La nouvelle proposition de taxe de la Commission européenne

Feb 4, 2019 Otmar Issing

FRANCFORT – Au travers du traité de Lisbonne adopté en 2009, l’Union européenne est devenue un acteur plus agile et plus efficace, les politiques de l’UE dans une multitude de domaines étant depuis décidées par un vote à la majorité qualifiée, plutôt qu’à l’unanimité.

Mais dans certains cas, comme l’illustrent les récents efforts de répartition des réfugiés au sein de l’UE, et notamment lorsqu’interviennent d’importantes problématiques de souveraineté nationale, les États membres en minorité de voix ne sont pas préparés ou ne sont pas disposés à appliquer des décisions collectives. Voici pourtant que la Commission européenne entreprend de régir un autre domaine dans lequel des problématiques fondamentales de souveraineté sont en jeu.

Depuis de nombreuses années, certains États membres de l’UE refusent de coopérer pleinement dans la lutte contre la fraude et l’évasion fiscale. Et dans la mesure où les politiques fiscales de l’UE nécessitent un vote à l’unanimité, chaque État dispose d’un veto. Il semble par conséquent naturel que l’UE entende introduire sur cette question également un vote à la majorité qualifiée. En vertu d’une proposition nouvelle de Pierre Moscovici, Commissaire européen aux Affaires économiques et financières, à la Fiscalité et à l'Union douanière, si 55 % des États membres, représentant au moins 65 % de la population de l’UE, votaient en faveur d’une nouvelle politique fiscale, la mesure en question serait adoptée.

We hope you're enjoying Project Syndicate.

To continue reading, subscribe now.

Already have an account? Log in

Support High-Quality Commentary

US President-elect Joe Biden may have promised a “return to normalcy,” but the truth is that there is no going back. The world is changing in fundamental ways, and the actions the world takes in the next few years will be critical to lay the groundwork for a sustainable, secure, and prosperous future.

For more than 25 years, Project Syndicate has been guided by a simple credo: All people deserve access to a broad range of views by the world’s foremost leaders and thinkers on the issues, events, and forces shaping their lives. At a time of unprecedented uncertainty, that mission is more important than ever – and we remain committed to fulfilling it.

But there is no doubt that we, like so many other media organizations nowadays, are under growing strain. If you are in a position to support us, please subscribe now.

As a subscriber, you will enjoy unlimited access to our On Point suite of long reads and book reviews, Say More contributor interviews, The Year Ahead magazine, the full PS archive, and much more. You will also directly support our mission of delivering the highest-quality commentary on the world's most pressing issues to as wide an audience as possible.

By helping us to build a truly open world of ideas, every PS subscriber makes a real difference. Thank you.

Subscribe Now

new comment has been posted. new comments have been posted.

0 Comments on this paragraph, 10 in all 10 Comments on this article

Emanuel Müller Feb 8, 2019

The E. U. without the U. K. could finally make sense, with a recentering around the latin countries, or even the Mediterranean countries. Countries like Libya, Algeria, Tunisia, Turkey and Egypt were historically part of the Roman empire and therefore of Europe and the more they will be integrated into the security apparatus of the E.U. against climate migrants, the more it will be reasonable to extend membership of the E. U. to racially non-white countries defeating the claim by so many brexiteers that the E. U. will necessarily and durably become a race based far right entity.
- Alistair Newton Feb 8, 2019
  
  As an ardent Brexiteer of many year’s standing I can honestly say that I have never heard anyone in the UK say anything at all about the EU becoming “a race based far right entity”.
  
  But good luck with trying to persuade anyone, never mind a majority of the EU populace to the concept of inviting Egypt and Turkey etc., to join the club. I will watch with interest.
  - Emanuel Müller Feb 11, 2019
    
    I (mis)interpreted this presentation on youtube: "Cummings - Why Leave Won the Referendum" as an indication that a lot of brexiters bet on a E.U. descent into racist zone status for some period of time due to the mishandling by the E.U. of the migration waves.
    A new reply to this comment has been posted.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Heinz Günther Feb 7, 2019

To put this article into perspective, one should see the live achievement of mr Issing.

He wrote two articles about the success of the ECB and its single mandate for price stability

Here:
https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/monetary-policy-and-european-growth?barrier=accesspay

And here:
https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/the-ecb-s-two-pillars---a-success?a_la=english&a_d=bf808f0146f86fa80baf5c06&a_m=&a_a=click&a_s=&a_p=%2Fcolumnist%2Fotmar-issing&a_li=the-ecb-s-two-pillars---a-success&a_pa=columnist-commentaries&a_ps=&barrier=accesspay

After beeing chief economist from 1998 to 2006 for the ECB he is now working as an advisor for Goldman Sachs.

Maybe it would be good for mr Issing to engage in some self reflection, if he is not maybe part of the problems that the EU currently has.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Henk Crop Feb 7, 2019

The EU Commission's approach has not only been to centralize power and money in Brussels, but they also have attempted to become a highly " Political Commission ".
In regular language they wanted, as unelected officials, to gain control over the EU at the expense of the leaders of the National Governments.
Mr. Juncker and his assistent Segmayer are now pushing to close files to cement their legislative legacy. ( Politico: The vanishing Juncker Commission ).
The EU has already a fake EU Parliament. It's only authority is they can send the Commission home. But they will not easily do that because it is too much work and hurt their carreer propects.

When you look at how in European history dictators came to power. It was, next to their character, the appeasement by people around them.
Therefore, I think before a new EU Commission is being installed that the degree of democracy in the EU top is studied. The EU Commission has already an immense amount of power as it is.
I think a small team of politicians or experts, with great respect for democracy, should review the role of the EU Commission and present recommendations to ensure that it will serve the EU citizen and not lead us to some form of authorian rule by unelected officials.
( The deep state of Europe, Basil Coronakis, 2016 ).
- Heinz Günther Feb 7, 2019
  
  You can find an overview of the duties of the parliament here
  
  https://europa.eu/european-union/about-eu/institutions-bodies/european-parliament_en
  
  And on the website of the parliament
  
  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/portal/en
  
  As the constitution of the commission will not change dramatically, it shrinks from 28 to 27 commissioners.
  
  The Brexit has a major influence on the council and the parliament. In the parliament the distribution of seats will change, as small countries will get more seats, while the german number of seats stays unchanged. In the council, the number of votes is based on the amount of citizens of the member states, for the double majority will obviously change.
  
  It is only in these two institutions, that this article makes any sense. As a result, yours does not.
  
  To emphasize my point, take this statement of the author
  
  "Under a new proposal from Pierre Moscovici, the EU Commissioner for Economic and Financial Affairs, Taxation, and Customs, if 55% of member states representing at least 65% of the EU population were to vote in favor of a new tax policy, it would pass."
  
  55% of member states who represent 65% of citizens is double majority vote of the COUNCIL! A council, which consist of the leaders of the member states!
  
  And this statement:
  
  "Making matters worse, following the upcoming election in May, a similar southward shift is also imminent in the European Parliament, which would also gain a greater say in tax-policy questions if the Commission’s proposals are enacted."
  
  So much for your fake parliament with no power theorie!
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Henk Crop Feb 5, 2019

This is just another step in the direction of the Federal State, the bloc.
This is the goal Junckers and Macron presented earlier ( J-C Juncker, The State of the Union Address 2017; E. Macron, Initiative for Europe, 26 September 2017 ).
Both focus on central control and distribution of wealth over the EU, not on the responsibilty of members to govern their own country. In a poll held on Juncker's proposal in the Netherlands it was rejected by 94 % of the respondents.
It is a fundamental change in the charater of the EU, it moves from a trade bloc to an EU welfare state. Some call it an EUSSR.
Smaller steps in this direction have been made over the past 20 years.
However to my recollection there has never been an extensive public debate about this change of direction.
It will mean more interference by Brussels for all members. For the Nordic members it will mean they will have to finance the welfare state. While it is completely unknown what that will cost them ?
Mr. Moscovici pushes now for the Federation by means of taxs methods.
Another push for the Federation is based monetairy grounds. These are the calls for "structural reforms". The goal thereof is to make the Eurozone a transfer Union.

With these steps we are moving far from the initial idea of the EU, the so successful common market.
Before we go along with all these small steps by the EU Commission, the Commission should explain to the EU citizen what plans they have ( including cost and benefits).
This should include the option of splitting up the Eurozone. The question of effective support of the weaker members. Are limits on the freedom of movement of people needed ? The EU citizen then need to approve their plans.
- Heinz Günther Feb 5, 2019
  
  As heavily as i oppose your comments on the other article, i do not want to miss the chance to agree with you on something:
  
  "Before we go along with all these small steps by the EU Commission, the Commission should explain to the EU citizen what plans they have ( including cost and benefits). "
  
  This is very very true. The time is right, to explain a greater idea and the detailed steps toward there. The event of the Brexit would have been the perfect option to split up the union into those who are in and those who want to be out.
  
  If the small steps lead to a greater goal, it should be explained. If not, these steps shouldnt happen at all!
  
  Just to be sure, this is the only sentence of your comment i agree with!
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Bernhard Kopp Feb 4, 2019

Thanks to the author for the clear-headed analysis and comments. Although it is not offered in German, it will be read and understood anyway. My hope is that the present Commission, with only a few months left in its terms, will not get very far before May 26, the EU-election. Eliminating tax-havens and tax avoidance schemes all over the EU, to the detriment of country-bound businesses and taxpayers does not require financial sovereignty in the hands of unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats. Above all, the sovereignty is with the people and not with their hired hands, who are elected to their offices for period of time. The hired hands have no business whatsoever to ' transfer ' anything to anybody, the least sovereignty. Any backhanded attempt to do it anyway may become the seed of civil war in Europe
- Michael Hullevad Feb 5, 2019
  
  Not civil war, but the much needed reset. The populists might win at the coming poll.
  Not everybody is pleased with the Brexit negotiations and the reason for the UK voters wanting to leave. It comes as no surprise that The Rotten Hearth of Europe also called the EURO has benefited the north and ruined the south. As J. Delors said: it is an experiment that can go wrong, but now we are doing it. It HAS gone wrong!
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.

https://prosyn.org/bAdwWpSfr

Cookies and Privacy

La nouvelle proposition de taxe de la Commission européenne

To continue reading, subscribe now.

Support High-Quality Commentary

New Comment

Email this piece to a friend

Contact us

Log in/Register

Cookies and Privacy

La nouvelle proposition de taxe de la Commission européenne

To continue reading, subscribe now.

Support High-Quality Commentary

Edit Newsletter Preferences

Set up Notification