned defense. While there's not enough in there to protect citizens or citizens, workers and support for industrial sectors in difficulties such as the automotive industry. The defense program that has new funds of four arms and an escalation in military development. Then there's the change in the reach regulation on chemical substances, which will reduce our environmental protection. It's very dangerous. As far as the work, the labor market, you need a structured way to face these transitions. We've asked for changes such as the short program during Covid to support competitiveness, to support our automotive industry when reconverting to electric. But many of these questions could become under the scope of the union of skills. And finally there, your housing plan is good, and it's very important for the Five Star movement a step in the right direction. But it's non-legislative nature and the very limited resources risk in seriously limiting the efficiency on the price of housing and the housing crisis. We need more concrete answers to protect workers and to support companies in launching their industries, which is a strategic asset for all of Europe.”
  EU housing policy
• “In Europe. However, I should also say that today in the morning I was reading some report. About Italy, and in 2014, the production of renewable energy in Italy, coming from mostly sun and wind, will overcome the production of of fossil energy. So this is a good sign. It is a good sign as well for the bill of people what they are going to pay. And this is a good sign as well for the transition towards towards a regime of production with experts consider more sustainable and better for life of people. Not because or else, but mostly because this is natural. And what, what is natural basically is not transformed and is not polluting anyway. So now I'm going to carefully send our our speaker starting from Mr. Kurt van der. And as usual we have seven minutes each for the speaker. And then we have the reaction in the Q&A from the members. Each member will have up to two minutes and then the reply of the speaker up to three minutes each. Mr. Kurt van Dender, the floor is yours. Thank you very much for coming.”
  Energy (green transition)
• “Boyer, Doherty and Zeller, thank you for coming. The own initiative report will try to anticipate the measure. The measure announced by the Commission in the mission letter to the Commission and designated for the taxation portfolio. In our mission letter to Wopke Hoekstra, the Commission president, tasked him with identify innovative solutions for a coherent tax framework for the EU financial sector that helps to integrate the EU financial sector, facilitate cross-border cooperation and foster digitalization and innovation. Ocs also commits to review the patchwork of Non-harmonised sectoral taxes, including insurance, premium taxes, financial institution levies, special payroll taxes and financial transaction taxes, as well as VAT exemption for financial services. And now we come to the introduction of the of the speaker of today. Both of them come from the Institute of Economic Research, the well-known Wifo in Vienna. So let me welcome Doctor Margaret Schrad, Chancellor, who is with us online. While you have here, Atanas, Mr. Atanas Plekhanov, who is with us in the room. Both of them are experts on the issue. In particular, Margaret is an expert on tax policy, while Atanas is an expert on macroeconomics. So I will give the floor first to Atanas for seven minutes and then well, I will. Then he will share the presentation with Margaret and then we will come back to the members as usual for two minutes each of questions and then three minutes by you for your answer. Thank you very much, Mr. Plekhanov, to be here. The floor is yours.”
  Taxation of financial transactions
• “Thank you indeed, Mr. Chair. Thank you to the president. Thank you, Mr. Giachetti. I think that Parliament did a great job in the last years, in particular since Covid, to adjust to the challenges that we know now. I think that there is a room for improvement, in particular in one field. I was trying to understand from the document, which is the system of evaluation of performance. I would like to see it more connection between the system of evaluation of performance and career development, and in particular, where there is none of the connection between performance and wage. To some extent, member states are really doing a great job in the last years in the making this connection. Even in Italy, which has been a very reluctant country as far as administration is concerned in linking performance and career development. I wonder whether the Parliament is aiming at this connection between performance and career development and wage development as well. Thank you very much.”
  Digitalization of public governance & administration
• “Thank you very much. Let's open the catch the eyes. I will post my question if you allow me, Commissioner. I would refer basically to the ultra high net worth individuals. You have heard, of course, about the debate last summer. The proposal in Brazil, uh, to tax billionaires. And today, actually, even the economic literature is always Convinced of the fact that the traditional difference between income tax and capital tax is being shaken in this new structure of the economy. So even the previous justification that it is not enough, not not necessary to tax wealth, because we do have taxation on income, we do have taxation on capital. With this new structure of, uh, of the economy of today, basically this division does not make so much sense. We do have individuals today who behave like a company, like a multinational company, and actually they are individuals. So on the basis of that as well, at the OECD, but in particular summer at the G20, there was the reflection the on a 2% ultra high net worth tax. I wonder I mean, first of all, I would like to ask you, what do you think about that if we need to, to go uh, A head as well in Europe with this proposal. Thank you very much.”
  Wealth taxation
• “So actually, I say the eating, but in fact, we are about to present the consideration of the evening report. Colleagues, please, can you sit down? We start. Thank you. So we have this consideration by Matthias Eck on a current tax framework for the EU financial sector. Mathias, you have four minutes to present them and then we listen. The rapporteurs Regina Roberts is not here. Then we have to Gilles Boyer Rasmus Andersen is six is sick. He told us so then we'll have a you see Mathias, four minutes. The floor is yours. Thank you.”
  EU competences on taxation
• “Thank you. So I think I will make some final remark. Uh, everybody is clear here. We don't have any question any longer. Just two clarification for the debate. Uh, first of all, when we speak about some complexity and simplification, we have to bear in mind that actually global minimum tax does not apply to small and medium enterprises. We are speaking about big enterprise. So don't get confused that because I understand the complexities is very much in fashion right now. But but small and medium enterprises are not affected by all that. A second thing, as a matter of fact, I would say as well, that guilty has little to do with, uh, with, with, uh. With the behavioral tax that actually, uh, was is so vicious. It is exactly different from guilty the truth because actually, uh, is is virtuous. It's actually pushing members. Member. As Benjamin pointed out at the very beginning, we are successful when we don't collect as much tax because it means that members of pillar are basically implementing and reinforcing properly the tax policy. So then, uh, then again, don't I? It is not a substitute of pillar two. Guilty. So we need to to to stick with what we have which which was approved. Thank you very much. It was a very long day, at least for, for for for us here. Um, it was a very interesting as well. Thank you to our speaker. To all of us. To all of you. Uh, I have to apologize as well for the interpreter, because actually, there was some problem from the side of apologize as well to the interpreter, because there was some problem with the connection, uh, and in particular with the with the speaker from Brazil before I have to inform you that next meeting is on 19th of May. On Monday. It is another very interesting, uh, joint meeting with, uh, with uh, Housing Committee. And then we have the three of June, another meeting and then the last one of June 25th of June, the last meeting of, uh, of before the break, I will say thank you to everybody. Have a good day.”
  EU competences on taxation
• “In the taxation area, we were actually not so much happy Concerning the fact that, uh, taxation was not in the title of your portfolio. And this was a request by all groups. Actually, it was a unanimous request. We were sure that this was, uh, the case. Unfortunately, for some reason, at the end, the taxation was added, was not added in the title. Anyway, we look at the substance of the portfolio. We really believe that we can make a step forward to strengthen our strategic autonomy in Europe. And I was uh, speaking with, uh, even today with, uh, with, uh, with experts and with, uh, people having institutional position in, uh, in Europe, uh, claiming that actually after the Drudge Report on competitiveness, we We would need probably something going in the same direction concerning taxation. Strengthening our strategic autonomy passes as well through tax matter. So we are keen to listen your priority today, and we will be very happy to cooperate with you on this on this field. You will have eight minutes in your first talk. Then I will give the floor, as usual, to members for their question, and then I will give you after each question the floor. Mr. Hoekstra, the floor is yours. Thank you very much for being here.”
  EU competences on taxation
• “Thank you very much. Thank you indeed. It is really a pleasure to be here to have this joint, uh, meeting and uh, our let me say two words. First of all, for colleagues who are not aware with our committee, actually, this was a special committee created five years ago to look in particular into fight against tax evasion and tax avoidance. And this was the result of several tax scandals which had put the topic on high on the European agenda. While this matter continued to be of high importance, we should not forget that taxation is a cross-cutting issue that affects many different policy areas and housing as well. That's why we are here. Tax policy are not the root cause of the current housing crisis. Of course, they will also not be the main solution. Tax policy could, however, be relevant in two ways. First, we can ask ourselves how can tax policy affect the affordability of housing? What is the impact of taxation, in particular on low and middle income households? How tax policy can be used as a tool to help rebalance the housing market in Europe? Can taxation encourage investment? Does it have an influence on the supply of housing? So there is space for public policy, for tax policy as well. I would like to thank the House Special Committee for the cooperation and for the for being here today for hosting this joint hearing and giving us the opportunity to discuss this question. I would like also to thank the experts that we will listen today and who have accepted to be with us today. So I really look forward to the discussion. And now you may introduce the expert from your side.”
  Priorities of taxation policy in the EU
• “Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Madam, they are concerned grow on the grow of private credit and equity markets, and on the growth of non-financial banking institution doing this business, and the lack of understanding on the risk emerging from the activity of non-financial sector. Non-banking financial sector. I wonder whether we are aware of this, of the grow, of this activity and what are the tools, regulatory tools that you and your team are preparing in order to cope with those risks coming from the non-banking financial sector? Thank you.”
  Financial regulation
• “Thank you, Philip, as well, for your passion. And you gave us actually a very interesting perspective on the way. We could, uh, we could, uh, cope with, uh, tech giant in order for them not to prevent. The entering of, uh, other firms to, to make innovation. Yeah. Thank you. I would like to move now with you, uh, Joe, to another issue, the fragmentation of taxation. We do have this issue both at European level, but as well at international level. Both of you have have worked extensively on international taxation in in Europe. Fragmented tax system undermining its single market. And how does this compare to federal state like the US, where varying state taxes coexist within a national framework with citizens increasingly feeling that large corporations and very wealthy individuals can avoid taxation more easily than ordinary workers. What reform would most effectively restore trust in a fair and enforceable system? You are aware as well of the discussion that we have done at OECD level and as well at UN United Nations level concerning pillar one and pillar two. For pillar two, we have reached in the past an agreement on the global minimum taxation on pillar one, meaning on the digital service tax. We didn't so far. How would you, uh what do you think about that? How would you assess this and what should be done? Again thank you.”
  EU competences on taxation
• “All messages exchanged also via online platforms are to be considered as documents and should be stored and archived and archived accordingly. Unfortunately, it appears that two messages are not. On the contrary, automatically destroyed. Can you please clarify how transparency and accountability can be ensured? If we have no way to verify that only informal exchange took place? Also, shouldn't the service be worried about possible spying on irrelevant and possible secretive information when using such app? Considering as well the foreign ownership of that app, I would like to touch some working condition issues. I'm a bit worried in particular when a delegation has to move. It appears that in these cases the staff is simply made redundant. As you mentioned in the question about the EU southern suboffice moving to Egypt. Do I understand that we basically evacuate our own EU staff, for example, for security reasons while we leave people working with us, but on local contract just to just figure out what to do. A similar issue and I'm going to finish now a similar issue is. Is happening as well in in places like Bosnia Herzegovina, we have also been made aware that verbal verbal information was provided to local to nine local staff in in Bosnia Herzegovina, but it appeared that the local labour law was not applied as it should have been since no official dialogue was ever put in place and know several plan was established. We are particularly worried because out of the nine staff are protected. Out of the nine staff are protected staff under the local labor law, being staff representative.”
  Accounting and auditing of EU budget
• “This seems to be done at the expense of the southern neighbourhood and the global South in general, with the Mediterranean relegated to a peripheral role. How would you respond to that claim? First of all. Second, concerning the genocide committed by Israel in Gaza, the commission president has proposed in September that EU suspends is bilateral support with Israel and partially suspended trade, part of its association agreement with Tel Aviv. What has been done to implement this declaration? Ask the High Representative. You are not, as I represent, that you are not in charge of humanitarian aid. We know, and it's not even providing financial support to oeuvre, but you are responsible for developing a more strategic approach to our neighbourhood. We can see a devastating situation in Gaza where Israel has destroyed major majority of civilian infrastructure, be them hospital, school or religious building or church. Many of them were financed by EU. Do you have any estimation of how much the EU taxpayer money has been wasted by the Israeli aggression in Gaza? And also, when it comes to the Russia war of aggression, the EU decided that Russia should pay for the reconstruction, which I agree. Is there any plan in the Commission to make Israel pay for the destruction in Gaza as well? Now for some member states. On another issue, some members of this Parliament already expressed concern about signal group chat administered by EU with EU member states. Foreign ministers used to exchange platform used to exchange information. For the sake of transparency and accountability, all messages.”
  Relations with Israel - Palestine
• “(16:24:56 – 16:25:37): Thank you. Yes. This is very good. Thank you very much for your work, and that's it. I would like to add some remarks, but colleagues have said so many good things. So I shared many of the things which were said. I will go direct to the second consideration of the draft report, the one of Kinga Kolar. The EU approach to corporate tax policy in a changing international environment. We do have, as well, the reporters, the shadow reporters. Sorry. Evelyn Reigner, Per Panpi. From Renew, we should have a... But actually, I don't see it.”
  Priorities of taxation policy in the EU
• “Sorry. The the the cost of non-europe the future of youth tax policy harmonization and the study of the Policy Department on the taxation of the EU Financial Sector. And second, the coordinator agreed on the suggestion for the 2026 European Court of Auditor Work Programme. Finally, coordinated took note of the programme for the mission to Abu Dhabi on 2620 8th May 2025. Now we move towards the very interesting hearing of today, which is titled A Coherent tax Framework for the EU Financial Sector. We have the the opportunity today to listen to distinguished guests. First we will, uh, listen Miss Roberta Parsa. She has a long career in Spain. And here in Brussels, the Commission on, uh, taxation. Today she is international tax partner at Deloitte Legal. And then we have, uh, Professor Michael Cotter, vice president and head of financial market department, Patton had a whole institute for economic research in Germany. She is an expert on financial services, financial economics. Now the issue of today. It is a very important one. In 2011, in the wake of the financial and economic crisis, the Commission proposed a financial transaction tax to prevent a possible fragmentation in the taxation of the financial sector and to ensure that financial sector makes a fair contribution to public finance. The initial proposal and the following enhanced cooperation with only 11 member states were unsuccessful. In 2020, the Commission made a new attempt to address the taxation of the financial sector, and it launched a public consultation on the review of the VAT rules for the financial sector for the insurance service.”
  Taxation of financial transactions
• “(16:02:48 – 16:08:26): Thank you very much. Thank you. We are running out of time. Thank you very much for your answer, Rita. We will go to the next item now, just let me say that we are having, in fact, an out an meeting with EPO as well. Mhmm. Exactly for the issue that Hirai said in the previous question. In the recent years, in fact, a lot has been done with the electronic bill. I speak for instance for my country, for Italy. There was a huge improvement. There was a actually, there was a result in the past 10 years in Italy in terms of reduction of VAT. In Italy, the tax evasion has been reducing for 30% in the last 5 in the last 10 years, which was a huge improvement. You know the numbers in Italy are quite important on that. And in particular, the reverse charge, the split payment were contributing in reducing, according to all the analysts, in reducing tax division. I can speak as well from my side, from my experience I had the the IMP, the Institute of National Security, which was sending which was using as well, beside all the tools that, at national level we were introducing, it was using as well a nudge approach. You mentioned it. So just before the deadline of a payment, Imps was sending, to some business where we're noticing some problem. Just an informal letter saying, please, you may have probably missed the deadline. There is a problem if you missed it for many other year days, considered to pay or reconsider the account that you have done. So it was just an informal letter. We saw that, after this nudge approach letter, 30% more of contribution we were intro we were getting from the business. So this has been, as well very, very useful. Thank you very much. Now 1 minute's break, and then we go to the Mister Ludovic other report or consideration. Thank you. Okay, colleague. We can start. So we open now the discussion on the consideration of amendments on the feasibility of a 20 eighth tax regime and its potential to support your competitiveness. The rapporteur is, Ludovic order. They are as well Shedora Porter, Ludac Nedimajer, Bruno Gonzalez is replaced by Eveline, Reigner, and Kirmacz, Pierre Pompey, Robert Zile, Kira, Maria Pedersands, and I don't see her. And you, Cesaramo is here. So thank you, Ludovic. I will go without a hesitation, just to you because we already spoke several times on the 20 eighth regime. We all are looking forward. Please, the floor is yours.”
  VAT harmonisation
• “Thank you. Thank you. Joe. So as I said, one of the questions was exactly about the discussion that we had in Europe. That's why in the Parliament as well in in the Committee on High Net Worth individual. Uh, and the typical argument. Well, of course they are. The Parliament here is very divided. The, the, the they are concerned, uh, proponent. Of course they claim and they, they think that inequality has been polarizing too much society. And there is a risk as well on democracy, a return on democracy and, and therefore, uh, tax, which would apply only to top up, uh, as a top up meaning for, for the, for the part of Ingo, which is not ready for the part of tax, which is not already paid by, by, by individuals in order to reach a 2% or 3%. And this would will generate an income flow in in Europe of €121 billion, which. Which, as you know, for the new priority of Europe, this would would be fundamental for for the green transition, for the digital transition for the defense priority, and so on and so forth. So yeah, I would like to ask you about that and about the the possibility of flight capital, whether this is an argument or not. What do you think about that, Philip? For you?”
  Wealth taxation
• “Thank you. I think we will go to the end. Uh, it was very interesting. Anyway, thank you very much, Commissioner, for your engagement today. And we know that tomorrow morning we will start again at 8 a.m. with us. We will have the opportunity to continue the discussion. You have heard here by many members sense of frustration for the withdrawal of FTT. We have heard as well important word on the GST. Uh, in this context, I personally believe that some key elements of this proposal should be included in the following the forthcoming omnibus package, or in a future initiative for a coherent tax framework for the EU financial sector, to preserve the substance of Parliament's work and to ensure the continuity in our shared policy objective, we will formalise our response to the Commission's suggestion to withdraw the proposals in the coming days and count on the commission to, as mentioned in your letter of 21st January, careful. Take our views into account before taking a decision on a final list of proposals to be withdrawn. Last but not least, let me take this opportunity to invite all of you. If you didn't do yet to the next tax symposium on 16 and 17th March, the Commission will be present as many other speakers, among which will have two Nobel Prize, Stiglitz and Aghayan. And many thanks again to all of you. We will have. We already have more than 700 participants registered from all over Europe. Member of Parliament and Staff Commissioner. You want to say something?”
  Taxation of financial transactions
• “Thank you. President. President Lagarde, we are in favor of introducing the digital euro and. The report on the ECB, together with 47 members from different political groups, will be tabling two amendments, which we think are important. Uh, we think that given the current geopolitical context in which economic relations are more fragile than then Europe has to strengthen its own strategic autonomy, including when it comes to payment systems. Now, two electronic transactions out of three in Europe are based on non-European infrastructure. Visa and Mastercard dominate, and this puts our strategic autonomy at risk in the payment systems. We need to have a genuinely European, independent public payment system, which will strengthen our monetary sovereignty and cut costs, as well as helping to help to control the flows of money. Um, this is the future of Europe. Uh, this is the big project for our autonomy. Thank you all very much.”
  Digital euro
• “Thank you Philippe. Thank you. Joseph. Now, Philippe, I live as well to you some consideration for the international situation. For what is happening. For. For which consequences may have as well. On on, uh, on, um, economic systems. And, uh, in particular, if we can do something to, to, to, to cope with the situation for family, for worker, for citizen, for firms, uh, facing high energy costs and so on. But beside that, in order to give you more time to, to, to explain and to make your consideration, I would like to, to focus with you on, on, on a specific question concerning, uh, transformation of the economy and digitalization, uh, digitalization and artificial intelligence are transforming productivity and labor markets. Do you, do you believe our tax system should adapt to this transformation, for example, through a new form of taxation on digital activity capital or even automate automation? Or would such measures risk slowing down innovation in your books and your readings. Often you advocate for competition as an important factor driver of innovation, and warn at the same time that monopolistic position may reduce innovation. So how can you explain the fact, for instance, that we do have giant in economy today, which actually, in fact are very innovative? But then we believe, at least theoretically, we may believe that this monopolistic company can curb innovation. Thank you.”
  Priorities of taxation policy in the EU
• “Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, President Donauer. I am a little bit worried, actually. I would say I am very much worried now. Wherever I stay, I hear speaking about the general escape Close to be stopped, to be introduced and to be to use basically increasing investment for arms, for defense instead of other priority which we need. You know, I have done some calculation, if you take into consideration all the expenditure that Italian member states do in in Europe, we reach the extraordinary amount of €350 billion of expenditure in defence. Actually, Russia spent much more, much less in absolute terms. Of course, the GDP in Russia is much smaller. And in terms of percentage of GDP, Russia spent 9%. But if you look at the number, we are very much overinvesting in in this sector without even coordination. I am for the European defence I am for, but actually there is room there for better organization rationalization rather than increase instead. And this is my question to President Donauer. I would use the two principal fundamental question that on the basis of which Europe was born, actually, Europe was born on peace and on industrial development. Now we do have peace in question, industrial development completely lacking. We do have the industrial sector in crisis. Can we use the general escape clause to create a sure programme for the automotive sector to invest in the industrial sector, which is lacking of competitiveness in Europe? Actually, Draghi was completely misunderstood here. Even yesterday he asked us to be bold but not to invest more in arms. Thank you very much.”
  Defence spending
• “So good morning everybody. Welcome back. Today we have a long morning with Fisk. And we start with a very interesting, uh, report. But before that, let me tell you, um, about the language availability. I thank you. All the interpreters in the in the room. Thank you very much. All the. Well, many languages are, are available, as you can see from the screen. And, um, we have, as usual, the web streaming, uh, all the documents are on the Fisk website. And now let's adopt the agenda, please. If there are no objection, the agenda is adopted. Thank you very much. Some announcements from me. We decided where the chairs decided on 6th March 2025, the following items. We adopted a gender mainstreaming action plan. We adopted a working programme until July 2025. We decided on the expert to be invited the next public hearings, and then we decided about the mission to Dublin next July. 17th July. 17 18th July. Uh, we go through the report. The report by. The report is titled, The Role of Simple tax Rule and Tax Fragmentation in European Competitiveness. Had a chance to see the draft which which was sent. I like it. I have to say, of course it's up to you to, to to to to to do whatever you like. Of course as well I would do some amendment, but I like the work, and I thank Michael for for his work. Um. The English version of the draft report was circulated, in fact, at the end of at the end of March. Michalis, you have up to five minutes for your introduction, and then we have other shadow intervention. Please, Michalis, the floor is yours.”
  Priorities of taxation policy in the EU
• “Thank you. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I'll be speaking Italian. Vice president Dobrovsky, I wanted to ask you what you think about the fact that the European Parliament has asked for an extension of 18 months. That's to say, with regard to the use of the RF funds. The Commission is now saying that the unspent money should be redirected to other instruments that have nothing to do with the recovery and resilience. We've heard about EDP, Investeu and Cohesion Funds. In some countries, this is in some cases going straight into defence. So why are we stating this as our objective priority? So this is a question that I've asked again and again. So I'm repeating it. But when it comes to cohesion funds Vice President Fitto, I'm turning to you now. We see that a lot of these funds are being moved from RF to cohesion funds, but at the same time, resources are being taken away from cohesion funds in 2026 compared to 2025. We're moving from €190 billion in the budget to 192. So for cohesion and agriculture, the funds are actually reducing. And when we're talking about this money in Italy, we're thinking about the south of Italy primarily, you're taking money against away from the cohesion funds, which are aimed at reducing territorial inequalities. You're taking money from the the funds and putting them into cohesion funds. Well, it seems that this is further damage that's been done to Italy. Because Italy has only managed to expand to spend 44%. So basically this is actually a reduction in the total amount of funds. I just wanted to hear what you thought about that. Well, for time reasons, I'll respond immediately to Mr.”
  Cohesion and rural funding
• “Okay. Good afternoon everybody. Thank you for coming. Thank you. All of you, as usual. Language available here for with our interpreter. In ten languages. In as usual as well. We do not. We do not have paper available in the room, but everything is online on the Facebook website. And our meeting is web streamed on the European Parliament. First of all, let me ask you to adopt the agenda if there are no options or no objection. Thank you very much. From my side. The chair announcement. None at this point. I will go immediately forward through the the workshop today, which is on the taxation of the EU financial sector. Well, this is a very important study that we have commissioned. Uh, so it is a very interesting because as usual, we are a very technical committee and we advance through evidence fact theory, relying mostly on experts. And today we are we have two. I will present them in a while. Uh, we advance as I said, as I said, based on empirical fact. Evidence, of course. Then we do have our political view and social preferences, which are always important. Uh. The the work. Uh, the intention is, uh, is is indeed that, uh, some inside of the present study will feed into the Fisc subcommittee. Works on an own initiative, report on a current tax framework for the EU financial sector. And I am happy to see the rapporteur here, Matthias Eck and the shadow rapporteurs, who are all here. Rasmus Andersson, probably not, but all of the rest are here.”
  Taxation of financial transactions
• “Thank you chair. Thank you, Vice President, as it was mentioned before. We have seen in the report of 2024 a contraction of the balance sheet of the ECB by €500 billion, more or less 0.5 trillion. Now this has negative consequences. It was an argument by a colleague of S&D on reinvestment, but I am also very much worried about the upward pressure on bond yields, which is as well under current. Today it is a circumstance that we can see today, in particular with the quantitative tightening that we are observing. So I wonder how the ECB is managing such a consequence. And on a related issue, I'm asking whether the rise of the last rise of the ECB interest rate in 2223 has led to an increase of remuneration of excess reserves by banks in an asymmetric way, between banks, between north and south of Europe. Asymmetric circumstances which you can observe between core and periphery of the eurozone. Now, given that given the success of remuneration and this distortion has created a windfall profit for banks without distribution, I'm asking whether we are managing somehow to take care of this distortion and to act in suggesting some policy which could which could give a less unequal distribution in this after this extra profit has done at bank level. Thank you very much.”
  ECB monetary policy
• “(15:40:19 – 15:43:00): Christina, do you want to start? Yes. So on your question on the behavioral changes, I think there is in some member states done a lot. I also hear that some member states consider to have lotteries where when you receive an invoice and you can demonstrate that you have paid VAT on it, that you are then in a pool, and then you have the chance to to to win something. So this is also something to attract the the honesty of of of consumers. I think on the behavioral change, as as Rita said, it's it's always that people think, there is corruption and others are are also not honest that that makes them, feel, that they have to do or they they are not blamed for doing the same. But, also, I think if if the tax rates are sometimes high or perceived to be high for the persons, They think they have a right to not pay VAT or income tax. So this is also something that, working on on that people think the they pay a fair share and and the tax rates are not perceived too high could help people be tend to be honest on on on their purchases. On the harmonization, yes, fragmentation on on rates and and exemption is hard for the businesses. And and I think it's it's, it also leads to a sort of compliance gap because businesses don't know the the the situations in other other countries. So it it is important for the business also to reduce the the cost on compliance to have a harmonization in this area. But if if the rates are really or the the fragmentation in the in the rates and exception is helping or is is is is has an impact on on on fraud. I don't think that this is the case. It's it's it's just important for for the businesses, and it's necessary to to to harmonize the VAT law in the in the member states.”
  VAT harmonisation
• “Okay, colleague, we start because then we will have another final session after this one. And so this is a public hearing now on the feasibility of the 28th tax regime and its potential to support EU competitiveness. We have a very distinguished guest speaker, and we'll start with Professor Reinier de Villers, senior fellow at Bruegel. Then we will have a doctor, Apostolos Thomas, research fellow and head of the Financial Market and Institution Unit at the centre for European Policy Studies. And then we will have Mr. Michael Schick, Head of office, European Tax Adviser, Federation. The speakers will have seven minutes each for the introduction remarks. Then we come back as usual to our member for their question. And then. Speaker are asked to reply up to three minutes for each question, so you will have plenty of time, not only in your introduction remark, I tell you, just in case you want to economize your time. But as well after the the the the question of the members. Professor, the floor is yours for seven minutes. Thank you.”
  EU competences on taxation
• “And. And it is interesting as well because probably some some of some of our idea which we believe to be true, which which are intuitive, maybe not true when they are tested, are the empirical evidence. I find the topic actually very interesting, very relevant politically as well, because we live in challenging times in which there are many demands for public money, security demands, social demand, ecological demand and so on. In such times, we would also strive to use public money, including tax subsidies, which is actually public money in a way to effectively stimulate investment and growth. We should make the best. We should make the best use of public money in this sense. And the topic of the study fits also to the objective of the fiscal subcommittee to contribute to an efficient and sustainable EU tax policy. The distinguished expert that we saw today come from the Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research in Mannheim. They belong to the research unit, corporate taxation, public finance. Let me welcome Doctor Caterina Nicolai first and Miss Sophia vehicle. Let me also inform you that the executive summary of the study and the slide of today's presentation are already online, and the publication of the full study will follow soon. Doctor Nicolai and Miss vehicle. The floor is yours. I only ask you to to not to speak more than 20 minutes, so that there is enough time as well for the question, for comments from the from the audience. So I don't know who is taking floor first. Doctor Nicolai, please. The floor is yours.”
  Priorities of taxation policy in the EU
• “Okay. Thank you very much. Yeah. We are at the end of this second hearing today. Thank you very much. To our speakers. These are on the 28th regime we are working on. Is making a report on that? I think that we will come back on this as well with the consideration with the shadow rapporteurs. And we were waiting for, for for final proposal from the commission. Thank you very much for being here to our guests. Thank you. Well, we have now the coordinator meetings for our coordinators, which starts in in 15 minutes. Yeah. Thank you.”
  EU political integration
• “Fine. Thank you everybody. Good afternoon. Let's start our work today, which is a long work for us, because after the hearing and the presentation of the study, we will have a study coordinator meeting. So welcome everybody. Language is available in 12 languages. Translation. So thank you all the interpreters to be here. As usual the documents are available on the website of the Fisc. And the meeting as well is web streamed as usual. Yeah. So the agenda was sent on 15th of January. If there are no objection, the agenda is adopted. Thank you. I just have a couple of announcements for you at the meeting of 11th December 2025. This coordinator took the following five decisions. First, they agreed on the list of the panelists to be invited at the EU Tax Symposium for 2026, which will be on 17th March. Second, they decided to allocate to the Patriots group the rapporteurs for the implementation report on the VAT reverse mechanism. Third, they agreed to organise a public hearing on the feasibility of a 28th tax regime and its potential to support EU competitiveness, which will take place on 24th February 2026. And last but not least, they endorsed the draft programme for the fiscal mission to Brazil from 26 to 20 8th May. Me. So if no objection, the minutes are of the Fisc. Committee meetings of 20th November and 11th December are approved.”
  Multilingualism in EU institutions
• “Thank you very much. Thank you indeed for all to all of you, and in particular to our distinguished guests. I think it was a really useful exchange. Thank you as well to Mr. Herbst for being here. Well, I think that it still remains a this is a priority of this subcommittee to fight against any form of tax fraud. Today we focused on the work done by EPPO. We will support it. We are going to to make pressure in all possible way. And because we stand on the side of legality. We know how it is important in particular during this time to be fair towards the taxpayer and this is a form of respect for them. So thank you very much for your presence here, for your contribution. Now I think we will have ten minutes of break. And after that we start with the Commissioner for the hearing on the priority of taxation. 1115 we start with him. Thank you very much. We have today so efficient. Okay. Welcome back to everybody and thank you. Today for us was a long day. But today now we have the great pleasure I would say to. Have with us, Commissioner Oscar. Uh, this will be this actually is our first meeting with, uh. Commissioner Hoekstra and, um, we are very happy about that because, uh, he will illustrate key priority.”
  EU law enforcement cooperation in criminal matters
• “Thank you. Thank you. Joseph. Philip, I know that you want to react to adding something to this similar issue. So feel feel free to do in this in this next question, but let me first introduce the topic, um, concerning artificial intelligence and the possibility to, to tax or not to tax artificial intelligence. You before share with me some idea which I found very, very interesting. I would like you to, to share with everybody. Some argue that automation and artificial intelligence shift income from labor to capital. Should tax system compensate for this shift, for instance, through taxation of automated capital or digital rents? Or are there better tools to maintain a fair a fair distribution of income? I remember in the past Somebody was arguing probably with some provocation to tax robots. I don't know if this was a provocation or was something that, uh, that is today a necessity. Anyway, I'm really looking forward for your reaction. Thank you.”
  Priorities of taxation policy in the EU
• “Okay, colleague, we start because then we will have another final session after this one. And so this is a public hearing now on the feasibility of the 28th tax regime and its potential to support EU competitiveness. We have a very distinguished guest speaker, and we'll start with Professor Reinier de Villers, senior fellow at Bruegel. Then we will have a doctor, Apostolos Thomas, research fellow and head of the Financial Market and Institution Unit at the centre for European Policy Studies. And then we will have Mr. Michael Schick, Head of office, European Tax Adviser, Federation. The speakers will have seven minutes each for the introduction remarks. Then we come back as usual to our member for their question. And then. Speaker are asked to reply up to three minutes for each question, so you will have plenty of time, not only in your introduction remark, I tell you, just in case you want to economize your time. But as well after the the the the question of the members. Professor, the floor is yours for seven minutes. Thank you.”
  Priorities of taxation policy in the EU
• “The final decision will be taken at the Econ coordinator meeting on 20th May. In the context of the annual programming cycle, they agreed on a fiscal contribution to the C.c.c. Summary Report 2025, which is scheduled to be adopted in June. This report may serve as a basis for inspiration for a potential resolution to be adopted by the political groups during July plenary. The coordinators decided to establish the Fiscal Standing Team for relation with the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine. Committee on Finance, Taxation and Customs Policy. The coordinators approved the draft programme of the mission to Dublin that will take place on 16 and 18th July 2025. They endorsed the first draft programme for the mission to Nicosia that will take place in September. Now it is really a pleasure to open this workshop on a very interesting topic. Tax incentive and investment in the EU best practice and way to stimulate private investment and prevent. Harmful tax practice. Actually from my from my paper is missing this word. But the prevention is actually from from harmful tax practice. Yes. And we have the honor here towards two distinguished. Speaker. The study has been commissioned by the Fisc subcommittee. And because we really believe that actually our decision, our understanding of the issue of the phenomenon need to be based on empirical evidence, theoretical arguments, solid theory, and solid evidence. So we really believe that we can take decision based on studies. So thank you very much for scholars and researchers worked on that. Today the study is about tax incentive and investment in the EU.”
  Priorities of taxation policy in the EU
• “Thank you. Uh, the final vote will be in Aiken on 15th July. So all of you are kindly asked to participate. And now we go to the second part. Well, to the third. The last part of our meeting today with the workshop on tax barriers and cross-border workers tackling the fragmentation of the EU tax framework. So I invite our speakers to to get closer, possibly on the first slide. I will break or do you need the break, Because when you are just one minute, break. One minute. Okay. Thank you for coming. Distinguished expert. As for the studies, as usual, we commissioned it because it is our firm conviction that good policy needs to be based on sound argument and research. I find the topic really relevant from several perspectives. I had a chance to speak with the speaker before and they are very interesting consequence of this study. The in particular, after Covid, the cross-border work has increasing consistently, and the issue of a national member state to face tax harmonisation issue, by the way, and probably the report by Michalis can be helpful again. The issue of cross-border in the face of national tax authorities has put new challenge. Both, I will say from an administrative point of view, but as well from a sustainable point of view. If I think, for instance, about the issue of pension system, the way out today are based on most of Europe, most of the world, in Europe, in Europe, in particular on a pay as you go system. The workers of today pay the pension of today. And when we see the increase of a. Cross-border worker this may challenge as well the system in terms of contribution to the national order to the competent national authority.”
  EU competences on taxation
• “Okay. Good afternoon everybody. Thank you for being here. We start now. So today we have a first for eating eating some free issues. And then we will have the coordinator's meeting. So languages are available here as usual in 12 interpretation are available in 12 languages. So thank you for the work of the interpreter. The documents are available on the European Parliament as usual on the Fisc website. And the meeting today, as usual, is web streamed on the European Parliament website. Now we are going to adopt the agenda. Which was mailed to members on 12th of February. If no objection, the agenda is adopted. Let me say two things concerning the work of the coordinators before. Us. First, the decision of the coordinators for the draft programme, which was adopted on 27 of January. Second, the request to the European Court of Order to include the following audit in its 2027 Work Programme. Effectiveness of effectiveness of small and medium enterprise VAT scheme. Divergence in capital gains taxation. Implementation and effectiveness of minimum effective corporate tax. Third, the mission to Paris on 18 19th June. The programme was is prepared by the Secretariat. Fourth, the request to authorise ad hoc Commission to participate as observers in the sixth session of United Nations negotiations for an international tax Convention in December this year.”
  Accounting and auditing of EU budget
• “Okay, so the topic of our hearing today, it is the future of EU anti-avoidance tax rule including simplification. Well, this is a very important topic. It's one of the most important topics for our committee. It was one of the. Reasons why our committee was funded actually. And I have to add that yesterday we had a very interesting joint meeting with the committee, the Court of Auditors, the European Court of Auditors was, was, was listened for, for its report. And actually we learned that there is a huge, impressive number of, uh, uh, tax evasion and tax avoidance concerning VAT. €90 billion. €90 billion. This was the number given by Mr. Cazalla, uh, one of the judges at the court. Well, 90 billion is half of the European GDP. European budget one year. I'm speaking about the ordinary budget beyond the apart from the next generation EU and all the extraordinary measures. And in the last years the European Union taken so half of budget of Europe in irregular. A. Tax evasion. Tax avoidance concerning VAT is a huge number. So that's why for us it's very important to listen our expert. We do it as well. Today with four. Experts in the field Francesco De Lillo managing senior EU tax knowledge team from the International Bureau of Fiscal Documentation. Miss Sarah, a tax specialist finnwatch participating online. Doctor Borbala Kolozs, researcher in tax law at the heads of Lorand University.”
  VAT harmonisation
• “President Ukraine, Venezuela, Iran, Greenland and perhaps tomorrow, Mexico. Canada? Who knows, maybe even France or Spain. All of Trump's direct and indirect threats are a humiliation for Europe, and they are upending global geopolitical balances. Our long standing certainties NATO, the EU and even the EU. We're all facing an identity crisis and risk being swept away by powerful oligarchies that are more influential than any single head of government. George Orwell's prophecies coming true globally is asserting control over all. The European Union stands at a crossroads. It must decide whether it will fight the modern form of authoritarianism or once again, 80 years after the end of World War II, stand up for democracy, freedom and sovereignty. At the next Council meeting, I urge European leaders to rise to this challenge and prove they, when it comes to tariffs, etc., the heads of leaders, uh, heads of state and government must show that they are leaders, that we are not vassals. Take clear positions against Trump and its arrogance and his arrogance. Thank you.”
  EU-US relations
• “(14:30:01 – 14:34:51): Okay. Good morning, everybody. We start. And, as usual, we have interpretation in 12 languages. Thank you to our interpreters. The documents are online and, in line with the no paper rules, basically, the dossier is available online on the FISC website as well, and the meeting is webstreamed on the Euro Parliament website. If there are no objections, the agenda which was sent on May 21 is adopted. Thank you. And now just a few announcements before starting our hearings. At their meeting of April 16, the fiscal coordinator took the following decision, which I would like to quickly repeat with you. They adopted the fiscal action plan on gender mainstreaming presented by Evelyn Reigner. They adopted the fiscal contribution to the European Parliament 2026 summary board regarding the commission work program. They agreed to organize a public hearing on the upcoming proposal to recast the directive on administrative cooperation, so called DAC, on 07/14/2026. They agreed to organize an ICM possibly on October 12, the interparliamentary meeting, which has been as well organized in the previous years and was quite successful. They agreed on the draft program for the Fisk Mission to Washington DC and Delaware on September 2026 and Copenhagen on 26-28 October. Coordinators also approved that the policy department prepares the following briefings, please. A briefing after each ECOFIN meeting covering the topics on the agenda of the council meeting related to taxation and a briefing on each new legislative tax proposal by the commission, including the upcoming tax omnibus and the DAC recourse. Thank you for that.”
  Gender roles, equality and inclusion
• “So in my previous job we had the the project for at European level for creating a European fiscal code which would trace then all the labour when they go, even for a mobility for one day or for a remote um in another country, so it's exchange of information would be the basis there. Thank you very much. I don't have any other catch the eye. Thank you. My question was covered by the. My question was covered by by the question by Fernando. So I don't pursue I understood that actually. Pasquale, you said there is one of the major stresses, um, the cost of auditing as well, the fear for auditing, which prevent, uh, mobility, uh, as well. So I think that here there is room for Europe. There is a, there is a cost of around Europe which probably emerge probably the phenomena is still not so big. It's still marginal. Uh, but surely the phenomena is increasing. And then we'll pose some very important question at European level since cost of non Europe will emerge. Um, we will have a conference by the way on that if you are interested on 2nd of July. Some of you are involved as well. On 2nd July actually it is on digital work. We have several universities involved and some policymaking as well. It will be interesting to to to have. It is in one of the room of the Parliament on 2nd of July in the morning around 10:00. Now. Thank you very much. Thank you for our distinguished guest and the expert. I recommend you to read this, uh, paper here, which was, uh, which is very, very interesting. Uh, next meeting for us is on 16th of July at 9:00 in Brussels. Thank you. See you soon. Thank you.”
  Regulation of teleworking labour conditions
• “Okay. Welcome back to everybody. We had a very interesting discussion today with expert on financial sectors. And now we will keep we will continue our hearing on the role of the IPO and the Eurofisc in tackling VAT fraud in the EU. We will have today two distinguished speakers. I will introduce We will speak today with Miss Laura Kovesi, European Chief prosecutor, and we will speak with Mr. Yannick Hulot, chair of the Eurofisc. I would like to to to thank you to thank as well the for the presence of Mr. Herbst, chair of the committee. And I would also like to thank the Miss Elena Skopje for her presence as representative of the DG Tax South. The discussion today, well, in the second part of the day, will focus on the EU fight against VAT fraud, particularly by the EPPO and the Eurofisc. A network of liaison officials from the 27 member states and Norway launched to combat cross-border VAT fraud. Recent EPPO led investigations highlight the large scale of cross-border VAT fraud and its impact on the EU national and national budget. These schemes, often linked to organised crime networks, exploit loopholes in the weights in the Vet system and require enhanced cooperation, intelligence sharing and enforcement measures at EU level. The insight from this exchange of view will provide Fisc members an opportunity to discuss the challenges, legal barriers and enforcement efforts in combating VAT fraud, as well as how the European Parliament, the EPPO and the Eurofisc can work together to strengthen cooperation against tax fraud and to prevent, with some mechanism in the EU against fraud. Now I will give you the floor for seven minutes each. Then I will ask Members of Parliament to pose questions. They will have two minutes each for the question I will ask as well. Mr. Herbst to to comment, to ask question, to participate. And then you will have three minutes for each question to answer. Now, Miss Laura Kovesi, the floor is yours for seven minutes. Thank you.”
  VAT harmonisation
• “Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you for for these nice words. Thank you to all of you for being here. And thank you, Madam Vice President, for being here. Thank you. For hosting with me. And yesterday, it was a wonderful day hosted by the Commission for this great event. I want to say a nice warm greeting as well for all national parliaments being here, regional parliaments being here from all over Europe. Thank you for this important effort that you have done to be here. So today we are going to speak about two main issues which shape our economy from one side, inequality from another, side growth. Unfortunately, we have been told for many years, too many years that there is a trade off between the two. But actually you can have a more cohesion, a more sustainable Development with growth, without inequality. We do not have necessarily to suffer for inequality, poverty, unemployment to get economic growth. Of course, taxation is part of it. Taxation is part of this. Two elements which combine the best equilibrium to get low inequality, low poverty, low unemployment and at the same time economic growth driving or driven by competitiveness. Today, in particular, we know that the world is changing so fast and so much. We always have seen economic growth being driven by technological progress. It's nothing new today with artificial intelligence in a way. In a way. But we know that artificial intelligence, as part of the new process of technology is different than the previous process of technological progress.”
  Priorities of taxation policy in the EU
• “So you may read yourself on his bio, all the books and writing that he has done. Now, I would like to to to pass the microphone to them, asking them some question and, uh, starting with, uh, with, uh, with, uh, Joseph Stiglitz, I would like to, to, to first making a general consideration because we cannot be apart from what is happening in the world. So before starting to speak specifically about tax, I would like, uh, Joseph to, to ask you, uh, some consideration on the current economic context, which are a consequence of swell of the geopolitical turmoil which is happening. Europe faced the economic fallout of the energy shock now intensified by the Middle East tension, including us-iran frictions. In this context, energy systems are being reshaped, our current tax system equipped to respond to energy crisis and protect households. Or do we need more structural tools like permanent windfall taxes or stronger fiscal coordination. More broadly, how are you should. You would think that taxation should support the economy in navigating these geopolitical shocks. Do you think that taxing extra profit, for instance, of pyramids, which are making huge profit today with, uh, energy is a good idea? Please, the floor is yours.”
  Taxation of windfall profits
• “Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you very much. I would like to thank the court for the presentation, first of all, and then the High Representative, Madame Calas, and all the staff, in particular, the new secretary general, Madame Belen Martinez Carbonell, for their presence here. And now, this hearing will close the hearing. For other institutions discharge. The European External Action Service is the last institution we hear and is a very special one. So we dedicated the importance that it deserves and the challenge as well of this period. Of course, we understand only talking about the strictly budgetary aspect. I would like to felicitate first of all the service for all the effort in adapting the internal control policy, but also for responding very quickly to the errors identified by the ECA in the audit. 2024 and they have introduced a correction. And so let me continue to welcome the effort facing an issue concerning inflation and energy costs in during this time. Now starting from these issues of inflation and energy costs, I would like to ask. The first question because of its nature. The IAS is certainly the institution more exposed to inflation and the currency fluctuation to face unprecedented negative conditions, as has already cut mission and downsize its own operations security activity. Additionally, in May this year, you presented a plan to reduce the dimension of some delegation. We welcome that as you committed in front of this committee. Last year, no delegation was closed, but media have reported that this plan may also be the result of a shift for the iOS, from its original focus on development aid and economic cooperation to some strategic interests, such as cooperation with governments, which may help in enforcing the EU sanctions against Russia.”
  Discharge of EU institutions and agencies
• “Morning, everybody. We can slowly, slowly start hoping that the rest of the map will come. So in the meantime, I will make some announcements. So welcome to everybody. And, uh, language are available in 12 languages. Uh, thank you to our interpreter here. The documents, as usual, are on the Facebook website following our policy of no paper. Those here in the room, and then the meeting is streamed in the on the European Parliament website. If there are no objection, the agenda is adopted, it, which was emailed on 6th May. Thank you. Now some quick announcement. Announcement from me, from my side. After the meeting of 24th April, this coordinator took the following decision. They agreed to organize a symposium on annual basis. They gave a mandate to the chair to negotiate with the Commission to the date of the next edition, which would be on 17th March 2026. They agreed to strengthen the cooperation with national parliaments by organizing an interparliamentary meeting in Brussels. This meeting will take place in addition to the EU Tax Symposium. They held a discussion on the topic on the topics to be included in the Fisc program for the period of July December 2025. They decided to organize the following hearings. Taxation of ultra high net worth. Individual taxation of digital activity at national and international level. Tackling tax obstacle in the single market tax implications of the tariff policy of the Trump administration. The coordinators also had a discussion as regards the the proposal to table an oral question to the Commission and to draft a motion for a resolution on digital taxation in order to contribute to the ongoing debate on a fair and coordinated European approach to taxation of the digital economy.”
  Priorities of taxation policy in the EU
• “Thank you madam. So it is really a pleasure to hold together with you this cross-cutting Hearing my greetings as well to the colleagues from from Ukraine. Our subcommittee on Tax Matters was created five years ago to look in particular on tax evasion, tax avoidance and the fight against this phenomenon. This was the result of several scandals, as you know, which put the topic on a high level on the European agenda. But while this matter continue to be of high importance, we should not forget that taxation is a cross-cutting issue that affects many different policy areas. And this is also the case of security and defence. And as we said before, money before to be spent needs to be collected or rearranged accordingly in order to follow a balanced budget. Today's agenda is structured around one panel that will guide our discussion. The hearing will focus on the legislative framework governing VAT exemptions for defence related activity carried out under the EU Common Security Defence policy. We would like to examine the effectiveness of the 2015 Council decision granting VAT exemption to NATO and EU agency for defence efforts, supporting the implementation of union activities, and assess how Member States are applying these provisions. In particular, the discussion will explore the cooperation mechanism between the European Commission, National Ministry of Finance and Ministry of Defence in ensuring consistent and compliant implementation of the VAT exemption. The panel will also address the operational and administrative challenges encountered in the field. The Insight Gateway will contribute to the broader debate on strengthening the fiscal framework underpinning European Defence Initiative, including the European Defence Industry Programme and upcoming measures under the EU Plan and Readiness 2030 strategy. I'm very pleased now to have our three experts with us today will share the valuable insight on the current state of the taxation in this field and discuss potential avenue for future for future reforms.”
  VAT harmonisation
• “Yeah. Morning, everybody. I think we can start, because actually, we have today a long day, a long morning, at least with, uh, several interventions, several talks, several distinguished guests. Um, so it's better to start, um, although we are not all present at the moment. So, as usual, the, uh, the language availability is, uh, here today in German, in English and French, in Italian, in Dutch, uh, in several other languages. Uh, so thank you very much to the translator. In view of the European Parliament, paperless project, no paper dossier is available in the meeting room. But we do have everything on the website As usual, and we have web streaming on the European Parliament website. The agenda of the previous meeting was sent to members on 28th July. January. Sorry. 2025. If no objection, the agenda is adopted. So thank you very much. Now, let's let me say two things before we start with some announcements. First of all, I have to say that the tax symposium is, uh, having a huge success. We have more than 900 registrations so far. This will take place, as you know, on 18th of March. And, uh, so this is probably the most important event for the Fisc subcommittee. I think that all of us will. We have put strong effort, and the success in the registration of people is quite clear. We have to say as well, that at the last meeting on 13 of January, we agreed. Well, coordinators agreed to, uh, to make two, two study with the European Policy Department research. And sorry, European policy research services.”
  Multilingualism in EU institutions