Skip to content
EU Parl Watch

amendment list, 10 June 2026

The EU’s approach to corporate tax policy in a changing international environment

Document ECON-AM-789934 · (2025/2210(INI))

Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs

On Parliament’s site PDF Word

Full text

Jump to an amendment (171)
Text 1,026 paragraphs

Amendment 1

Dirk Gotink

Motion for a resolution

Citation 31 a (new)

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
– having regard to the Commission’s European Affordable Housing Plan which stresses the need to simplify European legislation to boost the supply of social housing,

Or. en

Amendment 2

Dirk Gotink

Motion for a resolution

Citation 31 b (new)

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
– having regard to its resolution on the housing crisis in the European Union with the aim of proposing solutions for decent, sustainable and affordable housing,

Or. en

Read the rest (1,014 paragraphs)

Amendment 3

Rasmus Andresen

Motion for a resolution

Recital A

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
A. whereas taxation is a determining factor in the global competitiveness of EU companies; whereas fair, efficient and simple corporate taxation plays a central role in ensuring long-term economic growth and providing Member States with sufficient resources to meet their spending needs;A. whereas taxation is a determining factor in ensuring fairness and equal conditions for companies competing in the global economy; whereas fair, efficient and simple corporate taxation plays a central role in creating a level playing field in the EU Single Market, including for small and medium enterprises, ensuring social cohesion and providing Member States with sufficient and stable resources to finance public goods and necessary investments; whereas recent research1a indicates that fair and effective corporate taxation can support quality employment and reduce inequality;
1a https://publicservices.international/resources/publications/corporate-taxation-and-employment-dispelling-the-race-to-the-bottom-myth?lang=en&id=15686&showLogin=true

Or. en

Amendment 4

Arba Kokalari, Regina Doherty

Motion for a resolution

Recital A

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
A. whereas taxation is a determining factor in the global competitiveness of EU companies; whereas fair, efficient and simple corporate taxation plays a central role in ensuring long-term economic growth and providing Member States with sufficient resources to meet their spending needs;A. whereas taxation is a determining factor in the global competitiveness of EU companies; whereas low, efficient, predictable and simple corporate taxation plays a central role in ensuring long-term economic growth, encouraging investment and providing Member States with sufficient resources to meet their spending needs;

Or. en

Amendment 5

Katri Kulmuni, Billy Kelleher, Gilles Boyer

Motion for a resolution

Recital A

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
A. whereas taxation is a determining factor in the global competitiveness of EU companies; whereas fair, efficient and simple corporate taxation plays a central role in ensuring long-term economic growth and providing Member States with sufficient resources to meet their spending needs;A. whereas taxation is a significant factor in the global competitiveness of EU companies; whereas fair, efficient and simple corporate taxation plays a central role in ensuring long-term economic growth and providing Member States with sufficient resources to meet their spending needs;

Or. en

Amendment 6

Rasmus Andresen

Motion for a resolution

Recital A a (new)

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
Aa. whereas corporate tax avoidance and profit shifting have significant distributional impact, erode public revenues and shift the fiscal burden onto workers, SMEs and households, thereby exacerbating inequalities, weakening the financing of essential public services and undermining trust in the fairness of the tax system; whereas empirical research shows that weaker anti-tax avoidance rules and corporate profit shifting is associated with measurable job losses in the operation of multinational companies in domestic EU markets;

Or. en

Amendment 7

Niels Fuglsang, Bruno Gonçalves, Matthias Ecke, Aurore Lalucq, Evelyn Regner, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Recital B

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
B. whereas direct taxation remains a national competence of the Member States, while international corporate taxation is governed by a complex set of bilateral treaties on the avoidance of double taxation and the prevention of fiscal evasion with respect to taxes on income and capital, known as double taxation agreements, as well as multilateral instruments to prevent BEPS, and EU directives on combating tax avoidance (ATAD) and reinforcing administrative cooperation (DAC);B. whereas direct taxation remains largely a national competence of the Member States, while international corporate taxation is governed by a complex set of bilateral treaties on the avoidance of double taxation and the prevention of tax evasion with respect to taxes on income and capital, known as double taxation agreements, as well as multilateral instruments to prevent BEPS, and EU directives on combating tax avoidance (ATAD) and reinforcing administrative cooperation (DAC); whereas the unanimity requirement for Council decisions on taxation has often hindered progress on common tax initiatives, limiting the Union´s ability to respond effectively to global tax challenges, combat tax avoidance and evasion, and ensure fair taxation across the Single Market;

Or. en

Amendment 8

Rasmus Andresen

Motion for a resolution

Recital B

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
B. whereas direct taxation remains a national competence of the Member States, while international corporate taxation is governed by a complex set of bilateral treaties on the avoidance of double taxation and the prevention of fiscal evasion with respect to taxes on income and capital, known as double taxation agreements, as well as multilateral instruments to prevent BEPS, and EU directives on combating tax avoidance (ATAD) and reinforcing administrative cooperation (DAC);B. whereas direct taxation remains a national competence of the Member States, action at EU level continues to play a key role, notably through directives aimed at combating tax avoidance (ATAD) and strengthening cooperation between tax authorities (DAC), while international corporate taxation is governed by a complex set of bilateral treaties on the avoidance of double taxation and the prevention of fiscal evasion with respect to taxes on income and capital, known as double taxation agreements, as well as multilateral instruments to prevent BEPS;

Or. en

Amendment 9

Roberts Zīle

Motion for a resolution

Recital B

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
B. whereas direct taxation remains a national competence of the Member States, while international corporate taxation is governed by a complex set of bilateral treaties on the avoidance of double taxation and the prevention of fiscal evasion with respect to taxes on income and capital, known as double taxation agreements, as well as multilateral instruments to prevent BEPS, and EU directives on combating tax avoidance (ATAD) and reinforcing administrative cooperation (DAC);B. whereas direct taxation remains an exclusive and foundational national competence of the Member States, which must be fully respected; while international corporate taxation is governed by a complex set of bilateral treaties on the avoidance of double taxation and the prevention of fiscal evasion with respect to taxes on income and capital, known as double taxation agreements, as well as multilateral instruments to prevent BEPS, and EU directives on combating tax avoidance (ATAD) and reinforcing administrative cooperation (DAC);

Or. en

Amendment 10

Regina Doherty, Arba Kokalari

Motion for a resolution

Recital B

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
B. whereas direct taxation remains a national competence of the Member States, while international corporate taxation is governed by a complex set of bilateral treaties on the avoidance of double taxation and the prevention of fiscal evasion with respect to taxes on income and capital, known as double taxation agreements, as well as multilateral instruments to prevent BEPS, and EU directives on combating tax avoidance (ATAD) and reinforcing administrative cooperation (DAC);B. whereas direct taxation remains an exclusive national competence of the Member States, while international corporate taxation is governed by a complex set of bilateral treaties on the avoidance of double taxation and the prevention of fiscal evasion with respect to taxes on income and capital, known as double taxation agreements, as well as multilateral instruments to prevent BEPS, and EU directives on combating tax avoidance (ATAD) and reinforcing administrative cooperation (DAC);

Or. en

Amendment 11

Niels Fuglsang, Bruno Gonçalves, Matthias Ecke, Aurore Lalucq, Evelyn Regner, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Recital B a (new)

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
Ba. whereas interest and capital tax rules, as well as corporate tax rules, are not fully harmonised across the EU, making it more difficult and costly for market participants to be active in multiple EU Member States;13a
13a European Central Bank, Financial Integration and Structure in the Euro Area 2026, p. 38

Or. en

Amendment 12

Rasmus Andresen

Motion for a resolution

Recital C

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
C. whereas the OECD estimates annual global revenue losses resulting from BEPS at between USD 100 billion and 240 billion, equivalent to approximately 4 to 10 % of global corporate income tax revenues, resulting in considerable losses for Member States’ budgets;C. whereas the OECD estimates annual global revenue losses resulting from BEPS at between USD 100 billion and 240 billion, equivalent to approximately 4 to 10 % of global corporate income tax revenues, resulting in considerable losses for Member States’ budgets; whereas, according to the International Tax Observatory, the effective tax rate of multinational companies declined by 2.7 percentage points in the European Union between 2014 and 20222a;
2a https://taxobservatory.eu/eutax-publication/the-new-face-of-corporate-tax-competition/

Or. en

Amendment 13

Markus Ferber

Motion for a resolution

Recital C

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
C. whereas the OECD estimates annual global revenue losses resulting from BEPS at between USD 100 billion and 240 billion, equivalent to approximately 4 to 10 % of global corporate income tax revenues, resulting in considerable losses for Member States’ budgets;C. whereas the OECD estimates annual global revenue losses resulting from BEPS at between USD 100 billion and 240 billion, equivalent to approximately 4 to 10 % of global corporate income tax revenues, resulting in considerable losses for Member States’ budgets; whereas these losses are often a consequence of the lack of coordination between national tax systems and the complexity of international rules;

Or. en

Amendment 14

Niels Fuglsang, Bruno Gonçalves, Matthias Ecke, Aurore Lalucq, Evelyn Regner, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Recital C a (new)

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
Ca. whereas high-level indicators of potential BEPS activity have fallen in investment hubs relative in recent years, they remain far higher in investment hubs relative to other jurisdictions, pointing to the continued existence of BEPS activity, according to the OECD 14a;
14a https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/corporate-tax-statistics-2025_6a915941-en.html

Or. en

Amendment 15

Markus Ferber

Motion for a resolution

Recital C a (new)

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
C a. whereas the vast majority of companies act as responsible corporate citizens, providing the bulk of tax revenues, driving innovation, and sustaining the European social model through job creation;

Or. en

Amendment 16

Katri Kulmuni, Billy Kelleher, Gilles Boyer

Motion for a resolution

Recital D

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
D. whereas economic activity has generally and significantly shifted away from physical presence, leading to a mismatch between where profits are generated and where they are taxed;D. whereas economic activity has generally and significantly shifted away from physical presence, along with the changing characteristics of the digital economy, leading to a mismatch between where profits are generated and where they are taxed;

Or. en

Amendment 17

Arba Kokalari, Regina Doherty

Motion for a resolution

Recital D

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
D. whereas economic activity has generally and significantly shifted away from physical presence, leading to a mismatch between where profits are generated and where they are taxed;D. whereas economic activity, particularly in highly digitalised business models, has increasingly become less dependent on on physical presence, leading to a mismatch between where profits are generated and where they are taxed;

Or. en

Amendment 18

Rasmus Andresen

Motion for a resolution

Recital D

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
D. whereas economic activity has generally and significantly shifted away from physical presence, leading to a mismatch between where profits are generated and where they are taxed;D. whereas economic activity has generally and significantly shifted away from physical presence, and there is a mismatch between where profits are generated and where they are taxed;

Or. en

Amendment 19

Niels Fuglsang, Bruno Gonçalves, Matthias Ecke, Aurore Lalucq, Evelyn Regner, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Recital D a (new)

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
Da. whereas growing capital mobility, along with the broader trends of globalisation and digitalisation over recent decades, have progressively diminished the capacity of individual countries to ensure the effectiveness of their tax policy and protection of their tax base —particularly corporate taxes, but also increasingly personal income taxes — thereby eroding public revenue bases;15a
15a de la Feria, R. (2023). Pillar 2, Fiat, and the EU Unanimity rule on tax matters. Fiat, and the EU Unanimity Rule on Tax Matters (January 3, 2023), 2-8

Or. en

Amendment 20

Kinga Kollár

Motion for a resolution

Recital D a (new)

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
Da. whereas small and medium-sized enterprises, which typically operate primarily at domestic level, may be placed at a competitive disadvantage compared to multinational enterprises (MNEs) that can exploit cross-border tax planning opportunities, while large MNEs may not contribute fairly and proportionally to societal needs;

Or. en

Amendment 21

Kinga Kollár

Motion for a resolution

Recital E

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
E. whereas the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework on BEPS’ Two-Pillar solution seeks to modernise international tax rules through the reallocation of taxing rights to market jurisdictions (Pillar One) and the establishment of a global minimum effective corporate tax rate of 15 % (Pillar Two);E. whereas the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework on BEPS’ Two-Pillar solution seeks to modernise international tax rules in response to digitalisation and globalisation through the reallocation of taxing rights to market jurisdictions (Pillar One) and the establishment of a global minimum effective corporate tax rate of 15 % (Pillar Two);

Or. en

Amendment 22

Niels Fuglsang, Bruno Gonçalves, Matthias Ecke, Aurore Lalucq, Evelyn Regner, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Recital F

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
F. whereas negotiations on Pillar One have stalled at the international level; whereas, in this context, several Member States have introduced or maintained digital services taxes at national level; whereas Pillar Two has been fully or partially implemented by around one third of the 148 jurisdictions participating in the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework, while some Member States have fully implemented it through the Pillar Two Directive;F. whereas negotiations on Pillar One have stalled at the international level; whereas, in this context, several Member States have introduced or maintained digital services taxes at national level; whereas a uniform European digital tax would contribute to greater international tax fairness and better level laying field internationally and within the Single Market; whereas Pillar Two has been fully or partially implemented by around one third of the 148 jurisdictions participating in the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework, while some Member States have fully implemented it through the Pillar Two Directive;

Or. en

Amendment 23

Angelika Winzig

Motion for a resolution

Recital F

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
F. whereas negotiations on Pillar One have stalled at the international level; whereas, in this context, several Member States have introduced or maintained digital services taxes at national level; whereas Pillar Two has been fully or partially implemented by around one third of the 148 jurisdictions participating in the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework, while some Member States have fully implemented it through the Pillar Two Directive;F. whereas negotiations on Pillar One have stalled at the international level; whereas, in this context, several Member States have introduced or maintained digital services taxes at national level; whereas these national measures represent vital and legitimate revenue streams for Member States in the absence of a global agreement; whereas Pillar Two has been fully or partially implemented by around one third of the 148 jurisdictions participating in the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework, while some Member States have fully implemented it through the Pillar Two Directive;

Or. en

Amendment 24

Rasmus Andresen

Motion for a resolution

Recital F

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
F. whereas negotiations on Pillar One have stalled at the international level; whereas, in this context, several Member States have introduced or maintained digital services taxes at national level; whereas Pillar Two has been fully or partially implemented by around one third of the 148 jurisdictions participating in the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework, while some Member States have fully implemented it through the Pillar Two Directive;F. whereas negotiations on Pillar One have stalled at the international level; whereas, in this context, several Member States have successfully introduced or maintained digital services taxes at national level; whereas Pillar Two has been fully or partially implemented by around one third of the 148 jurisdictions participating in the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework, while some Member States have fully implemented it through the Pillar Two Directive;

Or. en

Amendment 25

Jussi Saramo, Martin Schirdewan, Pasquale Tridico, Manon Aubry

Motion for a resolution

Recital G

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
G. whereas, on the initiative of the United States, an agreement was reached within the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework on BEPS on a ‘side-by-side’ approach (SbS), which establishes a coordinated and simultaneous application of different minimum tax regimes; whereas in January 2026, the US NCTI system was granted safe harbour status under the SbS, which the Commission acknowledged through a Commission notice issued on 12 January 2026;G. whereas, on the initiative of the United States, an agreement was reached within the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework on BEPS on a ‘side-by-side’ approach (SbS), which establishes a coordinated and simultaneous application of different minimum tax regimes; whereas in January 2026, the US NCTI system was granted safe harbour status under the SbS, which the Commission acknowledged through a Commission notice issued on 12 January 2026; whereas the SbS exempts US-headquartered MNEs from the full application of Pillar Two rules, conferring a structural competitive advantage on US-headquartered enterprises operating within the EU internal market and undermining the integrity of the global minimum tax framework.

Or. en

Amendment 26

Kinga Kollár

Motion for a resolution

Recital G

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
G. whereas, on the initiative of the United States, an agreement was reached within the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework on BEPS on a ‘side-by-side’ approach (SbS), which establishes a coordinated and simultaneous application of different minimum tax regimes; whereas in January 2026, the US NCTI system was granted safe harbour status under the SbS, which the Commission acknowledged through a Commission notice issued on 12 January 2026;G. whereas, on the initiative of the United States, an agreement was reached within the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework on BEPS on a ‘side-by-side’ approach (SbS), which establishes a coordinated and simultaneous application of different minimum tax regimes; whereas in January 2026, the US NCTI system was granted safe harbour status under the SbS, which the Commission acknowledged through a Commission notice issued on 12 January 2026; whereas in February 2026 Brazil requested safe harbour status under the SbS;

Or. en

Amendment 27

Katri Kulmuni, Billy Kelleher, Gilles Boyer

Motion for a resolution

Recital G

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
G. whereas, on the initiative of the United States, an agreement was reached within the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework on BEPS on a ‘side-by-side’ approach (SbS), which establishes a coordinated and simultaneous application of different minimum tax regimes; whereas in January 2026, the US NCTI system was granted safe harbour status under the SbS, which the Commission acknowledged through a Commission notice issued on 12 January 2026;G. whereas, an agreement was reached within the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework on BEPS on a ‘side-by-side’ approach (SbS), including United States specificities, which establishes a coordinated and simultaneous application of different minimum tax regimes; whereas in January 2026, the US NCTI system was granted safe harbour status under the SbS, which the Commission acknowledged through a Commission notice issued on 12 January 2026;

Or. en

Amendment 28

Niels Fuglsang, Bruno Gonçalves, Matthias Ecke, Aurore Lalucq, Evelyn Regner, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Recital G a (new)

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
Ga. whereas no studies or estimates on the economic impact of the SbS have been released either by the OECD or by the Commission;

Or. en

Amendment 29

Niels Fuglsang, Bruno Gonçalves, Matthias Ecke, Aurore Lalucq, Evelyn Regner

Motion for a resolution

Recital H

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
H. whereas recent EU reports stress the importance of tax simplification, the decluttering of fiscal rules and effective tax incentives as key instruments for restoring the EU’s competitiveness;H. whereas recent EU reports stress the importance of tax simplification and harmonization of tax rules as well as cost- effective tax incentives as key instruments for enhancing the EU’s competitiveness; whereas well- designed, substance based tax incentives coordinated at EU level, can be a tool to advance public goals in the Single Market, such as the de-carbonization of the economy, provided that distortions are avoided and opportunities for tax evasion and avoidance are adequately mitigated; whereas governments should ensure that R&D tax incentives schemes include robust anti- tax loophole mechanisms as well as social and environmental constitutionalities, and provide value for money through regular and rigorous evaluation, based on transparent and high quality firm- level data;

Or. en

Amendment 30

Roberts Zīle

Motion for a resolution

Recital H

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
H. whereas recent EU reports stress the importance of tax simplification, the decluttering of fiscal rules and effective tax incentives as key instruments for restoring the EU’s competitiveness;H. whereas recent EU reports stress the importance of tax simplification, the decluttering of fiscal rules and effective tax incentives as key instruments for restoring the EU’s competitiveness; emphasises that domestic, substance-based tax incentives—such as a 0% tax rate on retained and reinvested corporate profits—are legitimate and highly effective economic policy tools for capital formation and growth in catching-up economies;

Or. en

Amendment 31

Arba Kokalari, Regina Doherty

Motion for a resolution

Recital H

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
H. whereas recent EU reports stress the importance of tax simplification, the decluttering of fiscal rules and effective tax incentives as key instruments for restoring the EU’s competitiveness;H. whereas recent EU reports stress the importance of tax simplification, the decluttering of fiscal rules and effective tax incentives as key instruments for restoring the EU’s competitiveness, supporting investment and reducing administrative burdens;

Or. en

Amendment 32

Rasmus Andresen

Motion for a resolution

Recital H

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
H. whereas recent EU reports stress the importance of tax simplification, the decluttering of fiscal rules and effective tax incentives as key instruments for restoring the EU’s competitiveness;H. whereas recent EU reports stress the importance of tax administrative simplification and the decluttering of fiscal rules as key instruments for harmonised and effective enforcement;

Or. en

Amendment 33

Rasmus Andresen

Motion for a resolution

Recital H a (new)

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
Ha. whereas negotiations on the UN Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation are ongoing, with the final text of the convention and two protocols expected to be concluded by 2027; whereas these negotiations present an opportunity to deliver a global agreement through an inclusive process;

Or. en

Amendment 34

Rasmus Andresen

Motion for a resolution

Subheading 1

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
Competitiveness in international taxationEffective and fair international taxation

Or. en

Amendment 35

Roberts Zīle

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 1

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
1. Emphasises the restoration of the EU’s competitiveness as a top priority; recalls that investment attractiveness requires a stable, predictable and easily navigable tax environment, and an optimal level of tax administration;1. Emphasises the restoration of the EU’s competitiveness as a top priority; recalls that investment attractiveness requires a stable, predictable and easily navigable tax environment, an optimal level of tax administration, and full respect for the flexibility of Member States to tailor their domestic tax systems to meet national economic conditions;

Or. en

Amendment 36

Markus Ferber

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 1

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
1. Emphasises the restoration of the EU’s competitiveness as a top priority; recalls that investment attractiveness requires a stable, predictable and easily navigable tax environment, and an optimal level of tax administration;1. Emphasises the restoration of the EU’s competitiveness as a top priority; recalls that investment attractiveness requires a stable, predictable and easily navigable tax environment focused on fostering growth rather than creating undue restrictions, and proportionate tax administration with minimal compliance overhead;

Or. en

Amendment 37

Niels Fuglsang, Bruno Gonçalves, Matthias Ecke, Aurore Lalucq, Evelyn Regner, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 1

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
1. Emphasises the restoration of the EU’s competitiveness as a top priority; recalls that investment attractiveness requires a stable, predictable and easily navigable tax environment, and an optimal level of tax administration;1. Emphasises the enhancement of the EU’s competitiveness as one of the Union´s priorities, alongside the green and digital transformation; recalls that investment attractiveness requires a stable, predictable, transparent and easily navigable tax environment, and an optimal level of tax administration;

Or. en

Amendment 38

Rasmus Andresen

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 1

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
1. Emphasises the restoration of the EU’s competitiveness as a top priority; recalls that investment attractiveness requires a stable, predictable and easily navigable tax environment, and an optimal level of tax administration;1. Recalls that investment attractiveness requires a fair, stable, predictable and easily navigable tax environment, and an optimal level of tax administration; emphasises the need for cross-border activity for EU’s competitiveness and the role of fair and harmonised taxation in this respect;

Or. en

Amendment 39

Pierre Pimpie, Tomáš Kubín, Enikő Győri

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 1

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
1. Emphasises the restoration of the EU’s competitiveness as a top priority; recalls that investment attractiveness requires a stable, predictable and easily navigable tax environment, and an optimal level of tax administration;1. Emphasises the restoration of the EU’s competitiveness as a top priority; recalls that investment attractiveness requires a stable, predictable and easily navigable tax environment, a competitive tax burden, and an efficient, proportionate and business-friendly tax administration;

Or. en

Amendment 40

Regina Doherty, Arba Kokalari

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 1

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
1. Emphasises the restoration of the EU’s competitiveness as a top priority; recalls that investment attractiveness requires a stable, predictable and easily navigable tax environment, and an optimal level of tax administration;1. Emphasises the restoration of the EU’s competitiveness as a top priority; recalls that investment attractiveness requires a stable, predictable, competitive, attractive, and easily navigable tax environment, and an optimal level of tax administration;

Or. en

Amendment 41

Arba Kokalari, Regina Doherty

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 1 a (new)

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
1a. Regrets that the combination of high corporate tax rates in the EU, compliance complexity, withholding rules, limited loss offsets in some countries, and fragmented national regimes create competitive disadvantages for EU firms trying to compete globally;

Or. en

Amendment 42

Rasmus Andresen

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 2

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
2. Welcomes international efforts, such as those undertaken by the OECD, which aim to stop the race to the bottom and create a more level playing field by establishing a global floor for the tax obligations of multinational enterprises (MNEs) through a minimum effective tax rate;2. Welcomes international efforts, such as those undertaken by the OECD, which aim to stop the race to the bottom and create a more level playing field by establishing a global floor for the tax obligations of multinational enterprises (MNEs) through a minimum effective tax rate; calls on the Commission and Member States to advocate in the relevant international forums for the progressive increase of the global minimum effective corporate tax rate in line with recommendations from ICRICT and independent economists to a level able to generate additional revenues for public investment, climate action and social spending;

Or. en

Amendment 43

Pierre Pimpie, Enikő Győri

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 2

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
2. Welcomes international efforts, such as those undertaken by the OECD, which aim to stop the race to the bottom and create a more level playing field by establishing a global floor for the tax obligations of multinational enterprises (MNEs) through a minimum effective tax rate;2. Takes note of international efforts, such as those undertaken by the OECD, which aim to create a more level playing field for multinational enterprises (MNEs) through a minimum effective tax rate; stresses, however, that fair, transparent and substance-based tax competition between jurisdictions can remain a legitimate tool to attract investment, support employment and strengthen competitiveness, and should not be equated with harmful tax practices;

Or. en

Amendment 44

Roberts Zīle

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 2

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
2. Welcomes international efforts, such as those undertaken by the OECD, which aim to stop the race to the bottom and create a more level playing field by establishing a global floor for the tax obligations of multinational enterprises (MNEs) through a minimum effective tax rate;2. Welcomes international efforts, such as those undertaken by the OECD

Or. en

Amendment 45

Roberts Zīle

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 2 a (new)

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
2a. Stresses that the future of corporate taxation in the Union must remain firmly anchored in the principles of economic substance and real capital accumulation. Maintains that competitive corporate tax models, specifically those utilizing a 0% tax rate on undistributed and reinvested profits, represent highly effective, forward-looking economic tools that stimulate domestic investment, innovation, and long-term capital formation. Rejects any strategy that seeks to transition the European tax framework toward mandatory formula-based consolidation or centralized profit reallocations, which systematically detach corporate tax liabilities from the actual physical and economic footprints of enterprises within individual Member States;

Or. en

Amendment 46

Niels Fuglsang, Bruno Gonçalves, Matthias Ecke, Aurore Lalucq, Evelyn Regner, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 2 a (new)

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
2a. Welcomes the efforts by the United Nations Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC) on International Tax Cooperation to draft a United Nations Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation to enhance international tax cooperation, combat tax evasion, and ensure fairer tax systems worldwide;

Or. en

Amendment 47

Rasmus Andresen

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 2 a (new)

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
2a. Welcomes UN efforts to create a coherent and comprehensive multilateral agreement on international taxation, including on fair allocation of taxing rights, illicit financial flows, harmful tax practices; supports the goal of aligning the international taxation with human rights and sustainable development goals;

Or. en

Amendment 48

Roberts Zīle

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 2 b (new)

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
2b. Highlights that navigating a changing international environment requires a structural shift away from relentless legislative over-regulation toward administrative stabilization and systemic simplification. Calls for future corporate tax policy to strictly prioritize the mitigation of compliance burdens by establishing a moratorium on overlapping reporting requirements and ensuring the immediate implementation of robust, permanent safe harbors under Pillar Two rules. Insists that the actual operational and structural capacities of smaller national tax administrations must serve as a primary baseline constraint for any future EU-wide or global fiscal frameworks, thereby protecting smaller Member States from bureaucratic over-extension and resource exhaustion;

Or. en

Amendment 49

Roberts Zīle

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 2 c (new)

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
2c. Warns that any shift toward simple-majority voting mechanisms in global tax standard-setting risks marginalizing smaller, open economies, disrupting established treaty networks, and creating a fragmented, dual-track international tax regime;

Or. en

Amendment 50

Rasmus Andresen

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 3

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
3. Regrets that the global implementation of Pillar Two remains incomplete, with major economies such as China and India not having implemented the reform; is of the view that the coexistence of Pillar Two with concurrent domestic minimum tax regimes leads to fragmentation and weakens its global application;3. Regrets that the global implementation of Pillar Two remains incomplete, with major economies such as China, India and the US not having implemented the reform; urges Member States to implement Pillar Two in full in particular the Undertaxed Profit Rule (UTPR); notes that the UTPR is an essential element for a well-functioning Pillar Two ensuring a level playing field for European companies; calls on Member States not to extend the UTPR transitional safe harbour beyond 2026 which would disadvantage EU companies; welcomes the clear commitment to UTPR by Commissioner Hoekstra in his written replies to the Parliament in the context of the appointment hearings; recalls that in 2021 the United States agreed to the OECD minimum tax at G7, G20 and OECD Inclusive Framework levels;

Or. en

Amendment 51

Pierre Pimpie, Tomáš Kubín

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 3

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
3. Regrets that the global implementation of Pillar Two remains incomplete, with major economies such as China and India not having implemented the reform; is of the view that the coexistence of Pillar Two with concurrent domestic minimum tax regimes leads to fragmentation and weakens its global application;3. Regrets that the global implementation of Pillar Two remains incomplete, with major economies such as China and India not having implemented the reform; stresses that a global minimum tax can only deliver a genuine level playing field if it is applied effectively and consistently by all major economies; considers, therefore, that the EU should assess alternative and more pragmatic approaches where global implementation remains incomplete, including targeted simplification, reciprocal safe harbours and measures to preserve the competitiveness of EU-headquartered companies;

Or. en

Amendment 52

Katri Kulmuni, Billy Kelleher, Gilles Boyer

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 3

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
3. Regrets that the global implementation of Pillar Two remains incomplete, with major economies such as China and India not having implemented the reform; is of the view that the coexistence of Pillar Two with concurrent domestic minimum tax regimes leads to fragmentation and weakens its global application;3. Regrets that the global implementation of Pillar Two remains incomplete, and imposes a significant administrative burden and exceptional costs on taxpayers without corresponding tax revenues, with major economies such as China and India not having implemented the reform; is of the view that the coexistence of Pillar Two with concurrent domestic minimum tax regimes leads to fragmentation and weakens its global application;

Or. en

Amendment 53

Kinga Kollár

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 3

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
3. Regrets that the global implementation of Pillar Two remains incomplete, with major economies such as China and India not having implemented the reform; is of the view that the coexistence of Pillar Two with concurrent domestic minimum tax regimes leads to fragmentation and weakens its global application;3. Regrets that the global implementation of Pillar Two remains incomplete, with major economies such as China and India not having implemented the reform; is of the view that the coexistence of Pillar Two with concurrent domestic minimum tax regimes - such as the US NCTI regime and other national regimes that may get a safe harbour status under SbS - leads to fragmentation and weakens its global application;

Or. en

Amendment 54

Roberts Zīle

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 3

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
3. Regrets that the global implementation of Pillar Two remains incomplete, with major economies such as China and India not having implemented the reform; is of the view that the coexistence of Pillar Two with concurrent domestic minimum tax regimes leads to fragmentation and weakens its global application;3. Notes that the global implementation of Pillar Two remains incomplete, with major economies such as China and India not having implemented the reform; is of the view that the coexistence of Pillar Two with concurrent domestic minimum tax regimes leads to fragmentation, increases the risk of asymmetric competitive disadvantages for European businesses, and unnecessarily complicates domestic tax policy space;

Or. en

Amendment 55

Niels Fuglsang, Bruno Gonçalves, Matthias Ecke, Aurore Lalucq, Evelyn Regner, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 3

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
3. Regrets that the global implementation of Pillar Two remains incomplete, with major economies such as China and India not having implemented the reform; is of the view that the coexistence of Pillar Two with concurrent domestic minimum tax regimes leads to fragmentation and weakens its global application;3. Regrets that the global implementation of Pillar Two remains incomplete, with major economies such as China and India not having implemented the reform; recalls that the Pillar Two agreement is a key instrument in ensuring fair taxation, reducing harmful tax practices, and establishing a fairer level playing field for large businesses operating in the global economy;

Or. en

Amendment 56

Rasmus Andresen

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 4

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
4. Notes with concern that the significant structural differences between the US NCTI regime and Pillar Two result in different effective tax rates that disadvantage EU-headquartered MNEs operating in the United States; notes, furthermore, that as a result of the SbS, US-headquartered MNEs are technically exempted from most Pillar Two obligations, thereby putting European companies at a competitive disadvantage;4. Notes with concern that the significant structural differences between the US NCTI regime and Pillar Two result possibly in different effective tax rates and inconsistent application across jurisdictions; notes, furthermore, that as a result of the SbS, US-headquartered MNEs are technically exempted from most Pillar Two obligations, thereby reopening incentives for corporate profit shifting and undermining a level playing field for companies and tax jurisdictions worldwide; notes that persistent regulatory uncertainty and recent shifts in US economic and trade policy continue to generate caution among international investors and businesses; underlines that the current international environment is increasingly characterised by geopolitical competition, unilateral policy measures and growing fragmentation of the rules-based multilateral order;

Or. en

Amendment 57

Katri Kulmuni, Billy Kelleher, Gilles Boyer

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 4

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
4. Notes with concern that the significant structural differences between the US NCTI regime and Pillar Two result in different effective tax rates that disadvantage EU-headquartered MNEs operating in the United States; notes, furthermore, that as a result of the SbS, US-headquartered MNEs are technically exempted from most Pillar Two obligations, thereby putting European companies at a competitive disadvantage;4. Stresses that the significant structural differences between the US NCTI regime and Pillar Two result in different effective tax rates that disadvantage EU-headquartered MNEs operating in the United States; notes, furthermore, that as a result of the SbS, US-headquartered MNEs are technically exempted from most Pillar Two obligations, thereby putting European companies at a significant competitive disadvantage;

Or. en

Amendment 58

Niels Fuglsang, Bruno Gonçalves, Matthias Ecke, Aurore Lalucq, Evelyn Regner, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 4 a (new)

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
4a. Expresses serious concerns about the effects of the SbS; notes that, while the agreement aims to bring regulatory stability, it risks harming the level playing field and reignite the harmful corporate tax practices that the Pillar Two framework was designed to curb;

Or. en

Amendment 59

Katri Kulmuni, Billy Kelleher, Gilles Boyer

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 4 a (new)

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
4a. Stresses that while Pillar Two applies a 15% minimum tax per jurisdiction, the US NCTI’s global blending offsets under-taxed profits, creating a structural imbalance between both regimes;

Or. en

Amendment 60

Niels Fuglsang, Bruno Gonçalves, Matthias Ecke, Aurore Lalucq, Evelyn Regner, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 4 b (new)

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
4b. Calls on the Commission to release available data or analysis on the estimated revenue loss to EU Member States resulting from the implementation of the SbS;

Or. en

Amendment 61

Niels Fuglsang, Bruno Gonçalves, Matthias Ecke, Aurore Lalucq, Evelyn Regner, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 4 c (new)

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
4c. Calls on the Commission to further release an assessment on the impact of the introduction, through the SbS, of a new targeted substance-based tax incentive safe harbour in the Pillar Two framework; underlines the importance of analysing the extent to which the permissibility of these incentives, which are mostly used in the United States, undermine the overarching goals of preventing a race to the bottom in taxation and introduce competitive disadvantage vis-a-vis businesses based in the EU;

Or. en

Amendment 62

Regina Doherty, Arba Kokalari

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 5

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
5. Calls on the Commission to analyse and propose solutions on how to correct the structural imbalances created by the SbS, in order to safeguard a level playing field for European companies and the EU’s global competitiveness;5. Calls on the Commission to analyse and propose solutions on how to correct the structural imbalances created by the SbS, in order to safeguard a level playing field for European companies and the EU’s global competitiveness, while recognising the principle of subsidiarity and that taxation is a Member State competence; calls on the Commission to take EU economic competitiveness into account at all times and to ensure that its proposals enhance the EU's economic attractiveness, and do not undermine it;

Or. en

Amendment 63

Rasmus Andresen

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 5

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
5. Calls on the Commission to analyse and propose solutions on how to correct the structural imbalances created by the SbS, in order to safeguard a level playing field for European companies and the EU’s global competitiveness;5. Calls on the Commission to urgently and thoroughly analyse the impact the impact of the SbS on facilitating global profit shifting and lowering effective tax rates and propose corrective measures and solutions to safeguard the integrity of the global minimum tax framework, prevent a race the bottom and ensure multinational companies operating in the Single Market contribute to a fair and effective level of taxation irrespective of where they are headquartered;

Or. en

Amendment 64

Niels Fuglsang, Bruno Gonçalves, Matthias Ecke, Aurore Lalucq, Evelyn Regner, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 5

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
5. Calls on the Commission to analyse and propose solutions on how to correct the structural imbalances created by the SbS, in order to safeguard a level playing field for European companies and the EU’s global competitiveness;5. Calls on the Commission to analyse and propose solutions on how to correct the structural imbalances created by the SbS, in order to safeguard a level playing field for European companies, ensure fair taxation, protect public revenues, prevent harmful tax practices, and support sustainable economic growth and the EU’s global competitiveness;

Or. en

Amendment 65

Pierre Pimpie, Enikő Győri

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 5

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
5. Calls on the Commission to analyse and propose solutions on how to correct the structural imbalances created by the SbS, in order to safeguard a level playing field for European companies and the EU’s global competitiveness;5. Calls on the Commission to urgently analyse and propose solutions, including legislative solutions where necessary, to correct the structural imbalances created by the SbS, in order to safeguard a level playing field for European companies and the EU’s global competitiveness;

Or. en

Amendment 66

Katri Kulmuni, Billy Kelleher

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 5

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
5. Calls on the Commission to analyse and propose solutions on how to correct the structural imbalances created by the SbS, in order to safeguard a level playing field for European companies and the EU’s global competitiveness;5. Calls on the Commission to analyse and propose solutions on how to correct the structural imbalances created by the SbS, in order to safeguard a level playing field for European companies and the EU’s global competitiveness and actively seek to simplify the Pillar Two rules;

Or. en

Amendment 67

Jussi Saramo, Martin Schirdewan, Pasquale Tridico, Manon Aubry

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 5 a (new)

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
5a. Expresses concern that the granting of safe harbour status to third-country minimum tax regimes that operate outside the Pillar Two framework sets a damaging precedent of exceptionalism within a system that derives its value from universal and consistent application; underlines that concessions of this nature, when made under the explicit threat of unilateral trade measures, normalise the use of extraterritorial economic pressure as a lever over the EU's regulatory autonomy, a form of coercion that, by its nature, could be extended to any domain of EU policy, thereby eroding the Union's sovereignty; reaffirms that the EU's commitment to combating tax avoidance and ensuring that all multinational enterprises contribute their fair share must remain unconditional;

Or. en

Amendment 68

Regina Doherty

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 5 a (new)

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
5a. Rejects calls for a new EU statistical own resource on company profits;

Or. en

Amendment 69

Roberts Zīle

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 6

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
6. Calls on the Commission to fully deploy instruments to counter anti-competitive tax advantages that harm European companies, including State aid and anti-subsidy measures;deleted

Or. en

Amendment 70

Rasmus Andresen

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 6

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
6. Calls on the Commission to fully deploy instruments to counter anti-competitive tax advantages that harm European companies, including State aid and anti-subsidy measures;6. Calls on the Commission to bring forward a proposal for a digital services tax in order to restore fairness in the taxation of the digital economy; notes that certain highly digitalised multinational enterprises continue to benefit from business structures that facilitate the shifting of profits to low-tax jurisdictions, resulting in effective tax rates that are significantly below those of many other economic actors; stresses that, in the absence of a comprehensive global solution, a Union-wide digital services tax would constitute a simple, effective and flexible tool to ensure that value created in the Union is taxed fairly and that competition within the Single Market is not distorted;

Or. en

Amendment 71

Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 6

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
6. Calls on the Commission to fully deploy instruments to counter anti-competitive tax advantages that harm European companies, including State aid and anti-subsidy measures;6. Calls on the Commission to fully deploy instruments to counter anti-competitive tax advantages that harm European companies, including State aid and anti-subsidy measures; recalls the need to return to a strict state aid framework once exceptional circumstances have ceased, which would reinforce a healthy tax competition ecosystem within the EU;

Or. en

Amendment 72

Niels Fuglsang, Bruno Gonçalves, Matthias Ecke, Aurore Lalucq, Evelyn Regner, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 6

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
6. Calls on the Commission to fully deploy instruments to counter anti-competitive tax advantages that harm European companies, including State aid and anti-subsidy measures;6. Calls on the Commission to fully deploy instruments to counter anti-competitive tax advantages that may result from the SbS;

Or. en

Amendment 73

Rasmus Andresen

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 6 a (new)

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
6a. Notes with concern that a significant share of profits generated by oil, gas and mineral extraction is shifted to low-tax jurisdictions, with evidence showing that profit shifting increases during periods of high commodity prices; calls on the Commission to put forward a proposal for a surtax on consolidated profits of fossil fuel companies, ensuring fair taxation of fossil fuel rents, redirection of revenues to the green transition, and a shift away from environmentally harmful activities towards a more sustainable environmental tax framework;

Or. en

Amendment 74

Niels Fuglsang, Bruno Gonçalves, Matthias Ecke, Aurore Lalucq, Evelyn Regner, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 6 a (new)

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
6a. Stresses that a substantial share of wealth is concentrated in corporate assets and profits; underlines the need for fair and effective corporate taxation in order to secure sufficient public revenues, allowing Member States to address the consequences of past crises and prepare for future economic, social and geopolitical challenges; notes that aggressive tax planning and the under taxation of corporate profits distort competition, undermine tax fairness and weaken the level playing field, globally and internally;

Or. en

Amendment 75

Georgios Aftias

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 6 a (new)

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
6a. Calls on the Commission to propose a legislative framework to ensure that multinational enterprises that are resident for tax purposes in third countries are taxed within the Union in a manner equivalent to that of companies resident for tax purposes in a Member State when they generate a significant portion of their revenue in the single market.

Or. el

Amendment 76

Kinga Kollár

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 6 a (new)

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
6a. Highlights the role of targeted tax incentives and exemptions in boosting competitiveness and promoting innovation; urges the Commission and the Member States to develop and use EU state aid compliant taxation tools to attract and keep high-value-added activities within the EU;

Or. en

Amendment 77

Rasmus Andresen

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 6 b (new)

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
6b. Notes with concern that, since the outbreak of the Iran war energy shock, the profits of oil and gas companies have skyrocketed, while energy bills for households and European businesses have increased sharply, and that those profits are expected to continue to grow in the coming years; notes that the five largest oil companies recorder more than 100 billion dollars in profits in 2024 alone; calls on the Commission to put forward without delay a targeted windfall profits tax on the consolidated excess profits of large oil and gas companies, set at a rate of at least 50%, calculated against the average profits made by energy companies in recent years; stresses that revenues from such a measure should be used to provide targeted support to households and SMEs, and to contribute reducing Union’s dependence on imported fossil fuels and accelerating the sustainable energy transition;

Or. en

Amendment 78

Georgios Aftias

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 6 b (new)

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
6b. Calls on the Commission to establish a ‘European tax presence’ mechanism whereby third-country companies with a turnover above a certain threshold in the Union are deemed to have a tax presence in the EU, irrespective of their physical establishment.

Or. el

Amendment 79

Georgios Aftias

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 6 c (new)

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
6c. Calls on the Commission to assess the possibility of imposing a supplementary equalisation tax on third-country companies operating in the internal market that are subject to an effective tax rate significantly lower than that applied in the Member States.

Or. el

Amendment 80

Georgios Aftias

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 6 d (new)

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
6d. Emphasizes that access to European funding instruments, research and innovation programmes and public procurement should be conditional on having a substantive tax presence within the Union and on full compliance with EU tax rules.

Or. el

Amendment 81

Rasmus Andresen

Motion for a resolution

Subheading 2

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
Need for simplification and clarity in EU legislationNeed for simplification, clarity and an effective and democratic decision-making in EU tax legislation

Or. en

Amendment 82

Niels Fuglsang, Bruno Gonçalves, Matthias Ecke, Aurore Lalucq, Evelyn Regner, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Subheading 2

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
Need for simplification and clarity in EU legislationNeed for simplification, transparency and clarity in EU legislation

Or. en

Amendment 83

Kinga Kollár

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 7

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
7. Notes with concern that the SbS increases legal and administrative complexity, as well as compliance costs for EU-headquartered MNEs operating in the United States;7. Notes with concern that the design of Pillar 2 brought a separate, burdensome accounting layer to reporting requirements since, in order to calculate global minimum taxes, financial frameworks (like IFRS or US GAAP) mixed with complex OECD adjustments needs to be applied on top of local tax codes; regrets that the SbS increases even further legal and administrative complexity, as well as compliance costs for EU-headquartered MNEs operating in the United States;

Or. en

Amendment 84

Rasmus Andresen

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 7

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
7. Notes with concern that the SbS increases legal and administrative complexity, as well as compliance costs for EU-headquartered MNEs operating in the United States;7. Notes with concern that the SbS increases legal and administrative complexity and creates new loopholes, as well as compliance costs, including for EU-headquartered MNEs operating in the United States, while shielding US headquartered corporations from essential elements of the OECD Pillar Two framework and enabling the continuation of harmful corporate tax abuse1b;
1b https://thefactcoalition.orgn/oecd-side-by-side-agreement/

Or. en

Amendment 85

Katri Kulmuni, Billy Kelleher, Gilles Boyer

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 7

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
7. Notes with concern that the SbS increases legal and administrative complexity, as well as compliance costs for EU-headquartered MNEs operating in the United States;7. Notes with concern that the SbS increases legal and administrative complexity, as well as compliance costs for EU-headquartered MNEs operating in the United States, thereby undermining the EU’s competitiveness;

Or. en

Amendment 86

Niels Fuglsang, Bruno Gonçalves, Matthias Ecke, Aurore Lalucq, Evelyn Regner, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 7 a (new)

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
7a. Takes the view that harmonising corporate tax procedures, including the calculation of tax bases, enforcement and definitions, would provide clear benefits for the corporate world, as it would make it easier for enterprises to carry out investment activities in another EU Member State, while also helping to curb tax evasion and avoidance;

Or. en

Amendment 87

Rasmus Andresen

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 8

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
8. Welcomes the Commission’s work in preparing the Omnibus package on taxes; calls on the Commission to prioritise tax simplification by reviewing overlapping reporting and anti-tax avoidance measures under EU tax law and reducing administrative burden on EU-headquartered businesses – in particular by examining the continued necessity of the ATAD’s controlled foreign company provisions, and by reviewing and potentially simplifying the Parent-Subsidiary Directive, the Merger Directive, the Country-by-Country Reporting Directive and the DAC framework;8. Takes note of the Commission’s work in preparing the Omnibus package on taxes; calls on the Commission to prioritise administrative simplification by reviewing overlapping reporting and evaluate and improve consistency of anti-tax avoidance measures under EU tax law whilst simplifying reporting and procedures for reducing unnecessary administrative burden on EU-headquartered businesses; calls further on the Commission to resist deregulatory pressure from large multi-national enterprises lobbying seeking to weaken EU tax rules, and to ensure that this exercise does not result in reduced tax transparency or weaker anti-avoidance tax rules; opposes in particular any rollback of the ATAD’s controlled foreign company provisions and any premature , revision of the the Country-by-Country Reporting Directive since its practical effects cannot yet be properly assessed due to its recent implementation; calls instead on the Commission to allow sufficient time for implementation before considering any legislative changes and to carry out an evidence-based assessment of its first two years of implementation and to bring forward proposals to strengthen the framework, including by moving towards a full public disaggregated CbCR across all jurisdictions; further stresses the importance of strengthening cooperation between Member States and national tax administrations in order to promote a more consistent interpretation and application of both direct and indirect tax legislation across the Union;

Or. en

Amendment 88

Enikő Győri, Tomáš Kubín, Pierre Pimpie

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 8

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
8. Welcomes the Commission’s work in preparing the Omnibus package on taxes; calls on the Commission to prioritise tax simplification by reviewing overlapping reporting and anti-tax avoidance measures under EU tax law and reducing administrative burden on EU-headquartered businesses – in particular by examining the continued necessity of the ATAD’s controlled foreign company provisions, and by reviewing and potentially simplifying the Parent-Subsidiary Directive, the Merger Directive, the Country-by-Country Reporting Directive and the DAC framework;8. Welcomes the Commission’s work in preparing the Omnibus package on taxes; calls on the Commission to pursue an ambitious and comprehensive corporate tax simplification agenda aimed at strengthening the Union’s global competitiveness, reducing compliance costs and increasing legal certainty for businesses operating within the internal market; calls on the Commission to prioritise tax simplification by reviewing overlapping reporting and anti-tax avoidance measures under EU tax law and reducing administrative burden on EU-headquartered businesses – in particular by examining the continued necessity of the ATAD’s controlled foreign company provisions, and by reviewing and potentially simplifying the Parent-Subsidiary Directive, the Merger Directive, the Country-by-Country Reporting Directive and the DAC framework; stresses that simplification efforts should particularly benefit SMEs, innovative companies and cross-border businesses by reducing excessive administrative burdens, duplicative reporting obligations and legal fragmentation across the Union;

Or. en

Amendment 89

Niels Fuglsang, Bruno Gonçalves, Matthias Ecke, Aurore Lalucq, Evelyn Regner, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 8

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
8. Welcomes the Commission’s work in preparing the Omnibus package on taxes; calls on the Commission to prioritise tax simplification by reviewing overlapping reporting and anti-tax avoidance measures under EU tax law and reducing administrative burden on EU-headquartered businesses – in particular by examining the continued necessity of the ATAD’s controlled foreign company provisions, and by reviewing and potentially simplifying the Parent-Subsidiary Directive, the Merger Directive, the Country-by-Country Reporting Directive and the DAC framework;8. Notes the Commission’s work in preparing the Omnibus package on taxes; notes in particular, the need to take advantage of the review process to address current overlapping rules, and to streamline and simplify the application of common rules and concepts; points out in particular that standardisation of terms and concepts is crucial to simplify compliance, since various domestic interpretations may give rise to fragmentation and complexity; calls on the Commission to prioritise tax simplification by reviewing overlapping reporting and anti-tax avoidance measures under EU tax law and reducing administrative burden on EU-head-quartered businesses – in particular streamlining ATAD’s provisions with the Pillar Two framework, where possible, and by reviewing and potentially simplifying the Parent-Subsidiary Directive, the Merger Directive, the Country-by-Country Reporting Directive and the DAC framework; emphasises that efforts to simplify EU legislation must not lead to deregulation and lowering current standards;

Or. en

Amendment 90

Aurore Lalucq, Evelyn Regner

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 8

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
8. Welcomes the Commission’s work in preparing the Omnibus package on taxes; calls on the Commission to prioritise tax simplification by reviewing overlapping reporting and anti-tax avoidance measures under EU tax law and reducing administrative burden on EU-headquartered businesses – in particular by examining the continued necessity of the ATAD’s controlled foreign company provisions, and by reviewing and potentially simplifying the Parent-Subsidiary Directive, the Merger Directive, the Country-by-Country Reporting Directive and the DAC framework;8. Notes the Commission’s work in preparing the Omnibus package on taxation; calls on the Commission to prioritise identifying remaining tax loopholes and streamlining overlapping rules; highlights the effectiveness of the Anti-Tax Avoidance Directive (ATAD) in implementing the OECD Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS) Action Plan; recognises that controlled foreign company (CFC) provisions could be simplified by retaining the option under Article 7(2)(a) for non-distributed income; recalls that Pillar II, contrary to the ATAD, applies only to groups that have an annual revenue of EUR 750 000 000 or more; acknowledges the potential for simplification by reviewing the Parent-Subsidiary Directive, the Merger Directive, and the Directive on Administrative Cooperation (DAC) framework; emphasises that efforts to simplify EU legislation must not lead to deregulation and lowering current standards;

Or. en

Amendment 91

Jussi Saramo, Pasquale Tridico

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 8

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
8. Welcomes the Commission’s work in preparing the Omnibus package on taxes; calls on the Commission to prioritise tax simplification by reviewing overlapping reporting and anti-tax avoidance measures under EU tax law and reducing administrative burden on EU-headquartered businesses – in particular by examining the continued necessity of the ATAD’s controlled foreign company provisions, and by reviewing and potentially simplifying the Parent-Subsidiary Directive, the Merger Directive, the Country-by-Country Reporting Directive and the DAC framework;8. Welcomes the Commission’s work in preparing the Omnibus package on taxes; calls on the Commission to prioritise tax simplification by reviewing overlapping reporting and anti-tax avoidance measures under EU tax law and reducing administrative burden on EU-headquartered businesses; underlines, however, that any simplification exercise must not come at the expense of the transparency mechanisms and disclosure framework that are essential for effective tax enforcement, the protection of public revenue, and the rule of law; calls on the Commission to ensure that any reduction in transparency obligations is accompanied by a robust impact assessment demonstrating no consequential reduction in enforcement capacity;

Or. en

Amendment 92

Pierre Pimpie

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 8

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
8. Welcomes the Commission’s work in preparing the Omnibus package on taxes; calls on the Commission to prioritise tax simplification by reviewing overlapping reporting and anti-tax avoidance measures under EU tax law and reducing administrative burden on EU-headquartered businesses – in particular by examining the continued necessity of the ATAD’s controlled foreign company provisions, and by reviewing and potentially simplifying the Parent-Subsidiary Directive, the Merger Directive, the Country-by-Country Reporting Directive and the DAC framework;8. Welcomes the Commission’s work in preparing the Omnibus package on taxes; calls on the Commission to prioritise tax simplification by reviewing overlapping reporting and anti-tax avoidance measures under EU tax law and reducing administrative burden on EU-headquartered businesses, based on a strict proportionality test and the principle that no new tax reporting obligation should be introduced without removing or simplifying an equivalent existing obligation;

Or. en

Amendment 93

Markus Ferber

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 8

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
8. Welcomes the Commission’s work in preparing the Omnibus package on taxes; calls on the Commission to prioritise tax simplification by reviewing overlapping reporting and anti-tax avoidance measures under EU tax law and reducing administrative burden on EU-headquartered businesses – in particular by examining the continued necessity of the ATAD’s controlled foreign company provisions, and by reviewing and potentially simplifying the Parent-Subsidiary Directive, the Merger Directive, the Country-by-Country Reporting Directive and the DAC framework;8. Welcomes the Commission’s work in preparing the Omnibus package on taxes; calls on the Commission to prioritise tax simplification by reviewing overlapping reporting and anti-tax avoidance measures under EU tax law and reducing administrative burden on EU-headquartered businesses – in particular by examining the continued necessity of the ATAD’s controlled foreign company provisions, and by reviewing and potentially simplifying the Parent-Subsidiary Directive, the Merger Directive, the Country-by-Country Reporting Directive and the framework for administrative cooperation (DAC);

Or. en

Amendment 94

Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 8

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
8. Welcomes the Commission’s work in preparing the Omnibus package on taxes; calls on the Commission to prioritise tax simplification by reviewing overlapping reporting and anti-tax avoidance measures under EU tax law and reducing administrative burden on EU-headquartered businesses – in particular by examining the continued necessity of the ATAD’s controlled foreign company provisions, and by reviewing and potentially simplifying the Parent-Subsidiary Directive, the Merger Directive, the Country-by-Country Reporting Directive and the DAC framework;8. Welcomes the Commission’s work in preparing the Omnibus on taxation; calls on the Commission to prioritise tax simplification by reviewing overlapping reporting and anti-tax avoidance measures under EU tax law and reducing administrative burden on EU-headquartered businesses – in particular by examining the continued necessity of the ATAD’s controlled foreign company provisions, and by reviewing and potentially simplifying the Parent-Subsidiary Directive, the Merger Directive, the Country-by-Country Reporting Directive and the DAC framework;

Or. en

Amendment 95

Roberts Zīle

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 8

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
8. Welcomes the Commission’s work in preparing the Omnibus package on taxes; calls on the Commission to prioritise tax simplification by reviewing overlapping reporting and anti-tax avoidance measures under EU tax law and reducing administrative burden on EU-headquartered businesses – in particular by examining the continued necessity of the ATAD’s controlled foreign company provisions, and by reviewing and potentially simplifying the Parent-Subsidiary Directive, the Merger Directive, the Country-by-Country Reporting Directive and the DAC framework;8. Welcomes the Commission’s work in preparing the Omnibus package on taxes; calls on the Commission to prioritise tax simplification by reviewing overlapping reporting and anti-tax avoidance measures under EU tax law and reducing administrative burden on EU-headquartered businesses – in particular by examining the continued necessity of the ATAD’s controlled foreign company provisions, ensuring that smaller Member States and medium-sized enterprises are not disproportionately burdened by overlapping compliance frameworks;

Or. en

Amendment 96

Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 8 a (new)

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
8a. Recalls that the Pillar II Directive guarantees a minimum effective tax rate in every EU Member State and contains dedicated anti-abuse provisions covering intra-group financing arrangements; observes that ATAD shares the broader aim of Pillar II of preventing base erosion and profit shifting, notably by means of its interest limitation rule, which restricts how much intra-group interest a company may deduct; considers that, once a group is subject to the global minimum tax, that framework already absorbs a large part of the risk that justified the interest limitation rule, so that applying both regimes to the same group creates duplication without added value; calls on the Commission, on that basis, to assess whether groups within the scope of the Pillar II Directive should be released from the ATAD interest limitation rules, or should instead see those rules applied to them in an adjusted form;

Or. en

Amendment 97

Katri Kulmuni, Billy Kelleher, Gilles Boyer

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 8 a (new)

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
8a. It is particularly important to ensure that burdensome regulation and tax reporting intended for large companies are not extended directly or indirectly to SMEs. With regard to the existing regulation concerning large companies (such as minimum tax regulation), it is justified to maintain the limitations that exclude SMEs from the regulation. SMEs do not have the same resources (such as their own entire tax departments or very extensive advisory resources) to handle the workload resulting from complex tax regulation and heavy tax reporting as large groups, which is why complex and heavy regulation in principle burdens SMEs relatively much more;

Or. en

Amendment 98

Rasmus Andresen

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 8 a (new)

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
8a. Recalls that empirical evidence shows that weaker corporate tax-avoidance rules and profit shifting have an impact on employment and are associated with job losses; calls on the Commission in the context of the Tax Omnibus package to carry out a thorough assessment of its effects on labour markets, wages and working conditions;

Or. en

Amendment 99

Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 9

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
9. Calls on the Commission to re-examine its proposal for BEFIT, due to its fundamental incompatibilities with OECD Pillar Two rules;9. Calls on the Commission to re-examine its proposal for BEFIT, due to its fundamental incompatibilities with OECD Pillar Two rules, in particular, the mismatch between its tax base determination and the GloBE tax base under Pillar Two; regrets that proposal for BEFIT did not provide for a genuine consolidation at Union level, but rather for the aggregation and subsequent allocation of tax results; further regrets that it sought to introduce a Pillar One at EU level trhough a factor-based formulary apportionment despite the absence of an OECD agreement on Pillar one;

Or. en

Amendment 100

Rasmus Andresen

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 9

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
9. Calls on the Commission to re-examine its proposal for BEFIT, due to its fundamental incompatibilities with OECD Pillar Two rules;9. Calls on the Commission to re-examine its proposal for BEFIT, notably regarding the continued risks of profit shifting and tax base erosion; stresses the need to ensure full consistency with internationally agreed minimum taxation standards and to prevent new loopholes that could facilitate aggressive tax planning;

Or. en

Amendment 101

Angelika Winzig

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 9

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
9. Calls on the Commission to re-examine its proposal for BEFIT, due to its fundamental incompatibilities with OECD Pillar Two rules;9. Calls on the Commission to re-examine and adjust its proposal for BEFIT, taking into full account its fundamental incompatibilities with OECD Pillar Two rules and the need to avoid creating an overlapping, parallel tax framework that increases the administrative and compliance burden for European businesses;

Or. en

Amendment 102

Roberts Zīle

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 9

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
9. Calls on the Commission to re-examine its proposal for BEFIT, due to its fundamental incompatibilities with OECD Pillar Two rules;9. Urges the Commission to withdraw or fundamentally halt its proposal for BEFIT, due to its fundamental incompatibilities with OECD Pillar Two rules, its potential to distort national corporate tax bases through arbitrary consolidation formulas, and the unnecessary administrative burden it introduces;

Or. en

Amendment 103

Markus Ferber

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 9

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
9. Calls on the Commission to re-examine its proposal for BEFIT, due to its fundamental incompatibilities with OECD Pillar Two rules;9. Calls on the Commission to re-examine its proposal for BEFIT, due to its fundamental incompatibilities with OECD Pillar Two rules and to bring forward, if appropriate, a narrower proposal limited to administrative simplification measures that are fully compatible with the international framework;

Or. en

Amendment 104

Arba Kokalari

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 9

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
9. Calls on the Commission to re-examine its proposal for BEFIT, due to its fundamental incompatibilities with OECD Pillar Two rules;9. Calls on the Commission to re-examine its proposal for BEFIT, due to its fundamental incompatibilities with OECD Pillar Two rules; Takes note of the lack of progress in the Council on this legislative file and of the fact that negotiations remain blocked;

Or. en

Amendment 105

Niels Fuglsang, Bruno Gonçalves, Matthias Ecke, Aurore Lalucq, Evelyn Regner, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 9

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
9. Calls on the Commission to re-examine its proposal for BEFIT, due to its fundamental incompatibilities with OECD Pillar Two rules;9. Calls on the Commission to re-examine its proposal for BEFIT, with a view to assessing and tackling any inconsistencies vis-a-vis the obligations for MNEs in the scope of the Pillar Two framework;

Or. en

Amendment 106

Regina Doherty

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 9

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
9. Calls on the Commission to re-examine its proposal for BEFIT, due to its fundamental incompatibilities with OECD Pillar Two rules;9. Calls on the Commission to re-examine and withdraw its proposal for BEFIT, due to its fundamental incompatibilities with OECD Pillar Two rules;

Or. en

Amendment 107

Pierre Pimpie, Tomáš Kubín, Enikő Győri

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 10

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
10. Is concerned about the implementation of the SbS system as a safe harbour under Article 32 of the Pillar Two Directive, rather than through a proper legislative process;10. Is concerned about the implementation of the SbS system as a safe harbour under Article 32 of the Pillar Two Directive, rather than through a proper legislative process; insists that any material change to the obligations of Member States or companies under the Pillar Two Directive should be made through the appropriate legislative procedure, with full respect for the unanimity requirement in tax matters;

Or. en

Amendment 108

Rasmus Andresen

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 10

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
10. Is concerned about the implementation of the SbS system as a safe harbour under Article 32 of the Pillar Two Directive, rather than through a proper legislative process;10. Is concerned about the implementation of the SbS system as a safe harbour under Article 32 of the Pillar Two Directive, rather than through a proper legislative process; regrets that political pressure from the United States has resulted in an arrangement risking undermining the global level playing field and effectiveness of the global minimum tax framework;

Or. en

Amendment 109

Roberts Zīle

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 11

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
11. Notes that the Member States will apply the Pillar Two Directive from different dates; calls on the Member States to ensure the full transposition of the directive to mitigate risks arising from mutual reliance on tax rulings issued by national tax administrations;11. Notes that the Member States will apply the Pillar Two Directive from different dates; calls on the Member States to ensure the full transposition of the directive;

Or. en

Amendment 110

Rasmus Andresen

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 12

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
12. Invites the Commission to explore simplification measures to alleviate the implementation burden of Pillar Two on the tax administrations of smaller Member States;deleted

Or. en

Amendment 111

Markus Ferber

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 12

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
12. Invites the Commission to explore simplification measures to alleviate the implementation burden of Pillar Two on the tax administrations of smaller Member States;12. Emphasises that the administrative burden imposed by Pillar Two on businesses and tax administrations alike risks outweighing its revenue benefits for smaller Member States; invites the Commission to explore simplification measures to alleviate the implementation burden of Pillar Two on the tax administrations of smaller Member States, e.g. by introducing a simplified compliance pathway for companies below a defined revenue threshold and by streamlining overlapping reporting requirements;

Or. en

Amendment 112

Angelika Winzig

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 12

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
12. Invites the Commission to explore simplification measures to alleviate the implementation burden of Pillar Two on the tax administrations of smaller Member States;12. Invites the Commission to explore simplification measures to alleviate the implementation burden of Pillar Two on the tax administrations of smaller Member States; emphasises that the implementation of Pillar Two must not penalize legitimate national tax incentives for innovation and R&D, such as research premiums; calls on the Commission to push within the OECD for permanent and simple safe harbors to protect competitive business locations;

Or. en

Amendment 113

Kinga Kollár

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 12

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
12. Invites the Commission to explore simplification measures to alleviate the implementation burden of Pillar Two on the tax administrations of smaller Member States;12. Invites the Commission to explore simplification measures to alleviate the implementation burden of Pillar Two on the tax administrations of smaller Member States; calls the Member States and the Commission to initiate negotiations within the OECD to explore further simplification opportunities;

Or. en

Amendment 114

Roberts Zīle

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 12

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
12. Invites the Commission to explore simplification measures to alleviate the implementation burden of Pillar Two on the tax administrations of smaller Member States;12. Invites the Commission to explore and rapidly implement robust simplification measures, such as safe harbours and simplified filing procedures, to alleviate the severe implementation and monitoring burden of Pillar Two on the tax administrations of smaller Member States;

Or. en

Amendment 115

Niels Fuglsang, Bruno Gonçalves, Matthias Ecke, Aurore Lalucq, Evelyn Regner, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 12

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
12. Invites the Commission to explore simplification measures to alleviate the implementation burden of Pillar Two on the tax administrations of smaller Member States;12. Invites the Commission to explore simplification measures to alleviate the implementation burden of Pillar Two on the tax administrations;

Or. en

Amendment 116

Rasmus Andresen

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 12 a (new)

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
12a. Regrets that unanimity in tax matters has been blocking meaningful progress towards a harmonised and fairer corporate tax framework, including on corporate tax base harmonisation, minimum taxation and the taxation of digital companies; stresses that this situation has enabled harmful tax competition and distortions of the internal market in the Union, favouring large multi-national enterprises at the expense of public budgets and SMEs; calls on the Council and the European Council to move away from unanimity in tax matters by making use of the passerelle clauses provided for in the Treaties, including measures against tax fraud, evasion and avoidance, administrative cooperation, tax transparency and any other measures necessary for the proper functioning of the internal market; notes that such a possibility has never been used in the area of taxation;

Or. en

Amendment 117

Niels Fuglsang, Bruno Gonçalves, Matthias Ecke, Aurore Lalucq, Evelyn Regner, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 12 a (new)

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
12a. Stresses that a common framework for corporate taxation through harmonisation will not only significantly cut compliance costs and the administrative burden, but also create a level playing field for businesses operating within the Single Market, encourage expansion, enhance legal certainty, and stimulate investments and growth in the Union; calls on the Commission, in this regard, to remain active in fostering BEFIT-like measures for the harmonisation of the corporate tax base and consolidation, potentially through a step-by-step approach;

Or. en

Amendment 118

Dirk Gotink

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 12 a (new)

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
12a. Urges the Commission to exclude loans for the construction, transformation and renovation of buildings for social housing purposes from the ATAD’s interest limitation rules;

Or. en

Amendment 119

Arba Kokalari

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 12 a (new)

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
12a. Rejects the proposal for a Corporate Resource for Europe (CORE);

Or. en

Amendment 120

Rasmus Andresen

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 12 b (new)

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
12b. Calls on the Commission to present an updated roadmap on a more efficient and democratic decision-making in EU tax policy, with a view to moving towards qualified majority voting and ordinary legislative procedure in defined areas of tax policy, and to assess systematically the use of Article 116 TFEU where divergent national tax rules distort competition in the internal market and an agreement cannot be reached; further calls on willing Member States to use enhanced cooperation where unanimity prevents progress on long-standing tax initiatives;

Or. en

Amendment 121

Niels Fuglsang, Bruno Gonçalves, Matthias Ecke, Aurore Lalucq, Evelyn Regner, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 12 b (new)

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
12b. Recalls that tax transparency measures, including public Country-by-Country Reporting (pCBCR), contribute to fair competition, enhance corporate accountability and provide greater certainty for investors; stresses that increased transparency helps create a level playing field within the Single Market that strengthens the EU’s attractiveness as a destination for sound and sustainable investment;

Or. en

Amendment 122

Arba Kokalari, Regina Doherty

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 12 b (new)

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
12b. Recalls the importance of the Once-Only Principle , where tax authorities that already receive information under one directive should not request the same entity again in a different form unless the additional request has a clear enforcement purpose;

Or. en

Amendment 123

Arba Kokalari, Regina Doherty

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 12 c (new)

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
12c. Highlights that tax fragmentation is one reason why EU firms face higher costs when expanding and scaling up across borders, raising capital, or structuring investment within the Single Market;

Or. en

Amendment 124

Rasmus Andresen

Motion for a resolution

Subheading 3

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
State of the fight against harmful tax practicesState of the fight against tax evasion, avoidance and aggressive tax planning

Or. en

Amendment 125

Markus Ferber

Motion for a resolution

Subheading 3

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
State of the fight against harmful tax practicesStatus of global administrative cooperation in taxation matters

Or. en

Amendment 126

Enikő Győri, Pierre Pimpie

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 13

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
13. Welcomes the contribution of Pillar Two to reducing the number of jurisdictions applying very low effective corporate tax rates and to the introduction of qualified domestic minimum top-up taxes in many jurisdictions, representing a major step towards preventing the tax avoidance practices of MNEs;13. Welcomes the contribution of Pillar Two to reducing the number of jurisdictions applying very low effective corporate tax rates and to the introduction of qualified domestic minimum top-up taxes in many jurisdictions, representing a major step towards preventing the tax avoidance practices of MNEs; stresses, however, that fair and healthy tax competition among EU Member States remains an important element of the internal market and contributes to the Union’s global competitiveness by creating a business friendly environment; underlines that preserving sufficient flexibility for Member States in the field of direct taxation helps maintain the attractiveness of the Union as a place for business activity and innovation, thereby supporting the retention of companies, investment, highly skilled jobs and strategic industries within the EU;

Or. en

Amendment 127

Rasmus Andresen

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 13

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
13. Welcomes the contribution of Pillar Two to reducing the number of jurisdictions applying very low effective corporate tax rates and to the introduction of qualified domestic minimum top-up taxes in many jurisdictions, representing a major step towards preventing the tax avoidance practices of MNEs;13. Welcomes the contribution of Pillar Two to reducing the number of jurisdictions applying very low effective corporate tax rates and to the introduction of qualified domestic minimum top-up taxes in many jurisdictions, representing a major step towards preventing the tax avoidance practices of MNEs; regrets that, despite regulatory efforts over the past decade, profit shifting to low-tax jurisdictions remains a widespread practice among large multinational enterprises and shows few signs of declining; recalls that in the current international context, it is essential to monitor emerging forms of harmful tax competition, including those arising from carve-outs embedded in the Pillar Two framework and from the treatment of tax credits3a;
3a https://taxjustice.net/reports/the-state-of-tax-justice-2025/

Or. en

Amendment 128

Markus Ferber

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 13

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
13. Welcomes the contribution of Pillar Two to reducing the number of jurisdictions applying very low effective corporate tax rates and to the introduction of qualified domestic minimum top-up taxes in many jurisdictions, representing a major step towards preventing the tax avoidance practices of MNEs;13. Welcomes the contribution of Pillar Two to reducing the number of jurisdictions applying very low effective corporate tax rates and to the introduction of qualified domestic minimum top-up taxes in many jurisdictions, representing a major step towards establishing global certainty for corporate tax payers and towards more effective administrative cooperation;

Or. en

Amendment 129

Georgios Aftias

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 14

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
14. Notes that estimated revenue losses resulting from BEPS strategies by MNEs remain substantial; calls on the Commission and the Member States to intensify international cooperation to address this challenge and safeguard their domestic tax revenues;14. Notes that estimated revenue losses resulting from BEPS strategies by MNEs remain substantial; calls on the Commission and the Member States to intensify international cooperation to address this challenge and safeguard their domestic tax revenues; stresses that tax revenue losses are increasingly linked to third-country companies operating in the single market without a commensurate tax contribution, which distorts competition to the detriment of European companies.

Or. el

Amendment 130

Roberts Zīle

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 14

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
14. Notes that estimated revenue losses resulting from BEPS strategies by MNEs remain substantial; calls on the Commission and the Member States to intensify international cooperation to address this challenge and safeguard their domestic tax revenues;14. Notes that estimated revenue losses resulting from BEPS strategies by MNEs remain substantial;

Or. en

Amendment 131

Rasmus Andresen

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 14

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
14. Notes that estimated revenue losses resulting from BEPS strategies by MNEs remain substantial; calls on the Commission and the Member States to intensify international cooperation to address this challenge and safeguard their domestic tax revenues;14. Notes that estimated revenue losses resulting from BEPS strategies by MNEs remain substantial; urges the Commission to take a more proactive and ambitious role, together with and the Member States, in strengthening international cooperation and advancing effective measures to address this challenge and safeguard their domestic tax revenues;

Or. en

Amendment 132

Niels Fuglsang, Bruno Gonçalves, Matthias Ecke, Aurore Lalucq, Evelyn Regner, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 14

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
14. Notes that estimated revenue losses resulting from BEPS strategies by MNEs remain substantial; calls on the Commission and the Member States to intensify international cooperation to address this challenge and safeguard their domestic tax revenues;14. Notes that estimated revenue losses resulting from BEPS strategies by MNEs remain substantial; calls on the Commission and the Member States to coordinate anti-abuse measures and intensify international cooperation to address this challenge and safeguard their domestic tax revenues;

Or. en

Amendment 133

Enikő Győri, Tomáš Kubín, Pierre Pimpie

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 14 a (new)

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
14a. Stresses that an effective fight against tax fraud, tax evasion and aggressive tax avoidance remains essential for safeguarding Member States’ public finances and strengthening confidence in tax systems; calls on the Commission and the Member States to reinforce administrative cooperation, improve information exchange and promote effective and efficient tax collection mechanisms across the Union; underlines that well-functioning and enforceable tax systems are necessary to ensure a level playing field for businesses, reduce distortions within the internal market and secure sustainable public revenues while avoiding disproportionate administrative burdens for compliant taxpayers;

Or. en

Amendment 134

Rasmus Andresen

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 14 a (new)

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
14a. Regrets the withdrawal of the Commission’s proposal of the financial transaction tax, transfer pricing, UNSHELL, allowing qualified majority voting on technical or non-sensitive VAT issues, and debt equity bias reduction allowances (DEBRA) from the Commission’s work programme 2026 and urges the Commission to accelerate actions to combat tax evasion, avoidance and aggressive tax planning, as well as to put forward the proposal for the annual publication of the effective corporate tax rate of certain large companies, as foreseen in the Communication on Business Taxation for the 21st Century4a;
4a https://taxation-customs.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2021-05/communication_on_business_taxation_for_the_21st_century.pdf

Or. en

Amendment 135

Niels Fuglsang, Bruno Gonçalves, Matthias Ecke, Aurore Lalucq, Evelyn Regner, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 14 a (new)

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
14a. Recalls that, as Pillar Two is implemented, it is important to monitor new forms of harmful tax competition that may develop, notably as a result of embedded carve-outs in the framework, as well as the treatment of certain tax incentives 16a;
16a European Tax Observatory, Global Tax Evasion Report 2024, p. 36.; European Commission, Annual Tax Report 2025, p. 94. European Tax Observatory, Global Tax Evasion Report 2024, p.52-54

Or. en

Amendment 136

Rasmus Andresen

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 14 b (new)

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
14b. Regrets that certain Member States continue to facilitate aggressive tax planning and operate as EU tax havens through preferential regimes, low effective taxation of corporate profits and schemes facilitating aggressive tax planning; stresses that harmful tax competition within the Union distorts the internal market, undermines fairness and shifts the tax burden on workers, households and SMEs; calls on the Commission and the Council to apply objective and consistent criteria to harmful tax practices both inside and outside the Union, and to establish credible countermeasures; calls on further on the Commission and Council to assess the implementation of the 2022 revision of the Code of Conduct on Business Taxation in promoting fair tax competition within and outside the EU and curbing harmful tax practices; calls for a reform to strengthen its mandate, transparency, accountability and follow up mechanisms;

Or. en

Amendment 137

Niels Fuglsang, Bruno Gonçalves, Matthias Ecke, Aurore Lalucq, Evelyn Regner, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 14 b (new)

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
14b. Recalls Parliament’s resolutions on reforming the EU list of tax havens and on reforming the EU policy on harmful tax practices (including the reform of the Code of Conduct Group); calls on the Council to relaunch discussions on a comprehensive reform of the Code and to implement Parliament’s recommendations; 17a
17a European Parliament resolution of 21 January 2021 on reforming the EU list of tax havens; European Parliament resolution of 7 October 2021 on reforming the EU policy on harmful tax practices (including the reform of the Code of Conduct Group).

Or. en

Amendment 138

Niels Fuglsang, Bruno Gonçalves, Matthias Ecke, Aurore Lalucq, Evelyn Regner, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 14 c (new)

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
14c. Notes that ongoing geopolitical tensions have generated significant windfall profits in certain sectors; calls on the Commission and the Member States to ensure that these extraordinary gains are taxed fairly and effectively, and to address the cross-border shifting of windfall profits that undermines tax revenues and thus distort fair competition;

Or. en

Amendment 139

Rasmus Andresen

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 15

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
15. Reaffirms its commitment to the international rules-based order; stresses that internationally developed instruments are effective only insofar as they are backed by a genuine global agreement and effective implementation;15. Reaffirms its commitment to the international rules-based order; stresses that certain instruments, such as formula apportionment and digital services taxes, can remain effective even in the absence of universal implementation;

Or. en

Amendment 140

Jussi Saramo, Pasquale Tridico, Manon Aubry

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 15

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
15. Reaffirms its commitment to the international rules-based order; stresses that internationally developed instruments are effective only insofar as they are backed by a genuine global agreement and effective implementation;15. Reaffirms its commitment to the international rules-based order; stresses that internationally developed instruments represent the most ambitious and structurally sound framework available for addressing global tax challenges.

Or. en

Amendment 141

Rasmus Andresen

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 16

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
16. Regrets the fact that the EU’s digital services trade balance has tilted sharply towards other jurisdictions where digital technology and cloud service providers have expanded rapidly; points out that this shift is posing a significant challenge to Member States’ tax systems and requires a rethinking of the reallocation of taxing rights;16. Regrets the fact that the EU’s digital services trade balance has tilted sharply towards other jurisdictions where digital technology, artificial intelligence and cloud service providers have expanded rapidly, increasing the concentration of economic power and taxable profits in a small number of multinational digital companies headquartered outside the Union; points out that this shift is posing a significant challenge to Member States’ tax systems and requires a rethinking of the reallocation of taxing rights; calls on the Commission and Member States to develop a coordinated approach to the allocation of taxing rights in the digital and AI economy, with a view to preventing profit shifting and ensuring the profits and rents generated from EU users, data and businesses is taxed fairly where the value is created;

Or. en

Amendment 142

Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 16

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
16. Regrets the fact that the EU’s digital services trade balance has tilted sharply towards other jurisdictions where digital technology and cloud service providers have expanded rapidly; points out that this shift is posing a significant challenge to Member States’ tax systems and requires a rethinking of the reallocation of taxing rights;16. Regrets the fact that the EU’s digital services trade balance has tilted sharply towards other jurisdictions where digital technology and cloud service providers have expanded rapidly;

Or. en

Amendment 143

Regina Doherty, Arba Kokalari

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 16

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
16. Regrets the fact that the EU’s digital services trade balance has tilted sharply towards other jurisdictions where digital technology and cloud service providers have expanded rapidly; points out that this shift is posing a significant challenge to Member States’ tax systems and requires a rethinking of the reallocation of taxing rights;16. Regrets the fact that the EU’s digital services trade balance has tilted sharply towards other jurisdictions where digital technology and cloud service providers have expanded rapidly; points out that this shift highlights the importance of continued international cooperation to ensure tax certainty, avoid double taxation and provide a stable environment for investment, innovation and economic growth;

Or. en

Amendment 144

Georgios Aftias

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 16 a (new)

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
16a. Calls on the Commission to consider the creation of a European mechanism for allocating tax obligations for digital and online services provided by third-country companies to consumers and businesses within the Union.

Or. el

Amendment 145

Georgios Aftias

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 16 b (new)

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
16b. Calls for the establishment of uniform rules to prevent artificial transfers of profits outside the Union through intragroup transactions, intellectual property rights and digital services provided by affiliated companies established in third countries.

Or. el

Amendment 146

Jussi Saramo, Martin Schirdewan, Pasquale Tridico, Manon Aubry

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
17. Takes note of the United States’ concerns regarding unilateral digital services taxes, which it views as discriminatory towards US technology companies; welcomes the United States’ openness to dialogue on these matters;17. Regrets that multilateral negotiations on the reallocation of taxing rights under Pillar One have stalled without prospect of near-term conclusion, and that the question of taxing the digital economy has remained unresolved since 2018 despite sustained efforts by the EU and its partners; considers that the absence of meaningful progress at the multilateral level should not defer the EU's action to ensure that digital economy revenues generated within its internal market are taxed fairly and consistently; calls on the Commission to bring forward without further delay a new proposal for an EU-wide digital services tax, so as to safeguard Member States' revenues based and guarantee as level playing field between digital and traditional business models; notes that a 5% EU-wide digital services tax has been estimated to generate EUR 37.5 billion in annual revenues for 2026, a figure that would be expected to grow significantly in subsequent years, representing a substantial and increasing contribution to EU fiscal capacity at a time of heightened public finance needs;

Or. en

Amendment 147

Rasmus Andresen

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
17. Takes note of the United States’ concerns regarding unilateral digital services taxes, which it views as discriminatory towards US technology companies; welcomes the United States’ openness to dialogue on these matters;17. Takes note of the United States’ concerns regarding unilateral digital services taxes, nevertheless, pending the development and implementation of a comprehensive multilateral framework that ensures a fair allocation of taxing rights over multinational enterprises operating across jurisdictions, reaffirms the sovereign right of States to adopt temporary unilateral measures to protect and preserve their tax bases, including digital services taxes, while recognising that broader international participation in such measures may contribute to reducing the scope for unilateral retaliatory actions;

Or. en

Amendment 148

Angelika Winzig

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
17. Takes note of the United States’ concerns regarding unilateral digital services taxes, which it views as discriminatory towards US technology companies; welcomes the United States’ openness to dialogue on these matters;17. Takes note of the United States’ concerns regarding unilateral digital services taxes, which it views as discriminatory towards US technology companies; welcomes the United States’ openness to dialogue on these matters; underlines, however, that until a comprehensive and binding global agreement under Pillar One is fully operational, these national digital services taxes remain a justified and essential instrument for Member States to ensure that all digital businesses contribute their fair share to national budgets;

Or. en

Amendment 149

Niels Fuglsang, Bruno Gonçalves, Matthias Ecke, Aurore Lalucq, Evelyn Regner, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
17. Takes note of the United States’ concerns regarding unilateral digital services taxes, which it views as discriminatory towards US technology companies; welcomes the United States’ openness to dialogue on these matters;17. Takes note of the United States’ concerns regarding unilateral digital services taxes, which it views as discriminatory towards US technology companies; welcomes the United States’ openness to dialogue on these matters; underlines that fair and effective taxation of the digital economy remains essential in ensuring a level playing field and safeguarding public revenues;

Or. en

Amendment 150

Kinga Kollár

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
17. Takes note of the United States’ concerns regarding unilateral digital services taxes, which it views as discriminatory towards US technology companies; welcomes the United States’ openness to dialogue on these matters;17. Takes note of the United States’ concerns regarding solutions under Pillar One and unilateral digital services taxes, which it views as discriminatory towards US technology companies; welcomes the United States’ openness to dialogue on these matters;

Or. en

Amendment 151

Katri Kulmuni, Billy Kelleher, Gilles Boyer

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
17. Takes note of the United States’ concerns regarding unilateral digital services taxes, which it views as discriminatory towards US technology companies; welcomes the United States’ openness to dialogue on these matters;17. Takes note of the United States’ concerns regarding unilateral digital services taxes, which it views as discriminatory towards US technology companies; welcomes a constructive dialogue between the EU and the US on these matters;

Or. en

Amendment 152

Rasmus Andresen

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 18

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
18. Is of the view that unilateral measures or double tax agreements cannot adequately tackle global tax challenges and risk opening the door to retaliatory measures, and that a global solution to digital taxation would therefore be the ideal way forward;deleted

Or. en

Amendment 153

Roberts Zīle

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 18

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
18. Is of the view that unilateral measures or double tax agreements cannot adequately tackle global tax challenges and risk opening the door to retaliatory measures, and that a global solution to digital taxation would therefore be the ideal way forward;18. Is of the view that unilateral measures or double tax agreements cannot adequately tackle global tax challenges and risk opening the door to retaliatory measures, and that a global solution to digital taxation would therefore be the ideal way forward, provided that any solution respects the principle of economic substance and does not arbitrarily disadvantage smaller open economies;

Or. en

Amendment 154

Pierre Pimpie

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 18

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
18. Is of the view that unilateral measures or double tax agreements cannot adequately tackle global tax challenges and risk opening the door to retaliatory measures, and that a global solution to digital taxation would therefore be the ideal way forward;18. Is of the view that unilateral measures may risk opening the door to retaliatory measures, while recalling that double tax agreements remain a central instrument for preventing double taxation and preserving legal certainty; stresses that any global solution to digital taxation must be based on broad consensus, effective implementation by all major economies;

Or. en

Amendment 155

Kinga Kollár

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 18

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
18. Is of the view that unilateral measures or double tax agreements cannot adequately tackle global tax challenges and risk opening the door to retaliatory measures, and that a global solution to digital taxation would therefore be the ideal way forward;18. Is of the view that unilateral measures or double tax agreements cannot adequately tackle global tax challenges and risk opening the door to retaliatory measures, and that a global solution to digital taxation would therefore be the ideal way forward that constructs a solution on a wider basis;

Or. en

Amendment 156

Regina Doherty, Arba Kokalari

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 18

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
18. Is of the view that unilateral measures or double tax agreements cannot adequately tackle global tax challenges and risk opening the door to retaliatory measures, and that a global solution to digital taxation would therefore be the ideal way forward;18. Is of the view that unilateral measures or double tax agreements cannot adequately tackle global tax challenges and risk opening the door to retaliatory measures, and that a global solution to digital taxation would be the only effective way forward;

Or. en

Amendment 157

Niels Fuglsang, Bruno Gonçalves, Matthias Ecke, Aurore Lalucq, Evelyn Regner, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 18 a (new)

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
18a. Stresses, however, that in the absence of a global solution, regional or unilateral measures can play a role in ensuring greater tax fairness; urges the Commission to review the scope of EU action on the fair taxation of the digital economy in light of recent political developments in the OECD Pillar Two framework; calls for renewed consideration of an EU digital levy that ensures a common approach regarding the taxation of the digital sector, enhances the EU's global competitiveness by establishing legal certainty and a level playing field for digital businesses operating within the Union;

Or. en

Amendment 158

Georgios Aftias

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 18 a (new)

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
18a. Stresses that any future international tax cooperation agreement should include reciprocity clauses so that third-country companies enjoying access to the single market are subject to tax obligations equivalent to those applied to Union companies.

Or. el

Amendment 159

Rasmus Andresen

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 19

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
19. Takes note of ongoing negotiations within the UN Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation, which aim to improve tax cooperation and transparency in a global context;19. Welcomes the ongoing negotiations within the UN Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation, which aim to improve tax cooperation and transparency in a global context; takes the view that this UN Convention on Tax should be designed with a view to ensuring a fair division of taxing rights between nation states, and, while duly considering national tax sovereignty, support efforts to tackle harmful tax practices and illicit financial flows; stresses, in this context, that the EU should play a proactive role in enabling developing countries to mobilise domestic resources, in particular through enhanced tax governance, and that the EU should take the lead in combating illicit financial flows;

Or. en

Amendment 160

Roberts Zīle

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 19

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
19. Takes note of ongoing negotiations within the UN Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation, which aim to improve tax cooperation and transparency in a global context;19. Takes note with concern of ongoing negotiations within the UN Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation; strongly opposes draft provisions, such as Article 5, that could be interpreted as requiring the mandatory renegotiation of existing bilateral tax agreements, thereby undermining long-standing legal certainty; rejects any international tax framework that shifts away from consensus-based decision-making towards simple majority voting;

Or. en

Amendment 161

Niels Fuglsang, Bruno Gonçalves, Matthias Ecke, Aurore Lalucq, Evelyn Regner, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 19

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
19. Takes note of ongoing negotiations within the UN Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation, which aim to improve tax cooperation and transparency in a global context;19. Welcomes the ongoing negotiations within the UN Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation, which aim to establish a fully inclusive international tax cooperation, and create a fair, transparent, efficient, equitable and effective international tax system for sustainable development; calls on the Member States to continue to engage constructively in the process notwithstanding the work carried out at the OECD;

Or. en

Amendment 162

Pierre Pimpie, Tomáš Kubín, Enikő Győri

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 19

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
19. Takes note of ongoing negotiations within the UN Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation, which aim to improve tax cooperation and transparency in a global context;19. Takes note of ongoing negotiations within the UN Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation, which aim to improve tax cooperation and transparency in a global context; stresses that any UN-led process should complement, and not duplicate or undermine, existing OECD/G20 standards, should preserve legal certainty and should not create conflicting obligations for Member States, tax administrations or businesses;

Or. en

Amendment 163

Jussi Saramo, Martin Schirdewan, Pasquale Tridico, Manon Aubry

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 19

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
19. Takes note of ongoing negotiations within the UN Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation, which aim to improve tax cooperation and transparency in a global context;19. Welcomes the ongoing negotiations within the UN Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation, which aim to improve tax cooperation and transparency in a global context;

Or. en

Amendment 164

Roberts Zīle

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 20

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
20. Invites the Member States to strengthen their coordination and to present a unified position in multilateral forums; further invites the Commission to assist the Member States in effectively representing their interests in such forums;20. Invites the Member States to strengthen their coordination and to present a unified position in multilateral forums where appropriate, while maintaining their individual right to negotiate and vote independently in accordance with national interests; firmly rejects any attempt to transfer exclusive external competence in tax matters to the Commission; further invites the Commission to assist the Member States upon request in effectively representing their interests in such forums;

Or. en

Amendment 165

Kinga Kollár

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 20

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
20. Invites the Member States to strengthen their coordination and to present a unified position in multilateral forums; further invites the Commission to assist the Member States in effectively representing their interests in such forums;20. Invites the Member States to strengthen their coordination and to present a unified position in multilateral forums that reflects the EU interests, simplifies taxation obligations and ensures coherence within the international tax framework; further invites the Commission to assist the Member States in effectively representing their interests in such forums;

Or. en

Amendment 166

Rasmus Andresen

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 20

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
20. Invites the Member States to strengthen their coordination and to present a unified position in multilateral forums; further invites the Commission to assist the Member States in effectively representing their interests in such forums;20. Invites the Member States to strengthen their coordination and to present ambitious positions in multilateral forums; further urges the Commission to take a more proactive and ambitious role to effectively represent the Member States' in such forums;

Or. en

Amendment 167

Katri Kulmuni, Billy Kelleher, Gilles Boyer

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 20

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
20. Invites the Member States to strengthen their coordination and to present a unified position in multilateral forums; further invites the Commission to assist the Member States in effectively representing their interests in such forums;20. Invites the Member States to strengthen their coordination and to present a strong unified position in multilateral forums; further invites the Commission to assist the Member States in effectively representing their interests in such forums;

Or. en

Amendment 168

Niels Fuglsang, Bruno Gonçalves, Matthias Ecke, Aurore Lalucq, Evelyn Regner, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 20 a (new)

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
20a. Calls on the Council to move towards the use of qualified majority voting in certain corporate tax matters concerning the prevention of tax evasion and avoidance, and for the implementation of international tax agreements; stresses that the lack of further tax coordination pressures Member States to engage in a detrimental race to the bottom, while also hampering cross-border economic activities;

Or. en

Amendment 169

Georgios Aftias

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 20 a (new)

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
20a. Calls on the Commission to draw up an annual report on the tax gap between Union companies and third-country companies operating in the single market, assessing the impact on competitiveness, investment and public revenues of Member States, and to propose corrective measures where necessary.

Or. el

Amendment 170

Niels Fuglsang, Bruno Gonçalves, Matthias Ecke, Aurore Lalucq, Evelyn Regner, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 20 b (new)

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
20b. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to strengthen measures against international tax havens by promoting full transparency of beneficial ownership, supporting the automatic exchange of information, and ensuring the effective implementation of a global minimum corporate tax rate; urges the establishment of stronger sanctions against non-cooperative jurisdictions and calls for enhanced country-by-country reporting requirements for multinational enterprises in order to combat tax avoidance, tax evasion, and illicit financial flows;

Or. en

Amendment 171

Niels Fuglsang, Bruno Gonçalves, Matthias Ecke, Aurore Lalucq, Evelyn Regner, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 20 c (new)

Motion for a resolutionAmendment
20c. Urges the establishment of stronger sanctions against non-cooperative jurisdictions and calls for enhanced country-by-country reporting requirements for multinational enterprises in order to combat tax avoidance, tax evasion, and illicit financial flows;

Or. en