Sittings · Document

Draft report (COM(2023)0532 – C9-0341/2023 – 2023/0321(CNS)) 2025-06-13

Business in Europe: Framework for Income Taxation (BEFIT)

Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs

Official HTML ↗ PDF DOCX

AM_Com_LegReport

Amendment 89

Christophe Gomart

Proposal for a directive

Citation 5 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

having regard to the European Commission’s 2024 Annual Report on Taxation in the Union, published in June 2024,

Or. fr

Amendment 90

Christophe Gomart

Proposal for a directive

Recital 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(1) Within the Union there is currently no common approach to the computation of the taxable base for businesses. Therefore, Union businesses are obliged to comply with a different corporate tax system in each Member State in which they operate. For example, in 2023, according to the 2024 Annual Report on Taxation, statutory corporate tax rates varied between Member States from 10 % to 31.5 % (and from 9 % to 29 % taking into account the tax support schemes put in place by governments).

Or. fr

Amendment 91

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Recital 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(1) Despite all the proposals listed in recitals 1a, 1b and 1c, within the Union there is currently no common approach to the computation of the taxable base for businesses. Therefore, Union businesses are obliged to comply with a different corporate tax system in each Member State in which they operate.

Or. en

Amendment 92

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Recital 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(1 a) In 1975, the European Commission tabled a proposal to minimize the differences between Member States' corporate tax rates. Under the proposal1a, Member States could still choose their own corporate tax rate, but this rate could “not be lower than 45 % nor higher than 55 %”. Due to a lack of support from Member States, the proposal was withdrawn.

_________________

1a COM(75)0392.

Or. en

Amendment 93

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Recital 1 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(1 b) In 2011, the Commission made a proposal1b for a common consolidated corporate tax base, better known under the acronym CCCTB. After four years of technical discussions, negotiations faltered in Council and the proposal was withdrawn.

_________________

1b COM(2011)0121 final.

Or. en

Amendment 94

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Recital 1 c (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(1 c) In 2016, the European Commission tabled an altered 'rebooted' CCCTB1c. A common European corporate tax base would serve as a single rulebook on how companies should calculate their overall profit in the EU. After calculating a common tax base, a company active in more than one Member State could add up all the profits and losses of its entities in the different Member States, to work out its total net profit or loss for the entire EU (consolidation). The company's taxable profits would then be allocated between the respective company entities, using an apportionment formula (formulary apportionment), with the profits being divided according to three equally weighted factors (labour, tangible assets and sales). Each Member State would then tax the allocated shares of the company's profits at its own national corporate tax rate. The 2016 CCCTB proposal eventually met the same fate as its 2011 predecessor. The Council was not able to reach unanimous support and while Council had initially paused negotiations to provide room for the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)/Inclusive Framework's reform of corporate tax rules (see next paragraph), the 2016 CCCTB proposal was withdrawn in September 2023.

_________________

1c COM(2016)0683 final.

Or. en

Amendment 95

Guillaume Peltier

on behalf of the ECR Group

Proposal for a directive

Recital 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(2) There are 27 different corporate income tax systems in the Union. Globalisation and the digitalisation of the economy have significantly altered the perception of land borders and business models and governments are trying to adapt to this new reality.

Or. en

Amendment 96

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Recital 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(2) The existence of 27 different corporate income tax systems in the Union gives rise to complexity in tax compliance. That has become more evident as globalisation and digitalisation of the economy have significantly altered the perception of land borders and business models. As governments have tried to adapt to that new reality, a fragmented response among Member States has led to further distortions in the internal market. The various legal frameworks inevitably lead to different tax administration practices across the Member States as well. This often entails long procedures characterised by unpredictability and inconsistency along with high compliance costs, which discourages cross-border investments;

Or. en

Amendment 97

Gilles Boyer

Proposal for a directive

Recital 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(2) The existence of 27 different corporate income tax systems in the Union gives rise to complexity in tax compliance and leads to unfair competition for businesses, and facilitates cross-border aggressive tax planning, as well as instances of double taxation and double non-taxation. That has become more evident as globalisation and digitalisation of the economy have significantly altered the perception of land borders and business models. As governments have tried to adapt to that new reality, a fragmented response among Member States has led to further distortions in the internal market. The various legal frameworks inevitably lead to different tax administration practices across the Member States as well. This often entails long procedures characterised by unpredictability and inconsistency along with high compliance costs. Because this complexity can hinder businesses' expansion in the single market, with further negative impacts on innovation, competitiveness and jobs, companies need a workable single tax framework for developing their commercial activity across the single market.

Or. en

Amendment 98

Christophe Gomart

Proposal for a directive

Recital 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(2) The existence of 27 different corporate income tax systems in the Union gives rise to complexity in tax compliance, leads to unfair competition between businesses and promotes cross-border tax planning. According to the 2024 Annual Report on Taxation in the EU, revenue losses due to corporate profit shifting were estimated at 20 % of all corporate tax revenues collected in 2022 in the EU, which would amount to around EUR 100 billion in nominal value. These phenomena have become more evident as globalisation and digitalisation of the economy have significantly altered the perception of land borders and business models. As governments have tried to adapt to that new reality, a fragmented response among Member States has led to further distortions in the internal market. The various legal frameworks inevitably lead to different tax administration practices across the Member States as well. This often entails long procedures characterised by unpredictability and inconsistency along with high compliance costs.

Or. fr

Amendment 99

Danuše Nerudová

Proposal for a directive

Recital 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(2) The existence of 27 different corporate income tax systems in the Union gives rise to complexity in tax compliance and leads to unfair competition for businesses. That has become more evident as globalisation and digitalisation of the economy have significantly altered the perception of land borders and business models. As governments have tried to adapt to that new reality, a fragmented response among Member States has led to further distortions in the internal market. The various legal frameworks inevitably lead to different tax administration practices across the Member States as well. This often entails long procedures characterised by unpredictability and inconsistency along with high compliance costs. Moreover, the lack of coordination undermines tax certainty, discourages cross-border investment, and creates opportunities for aggressive tax planning. A common approach is therefore necessary not only to ensure fair and effective taxation, but also to strengthen the integrity and competitiveness of the companies acting on the Single Market.

Or. en

Amendment 100

Danuše Nerudová

Proposal for a directive

Recital 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(2) The existence of 27 different corporate income tax systems in the Union gives rise to complexity in tax compliance and leads to unfair competition for businesses. Such complexity can act as a barrier to business expansion within the internal market, hindering innovation, competitiveness, and employment. That has become more evident as globalisation and digitalisation of the economy have significantly altered the perception of land borders and business models. As governments have tried to adapt to that new reality, a fragmented response among Member States has led to further distortions in the internal market. The various legal frameworks inevitably lead to different tax administration practices across the Member States as well. This often entails long procedures characterised by unpredictability and inconsistency along with high compliance costs.

Or. en

Amendment 101

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Recital 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(2) The existence of 27 different corporate income tax systems in the Union gives rise to complexity in tax compliance and leads to unfair competition for businesses, especially because MNEs could use the different tax system in order to engage in aggressive tax planning, leading to SMEs having to pay a higher amount of taxes proportionally to their profits. That has become more evident as globalisation and digitalisation of the economy have significantly altered the perception of land borders and business models. As governments have tried to adapt to that new reality, a fragmented response among Member States has led to further distortions in the internal market. The various legal frameworks inevitably lead to different tax administration practices across the Member States as well. This often entails long procedures characterised by unpredictability and inconsistency along with high compliance costs. Most importantly, it leads to tax avoidance practices by MNEs.

Or. en

Amendment 102

Guillaume Peltier

on behalf of the ECR Group

Proposal for a directive

Recital 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 103

Danuše Nerudová

Proposal for a directive

Recital 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(3) Albeit different in their design, the fundamental features of corporate income tax systems are similar as they lay down rules aiming towards the same objective, i.e., to arrive at a taxable base for businesses. In this vein, it would be important for businesses which operate on the internal market that Member States introduce a common legal framework to harmonise the fundamental features of corporate income tax systems with a view to simplifying tax rules and ensuring a fair competition. Provisions regarding the corporate income tax rate should, however, remain at the discretion of Member States within the framework of Council Directive (EU) 2022/2523 on ensuring a global minimum level of taxation for multinational enterprise groups and large-scale domestic groups in the Union.

Or. en

Amendment 104

Danuše Nerudová

Proposal for a directive

Recital 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(3) Albeit different in their design, the fundamental features of corporate income tax systems are similar as they lay down rules aiming towards the same objective, i.e., to arrive at a taxable base for businesses. In this vein, it would be important for businesses which operate on the internal market that Member States introduce a common legal framework to harmonise the fundamental features of corporate income tax systems with a view to simplifying tax rules, reducing administrative burden, ensuring a fair competition and enhancing legal certainty for companies operating across borders.

Or. en

Amendment 105

Gilles Boyer

Proposal for a directive

Recital 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(3) Albeit different in their design, the fundamental features of corporate income tax systems are similar as they lay down rules aiming towards the same objective, i.e., to arrive at a taxable base for businesses. In this vein, to support the proper functioning of the internal market, the corporate tax environment in the Union should be shaped in accordance with the principle that companies pay their fair share of tax in the jurisdiction(s) where their profits are generated. Therefore, it would be important for businesses which operate on the internal market that Member States introduce a common legal framework to harmonise the fundamental features of corporate income tax systems with a view to simplifying tax rules and ensuring a fair competition.

Or. en

Amendment 106

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Recital 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 107

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Recital 3 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(3 a) Harmonisation should not be understood as the unification of Member States’ tax systems, as all Member States should retain the ability to compete on tax; it is therefore important to establish a range of tax rates that allows each Member State to set its own rates in order to boost competitiveness and attract investment;

Or. en

Amendment 108

Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Proposal for a directive

Recital 3 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(3 a) Harmonising the corporate tax base through a common set of rules improves transparency, thereby fostering a fair and healthy tax competition environment within the Union, which is underpinned in particular by the entry into force of Directive (EU) 2022/2523 on a global minimum level of taxation, and contributes to strengthening the Union’s overall competitiveness as well as the Union's commitment to internationally agreed standards.

Or. en

Amendment 109

Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Proposal for a directive

Recital 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(4) On 9 June 2023, 139 jurisdictions, which are members of the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework, had joined the October 2021 Statement on a “Two Pillar Solution to address the tax challenges arising from the digitalisation of the economy”3 . With that Statement, Member States agreed (i) to a review exercise that calculates potential minimum tax liability of large multinational groups starting from financial accounting, as parts of Pillar 2 and (ii) to partially re-allocate taxable profits on the basis of a formulary apportionment as part of Pillar 1. The design of a common framework to address the tax challenges arising from digitalisation and globalisation should draw inspiration from the achievements of that exercise. As the implementation of Pillar 2 has unanimously been adopted by Member States via Council Directive (EU) 2022/25234 , a common corporate tax framework in the Union should build upon concepts, such as the scope and computation of the tax base, which both businesses and Member States are already familiar with.

(4) On 9 June 2023, 139 jurisdictions, which are members of the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework, had joined the October 2021 Statement on a “Two Pillar Solution to address the tax challenges arising from the digitalisation of the economy”3 . With that Statement, Member States agreed (i) to a review exercise that calculates potential minimum tax liability of large multinational groups starting from financial accounting, as parts of Pillar 2 and (ii) to partially re-allocate taxable profits on the basis of a formulary apportionment as part of Pillar 1.However, no final agreement has been reached for this formulary appointment, making its implementation highly uncertain. The design of a common framework to address the tax challenges arising from digitalisation and globalisation should draw inspiration from the achievements of that exercise. As the implementation of Pillar 2 has unanimously been adopted by Member States via Council Directive (EU) 2022/25234 , a common corporate tax framework in the Union should build upon concepts, such as the scope and computation of the tax base, which both businesses and Member States are already familiar with.

_________________

3 Statement on a Two-Pillar Solution to Address the Tax Challenges Arising from the Digitalisation of the Economy – 8 October 2021, OECD/G20 Base Erosion and Profit Shifting Project.

4 Council Directive (EU) 2022/2523 of 14 December 2022 on ensuring a global minimum level of taxation for multinational enterprise groups and large-scale domestic groups in the Union (OJ L 328, 22.12.2022, p. 1.)

Or. en

Amendment 110

Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Proposal for a directive

Recital 4 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(4 a) Any solution adopted in the field of international taxation, in particular with regard to the two-pillar approach, should be grounded in a rules-based international order, thereby reinforcing the Union’s commitment to global cooperation; in this context, any allocation rule used to re-allocate taxable profits within the Union should be based on a globally agreed standard; given that no such standard currently exists, a formulary apportionment based on factors should not be pursued until fully aligned with internationally adopted standards.

Or. en

Amendment 111

Gilles Boyer

Proposal for a directive

Recital 4 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(4 a) To ensure legal certainty and avoid excessive administrative burdens on multinational enterprise groups, this Directive should aim for coherence with international tax developments, in particular those pursued by the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework, including Pillar One and Pillar Two. However, in light of the evolving international context and the possibility that key jurisdictions may not implement Pillar One, the Union should retain the flexibility to determine its own allocation mechanism where appropriate. Avoiding conflicting or overlapping tax rules between national, Union, and international levels remains essential to reduce compliance burdens and mitigate the risk of double or multiple taxation.

Or. en

Amendment 112

Danuše Nerudová

Proposal for a directive

Recital 4 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(4 a) The Commission and the Member States should ensure the coherence and alignment of this Directive with the OECD/G20 Model Rules and with Directive (EU) 2022/2523, in particular as regards the calculation of the effective tax rate on a country-by-country basis, which could be undermined by the cross-border loss relief between BEFIT group members envisaged in this Directive. That dimension should be assessed in the revision of this Directive.

Or. en

Amendment 113

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Recital 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(5) The environment for doing business in the internal market should be made more attractive with the aim to stimulate growth and investment in the Union. For this purpose, the enactment of a common framework of corporate tax rules should be prioritised, in order to make it easier for businesses to comply with such rules when they operate across borders and also to encourage those who wish to further expand abroad to do so. A single set of corporate tax rules for international activity is expected to result in enhanced tax certainty and less tax disputes, as it would tackle distortions and decrease the number of cases of double and over-taxation. Most importantly, harmonisation of rules implies less opportunities for tax avoidance. With an allocation of the taxable base, which is based on tangible factors such as labour, assets and sales, the common framework of corporate tax rules will mitigate aggressive tax planning. Due to the critical importance of sustainable tax revenue for Member States' budgets, for instance for the provision of public services, especially for the most vulnerable households, it is essential to ensure that the harmonisation of profit determination rules in the Union will lead to higher effective tax rates and higher revenues for Member States. In addition it would be critical to ensure for the future that the allocation of revenues is performed in accordance with a tool based on solid parameters that cannot be abused.

Or. en

Amendment 114

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Recital 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(5) The environment for doing business in the internal market should be made more attractive with the aim to stimulate growth and investment in the Union. For this purpose, the enactment of a common framework of corporate tax rules should be prioritised, in order to make it easier for businesses to comply with such rules when they operate across borders and also to encourage those who wish to further expand abroad to do so. A single set of corporate tax rules for international activity is expected to result in enhanced tax certainty and less tax disputes, as it would tackle distortions and decrease the number of cases of double (non) taxation. Harmonisation of rules also implies less opportunities to abuse some specific national tax provisions in a pan-European context. With an allocation of the taxable base, which is based on two factors, the common framework of corporate tax rules will mitigate tax avoidance and aggressive tax planning. Due to the critical importance of sustainable tax revenue for Member States' budgets, including investment in the digital, green and social transitions, in research and development and for the provision of public services, especially for the most vulnerable households, it is essential to ensure that the harmonisation of profit determination rules in the Union will not lead to lower effective tax rates and lower revenues for Member States.

Or. en

Amendment 115

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Recital 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(5) The environment for doing business in the internal market should be made more attractive with the aim to stimulate growth and investment in the Union, creating an even more competitive environment. For this purpose, the enactment of a common framework of corporate tax rules should be prioritised, in order to make it easier for businesses to comply with such rules when they operate across borders and also to encourage those who wish to further expand abroad to do so and encourage entrepreneurship in the single market, which is currently undermined by the bureaucratic burden and tax pressure. A single set of corporate tax rules for international activity is expected to result in enhanced tax certainty and less tax disputes, as it would tackle distortions and decrease the number of cases of double and over-taxation. Furthermore, as tax revenue sustainability is key to Member States’ budgets, including to invest in infrastructure, research and development and to deliver public services, it would be critical to ensure for the future that the allocation of revenues is performed in accordance with a tool based on solid parameters that cannot be abused.

Or. en

Amendment 116

Danuše Nerudová

Proposal for a directive

Recital 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(5) The environment for doing business in the internal market should be made more attractive with the aim to stimulate growth and investment in the Union. For this purpose, the enactment of a common framework of corporate tax rules should be prioritised, in order to make it easier for businesses to comply with such rules when they operate across borders and also to encourage those who wish to further expand abroad to do so. A single set of corporate tax rules for international activity is expected to result in enhanced tax certainty and less tax disputes, as it would tackle distortions and decrease the number of cases of double and over-taxation. Furthermore, as tax revenue sustainability is key to Member States’ budgets, including to invest in infrastructure, research and development, as EU companies spent around EUR 270 billion less in in this area than their US counterparts, and to deliver public services, it would be critical to ensure for the future that the allocation of revenues is performed in accordance with a tool based on solid parameters that cannot be abused.

Or. en

Amendment 117

Christophe Gomart

Proposal for a directive

Recital 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. fr

Amendment 118

Danuše Nerudová

Proposal for a directive

Recital 5 c (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(5 c) Recognising the importance of fostering economic growth and competitiveness, it is essential to encourage businesses to invest in new and improved tangible and intangible assets. Allowing to deduct the entire cost of certain investments of capital expenditures supporting productivity gains, promotes energy efficiency, and facilitates digital transformation. This approach aligns with the Union’s objectives to modernise its economy and accelerate the green and digital transitions, thereby making the BEFIT framework more growth-friendly and future-proof.

Or. en

Amendment 119

Gilles Boyer

Proposal for a directive

Recital 5 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(5 a) This Directive may also contribute to the Union's system of own resources, as outlined in the Interinstitutional Agreement of 16 December 2020 and the 2021 Commission Communication on the next generation of own resources. A BEFIT-based own resource would establish a link between the EU budget and the benefits that companies derive from operating in the single market, potentially providing a stable and resilient revenue stream.

Or. en

Amendment 120

Danuše Nerudová

Proposal for a directive

Recital 5 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(5 a) The Roadmap for the introduction of new Own Resources spelled out in the Interinstitutional Agreement also explicitly mentions a new own resource linked to corporate taxation as part of a basket of new revenue sources. In this sense, without the introduction of the BEFIT framework it will be complicated to define and adopt any practicable tax-based new own resource.

Or. en

Amendment 121

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Recital 6

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(6) It is indeed critical to create a system that achieves a degree of uniformity across the Union, at least amongst the taxpayers that it is chiefly addressed to. Accordingly, and considering the efforts that both tax administrations and businesses have made in order to implement the framework of a global minimum level of taxation, it would be important to capitalise on this achievement and design rules that remain as close as possible to the OECD/G20 Model Rules and Directive (EU) 2022/2523. On this basis, the common framework of rules should be mandatory for groups with a taxable presence in the Union provided that they have annual combined revenues of more than EUR 750 000 000 based on their consolidated financial statements. In this way, the scope would thus be targeted at businesses that are most likely to have cross-border activities and, thereby, can benefit from the simplification which a common legal framework would offer. The threshold would also provide alignment with Directive (EU) 2022/2523 for a consistent approach in the Union.

(6) It is indeed critical to create a system that achieves a degree of uniformity across the Union, at least amongst the taxpayers that it is chiefly addressed to. Accordingly, and considering the efforts that both tax administrations and businesses have made in order to implement the framework of a global minimum level of taxation, it would be important to capitalise on this achievement and design rules that remain as close as possible to the OECD/G20 Model Rules and Directive (EU) 2022/2523. On this basis, the common framework of rules should be mandatory for groups with a taxable presence in the Union provided that they have annual combined revenues of EUR 40 000 000 or more, in line with the definition of large groups within the meaning of Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council6a based on their consolidated financial statements. In this way, the scope would thus be targeted at businesses that are most likely to have cross-border activities and, thereby, can benefit from the simplification which a common legal framework would offer. The threshold would also provide alignment with Directive (EU) 2022/2523 for a consistent approach in the Union.

_________________

6a Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on the annual financial statements, consolidated financial statements and related reports of certain types of undertakings, amending Directive 2006/43/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directives 78/660/EEC and 83/349/EEC (OJ L 182, 29.6.2013, p. 19).

Or. en

Amendment 122

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Recital 6

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(6) It is indeed critical to create a system that achieves a degree of uniformity across the Union, at least amongst the taxpayers that it is chiefly addressed to. Accordingly, and considering the efforts that both tax administrations and businesses have made in order to implement the framework of a global minimum level of taxation, it would be important to capitalise on this achievement and design rules that remain as close as possible to the OECD/G20 Model Rules and Directive (EU) 2022/2523. On this basis, the common framework of rules should be mandatory for groups with a taxable presence in the Union provided that they have annual combined revenues of more than EUR 1 billion based on their consolidated financial statements. In this way, the scope would thus be targeted at businesses that are most likely to have cross-border activities and, thereby, can benefit from the simplification which a common legal framework would offer. The threshold would also provide alignment with Directive (EU) 2022/2523 for a consistent approach in the Union.

Or. en

Amendment 123

Christophe Gomart

Proposal for a directive

Recital 6

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. fr

Amendment 124

Markus Ferber

Proposal for a directive

Recital 6

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 125

Guillaume Peltier

on behalf of the ECR Group

Proposal for a directive

Recital 6

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(6) It is indeed critical to create a system that achieves a degree of uniformity across the Union, at least amongst the taxpayers that it is chiefly addressed to. Accordingly, and considering the efforts that both tax administrations and businesses have made in order to implement the framework of a global minimum level of taxation, it would be important to capitalise on this achievement and design rules that remain as close as possible to the OECD/G20 Model Rules and Directive (EU) 2022/2523. On this basis, the common framework of rules should only apply to groups with a taxable presence in the Union provided that they have annual combined revenues of more than EUR 750 000 000 based on their consolidated financial statements. In this way, the scope would thus be targeted at businesses that are most likely to have cross-border activities and, thereby, can benefit from the simplification which a common legal framework would offer. The threshold would also provide alignment with Directive (EU) 2022/2523 for a consistent approach in the Union.

Or. en

Amendment 126

Enikő Győri

Proposal for a directive

Recital 6 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(6 b) The measures introduced by this Directive should actively contribute to the simplification of the Union’s corporate tax framework. It is essential that the introduction of additional tax calculation layers does not exacerbate the compliance burden for undertakings already subject to the global minimum tax regime established under the OECD Pillar II framework. The coexistence of divergent tax bases must not give rise to overlapping tax obligations, legal uncertainty, or disproportionate administrative burdens. In particular, the concurrent application of this Directive and Pillar II agreement may compel companies to calculate and pay tax on the basis of the higher of two distinct tax bases in each Member State annually, thereby generating significant legal and financial uncertainty. Such a dual tax system risks imposing excessive administrative complexity on multinational enterprises and may undermine the proper functioning of the internal market by creating distortions in cross-border economic activity. This complexity has to be avoided.

Or. en

Amendment 127

Enikő Győri

Proposal for a directive

Recital 6 c (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(6 c) In light of significant uncertainties surrounding the international implementation of the OECD Pillar II agreement, and the risks of legal and administrative conflicts with global standards, the application of BEFIT rules is not timely. The implementation of the Directive should therefore be suspended until the Commission conducts a full assessment of international developments and their implications for the EU tax framework. This suspension mechanism is necessary until a thorough assessment is conducted and a decision is made by the Union institutions, based on global developments, regarding the appropriateness of proceeding with the Directive.

Or. en

Amendment 128

Enikő Győri

Proposal for a directive

Recital 6 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(6 a) The BEFIT framework introduced by this Directive should ensure maximum consistency and alignment with the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework, particularly the Pillar II agreement introducing a global minimum effective corporate tax rate of 15%.

Or. en

Amendment 129

Gilles Boyer

Proposal for a directive

Recital 6 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(6 a) In the absence of a global agreement entering into force, the adoption of an EU-specific formulary apportionment mechanism under this Directive may offer greater tax certainty and administrative simplification within the internal market. However, significant divergence from international standards, such as those developed under Pillar One of the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework, could increase the risk of double taxation, legal uncertainty, and tax disputes for multinational groups operating both within and outside the Union. In particular, if other jurisdictions maintain traditional transfer pricing approaches, EU-based companies could face overlapping tax claims unless mutual agreement procedures or relief mechanisms are available. Therefore, the design of any EU-only allocation formula should carefully balance the objectives of fairness, simplicity, and coherence with international tax principles, in order to strengthen the Union's competitiveness and avoid fragmentation of the global tax environment.

Or. en

Amendment 130

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Recital 7

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(7) Although the threshold would be determined on the basis of the combined revenues of the group on a global basis, the remit of the provisions should be limited to members of the group operating on the internal market as Union law only applies within the Union and does not bind non-Member States. Only the Union sub-set of such a group should therefore be captured. This would include companies which are resident for tax purposes in a Member State and their permanent establishments operating in a Member State as well as the permanent establishments in the Union of third country companies of the same group. Considering that the concept of a permanent establishment is dealt with within bilateral tax treaties and national law and although the definition features some common principles, there is still a degree of divergence worldwide. Consequently, it would be a pragmatic approach to rely on the existing double taxation treaties and national rules of the Member States, rather than attempt full harmonisation through secondary Union law.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 131

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Recital 7

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 132

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Recital 7 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(7 a) The Union should actively engage in international negotiations with a view to promoting the global harmonisation of rules and the allocation of taxing rights based on a formula reflecting tangible factors such as labour, assets and sales. The ongoing negotiations within the United Nations on international tax cooperation are a unique and timely opportunity in this regard. In this context, the abstention of several Member States is regrettable and they should be strongly encouraged to participate constructively and proactively in these discussions.

Or. en

Amendment 133

Gilles Boyer

Proposal for a directive

Recital 7 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(7 a) The implementation of this Directive should be coordinated with Member States' existing tax treaty obligations with third countries. To prevent double taxation and facilitate dispute resolution, Member States should provide, where applicable, corresponding adjustments in accordance with their tax treaties. The Commission should support administrative coordination and engage in dialogue with key third countries to promote coherence between BEFIT and international standards, particularly under the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework.

Or. en

Amendment 134

Danuše Nerudová

Proposal for a directive

Recital 7 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(7 a) The Union should participate actively in international discussions on international corporate taxation including an allocation of the taxable base for large multinationals. However, the decision of the US president from 20 January 2025, to sign an executive order declaring that the OECD's global corporate tax agreement “has no force or effect” in the US, is regrettable.

Or. en

Amendment 135

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Recital 7 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(7 b) In order to avoid delocalisation of profits outside of the EU by MNEs, BEFIT groups should also declare their global profit at the international level. Then, the formula used in this Directive would also be used to compare the profits originally declared in the EU and the ones which would have been declared if the formula was applied on the global profit of the BEFIT group. If the corrected profits are higher than the declared one, the EU will tax those corrected profits thanks to the formula approach included in this Directive.

Or. en

Amendment 136

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Recital 7 c (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(7 c) To fight against global tax avoidance, Member States could also unilaterally collect the tax deficit of multinationals: the difference between what a corporation pays in taxes globally and what it would have to pay if all of its profits were subject to a minimum tax rate in each of the countries in which it operates. Such a solution could encourage other states to follow this move and progressively lead to an ambitious global solution.

Or. en

Amendment 137

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Recital 8

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(8) To ensure proportionality and the well-functioning of the common framework, group members, including companies resident in a Member State, their permanent establishments and permanent establishments in the Union which are members of a group headquartered outside the Union, with limited activity in the internal market should be excluded from the scope through a materiality threshold.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 138

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Recital 8 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(8 a) This Directive should lay down rules extending the concept of a permanent establishment so as to include a significant economic presence through which a business is wholly or partly carried on. The underlying objective is to improve the resilience of the internal market as a whole in order to address the challenges of taxation of the digital economy. The increased importance of services, accelerated by the digitalisation of the economy, has led to recent proposals, as embedded in the OECD/G20 Pillar One proposal, to define significant economic presence as a taxable nexus based on a purely quantitative threshold of sales in any given country in order to capture all sectors and ensure simplicity. That objective cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States acting individually because digital businesses are able to operate cross-border without having any physical presence in a jurisdiction and rules are therefore needed to ensure that digital businesses pay taxes in the jurisdictions where they make profits, whether by providing services or selling products ( ‘sales’).

Or. en

Amendment 139

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Recital 8 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(8 a) This Directive also lays down rules extending the concept of a permanent establishment, so as to include a significant economic presence through which a business is wholly or partly carried on. The underlying objective is to improve the resilience of the internal market as a whole in order to address the challenges of taxation of the digitalised economy. The increased importance of services, accelerated by the digitalisation of the economy, has led to recent proposals, as embedded in the OECD/G20 Pillar One proposal, to define a ‘significant economic presence’ as a taxable nexus based on a purely quantitative threshold in order to capture all sectors and ensure simplicity. This objective cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States acting individually because digital businesses are able to operate cross-border without having any physical presence in a jurisdiction and rules are therefore needed to ensure that they pay taxes in the jurisdictions where they make profits.

Or. en

Amendment 140

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Recital 8 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(8 b) In order to provide for a robust definition of a taxable nexus of a business in a Member State, whether the business is digital or not, it is necessary that such a definition is based on the revenues from the supply services. The definition included in this Directive is equal to the definition agreed in the framework of the OECD/G20 Pillar One proposal. This is to ensure coherence between the Directive and the international framework. The Union should lead by example in international tax reform to provide certainty to taxpayers.

Or. en

Amendment 141

Danuše Nerudová

Proposal for a directive

Recital 9

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(9) The objective of simplifying the current rules underscores the envisaged initiative. Therefore, the rules on the computation of the tax base should be built by applying a limited series of tax adjustments to the financial statements of each group member. These limited adjustments would represent common adjustments that are necessary to convert the financial accounting statements into a tax base. Considering the need for alignment with Directive (EU) 2022/2523, the adjustments should resonate with that framework, which should also facilitate implementation for Member States and businesses that would already be familiar with the general principles. In that framework, the payment of top-up tax due in accordance with Directive (EU) 2022/2523 or in application of a qualified domestic top-up tax as referred to in that Directive, or any other alternative minimum taxes recognised in an international forum such as the OECD, should be taken into consideration.

Or. en

Amendment 142

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Recital 9

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(9) The objective of simplifying the current rules underscores the envisaged initiative, improving the efficiency and competitiveness of the single market. Therefore, the rules on the computation of the tax base should be built by applying a limited series of tax adjustments to the financial statements of each group member. These limited adjustments would represent common adjustments that are necessary to convert the financial accounting statements into a tax base. Considering the need for alignment with Directive (EU) 2022/2523, the adjustments should resonate with that framework, which should also facilitate implementation for Member States and businesses that would already be familiar with the general principles.

Or. en

Amendment 143

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Recital 9 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(9 a) The ultimate aim of this Directive should be to simplify regulatory compliance in order to lessen the bureaucratic and tax burden companies face. This is an even bigger problem for European SMEs, which allocate more of their resources to meeting those obligations. What is more, the system should be voluntary so companies can decide whether or not to adopt it.

Or. en

Amendment 144

Danuše Nerudová

Proposal for a directive

Recital 10

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(10) Given that, with the aim to bring simplification, the financial accounts will be used as a starting point for computing the tax base of each group member, it is necessary to draft tax rules in such a way that they stay as close as possible to financial accounting. In the cases where this is possible, the financial accounting treatment of an asset or liability would not change for the purpose of taxation and consequently, no adjustments would be required. Accordingly, it is also necessary that in line with the rationale of taxation, other elements of the tax base be treated for tax purposes in a different way compared to how they are qualified under financial accounting. In order to reduce unnecessary administrative burdens and ensure consistency with international tax practices such as those under the Pillar Two framework, the Regulation should allow greater flexibility in the choice of financial accounting standards used to determine the preliminary tax result. Recognised financial standards that ensure reliability and auditability should be permitted, subject to safeguards ensuring comparability.

Or. en

Amendment 145

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Recital 10 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(10 a) A fair taxation of passive income such as interest is required. It is therefore appropriate to lay down an interest limitation rule applicable to BEFIT group members in such a way as to reduce the debt-equity bias that can occur via an over-reliance to intra-group debt financing and to reduce the scope for base erosion and profit shifting through excessive interest payments.

Or. en

Amendment 146

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Recital 10 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 147

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Recital 10 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(10 b) To guarantee a minimal level of taxation of royalties, a royalties limitation rule for BEFIT group members should be introduced in accordance with the Subject to Tax Rule10a as proposed by the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework in Pillar II.

_________________

10a OECD (2023). Tax Challenges Arising from the Digitalisation of the Economy – Subject to Tax Rule (Pillar Two): Inclusive Framework on BEPS, OECD/G20 Base Erosion and Profit Shifting Project, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9afd6856-en

Or. en

Amendment 148

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Recital 10 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(10 b) To guarantee a minimal level of taxation of royalties, a royalties limitation rule for BEFIT group members should be introduced in accordance with the Subject to Tax Rule as proposed by the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework in Pillar II.

Or. en

Amendment 149

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Recital 10 c (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(10 c) A fairer taxation of passive income also requires robust Controlled Foreign Company (CFC) rules for BEFIT group members in order to make them more resilient against profit shifting.

Or. en

Amendment 150

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Recital 10 c (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(10 c) A fairer taxation of passive income also requires robust Controlled Foreign Company (CFC) rules for BEFIT group members in order to make them more resilient against profit shifting.

Or. en

Amendment 151

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Recital 11

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(11) Accordingly, it is essential to address specific sectors of activity, notably international shipping, that require certain sector-specific adjustments. For group members in this sector, the financial accounts would have to be adjusted, in order to exclude an amount (profit or loss) covered by a tonnage tax regime. Special tax regimes for international shipping, often referred to as ‘Tonnage tax regimes’ would normally allow for taxation on the basis of the tonnage (i.e., the carrying capacity) of ships operated by a group member rather than the actual profits or losses incurred by the group member through activities eligible for tonnage tax. An exclusion of such an amount would, therefore, build on the different acknowledged approaches for the computation of the tax base and would ensure a suitable consistency with the different policy objectives of the internal market.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 152

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Recital 11

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 153

Danuše Nerudová

Proposal for a directive

Recital 11 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(11 a) In order to spur investment and achieve a sustainable transition and ensure security to all EU citizens, Member States should be incentivised to adopt targeted accelerated depreciation rules aiming at developing dual-use capabilities in defence. Such temporary rules should stimulate sustainable economic growth, create jobs, ensure security and foster innovation in sustainable technologies. To operationalise those incentives, the Commission should be mandated to adopt delegated acts.

Or. en

Amendment 154

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Recital 12

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(12) To achieve the key objective of creating a simplified corporate tax framework, the preliminary tax results for each group member should be aggregated into one single common tax base, in order to subsequently allocate this base to eligible group members. The tax adjustments to the financial statements would produce preliminary tax results for each group member. These results would then be aggregated, which would allow for cross-border loss relief between BEFIT group members, and subsequently, the aggregated tax base would be allocated to group members based on a transition allocation rule; this would pave the way towards a permanent mechanism. That permanent mechanism could be based on a formulary apportionment and would render the need for intra-BEFIT group transactions to be consistent with the arm’s length principle redundant. It would have the advantage of using more recent country-by-country reporting (‘CbCR’) data and the information gathered during the transition period. This will also allow for a more thorough assessment of the impact that the implementation of the two-pillar approach is expected to have on national tax bases and the BEFIT group tax bases. In this way, it would still become possible to materialise the key objective of tax neutrality in the internal market, which would reduce instances of double and over-taxation and enhance tax certainty with the aim of reducing the number of tax disputes.

Or. en

Amendment 155

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Recital 12

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 156

Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Proposal for a directive

Recital 12

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 157

Michalis Hadjipantela, Danuše Nerudová

Proposal for a directive

Recital 12

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(12) To achieve the key objective of creating a simplified corporate tax framework, the preliminary tax results for each group member should be aggregated into one single common tax base, in order to subsequently allocate this base to eligible group members. Such framework should be simple for businesses and should avoid imposing any new burden on them. The tax adjustments to the financial statements would produce preliminary tax results for each group member. These results would then be aggregated, which would allow for cross-border loss relief between BEFIT group members, and subsequently, the aggregated tax base would be allocated to group members based on a transition allocation rule; this would pave the way towards a permanent mechanism. One year before the end of the transitional period, the Commission shall present a thorough comprehensive review and an impact assessment, especially regarding the interaction of this Directive with Directive (EU) 2022/2523 of 14 December 2022, and suggest, if deemed necessary, a new legislative proposal that could establish a permanent mechanism based on a formulary apportionment determined to benefit all Member States and that would render the need for intra-BEFIT group transactions to be consistent with the arm’s length principle redundant. It would have the advantage of using more recent country-by-country reporting (‘CbCR’) data and the information gathered during the transition period. This will also allow for a more thorough assessment of the impact that the implementation of the two-pillar approach is expected to have on national tax bases and the BEFIT group tax bases. In this way, it would still become possible to materialise the key objective of tax neutrality in the internal market, which would reduce instances of double and over-taxation and enhance tax certainty with the aim of reducing the number of tax disputes.

Or. en

Amendment 158

Gilles Boyer

Proposal for a directive

Recital 12

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(12) To achieve the key objective of creating a simplified corporate tax framework, the preliminary tax results for each group member should be aggregated into one single common tax base, in order to subsequently allocate this base to eligible group members. The tax adjustments to the financial statements would produce preliminary tax results for each group member. These results would then be aggregated, which would allow for cross-border loss relief between BEFIT group members, and subsequently, the aggregated tax base would be allocated to group members based on a transition allocation rule; this would pave the way towards a permanent mechanism. The design of the permanent mechanism should be informed by country-by-country reporting data and information gathered during the transition period. In light of evolving international tax developments and the uncertain implementation of Pillar One by key jurisdictions, it is essential that the Union preserves the flexibility to develop an autonomous, fair, and economically balanced allocation mechanism. While convergence with international standards remains a desirable objective, the competitiveness of the Union, the integrity of the internal market, and the need to ensure tax neutrality must guide the design of any future BEFIT allocation formula. A well-calibrated EU-specific approach, based on indicators of real economic activity and informed by a robust impact assessment, could serve as a credible alternative in the absence of a global consensus.

Or. en

Amendment 159

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Recital 12

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(12) To achieve the key objective of creating a simplified corporate tax framework, the preliminary tax results for each group member should be aggregated into one single common tax base, in order to subsequently allocate this base to eligible group members. That framework should be designed to be simple and intuitive for businesses and avoid being a new burden for them. The tax adjustments to the financial statements would produce preliminary tax results for each group member. These results would then be aggregated, which would allow for cross-border loss relief between BEFIT group members, and subsequently, the aggregated tax base would be allocated to group members based on a transition allocation rule; this would pave the way towards a permanent mechanism. That permanent mechanism could be based on a formulary apportionment and would render the need for intra-BEFIT group transactions to be consistent with the arm’s length principle redundant. It would have the advantage of using more recent country-by-country reporting (‘CbCR’) data and the information gathered during the transition period. This will also allow for a more thorough assessment of the impact that the implementation of the two-pillar approach is expected to have on national tax bases and the BEFIT group tax bases. In this way, it would still become possible to materialise the key objective of tax neutrality in the internal market, which would reduce instances of double and over-taxation and enhance tax certainty with the aim of reducing the number of tax disputes.

Or. en

Amendment 160

Jaroslava Pokorná Jermanová, Ondřej Knotek, Jaroslav Bžoch, Tomáš Kubín, Jana Nagyová, Enikő Győri, Jorge Martín Frías, Pierre Pimpie, Klara Dostalova

Proposal for a directive

Recital 12

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 161

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Recital 12 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(12 a) The importance of simplicity also suggests minimising the factors used for apportionment. Based on international experiences, such as the United States and Canada, the allocation formula consists of two factors: employment and unrelated third party revenues. Tangible and intangible assets have been excluded as there are significant variations between businesses in their need for physical assets. Economists have argued that including assets in the formula would particularly deter capital investment in assets. The growth of services and the increased importance of skilled and intellectual work in many sectors have widened the gap between these and businesses still highly invested in physical assets. In some sectors even expensive physical assets are mobile, for example transportation and construction, which would make it difficult to tie such investments to specific geographical locations. There are also significant difficulties in valuing fixed assets. These considerations, together with the need for simplicity, support the argument for a two-factor formula based on employees and revenues.

Or. en

Amendment 162

Gilles Boyer

Proposal for a directive

Recital 12 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(12 a) The allocation of the consolidated tax base under this Directive should reflect where economic value is effectively created within the internal market, following a robust assessment of the distributive, administrative, and legal consequences of such a mechanism. This would promote a more balanced and economically accurate distribution of the consolidated tax base within the Union.

Or. en

Amendment 163

Gilles Boyer

Proposal for a directive

Recital 12 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(12 b) In the absence of the adoption of this Directive and, more broadly, in the absence of a global agreement on the implementation of Pillar One of the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework or the establishment of a permanent Union-level allocation mechanism following the transitional period, Member States should retain the possibility to implement provisional national measures aimed at ensuring a fair and effective taxation of multinational enterprises operating within their territories. Such measures shall remain consistent with Union law and the principles of the internal market.

Or. en

Amendment 164

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Recital 12 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(12 b) During a three year ‘test’ phase, the Commission should carry out a comprehensive review of the allocation rule as part of which it shall prepare a study on the composition and weight of the formula and submit a report to the Council by the end of the third fiscal year. If the Commission deems it appropriate, taking into account the conclusions of this report, it could adopt a legislative proposal to amend this Directive by introducing a different method for the allocation of the BEFIT tax base.

Or. en

Amendment 165

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Recital 13

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(13) The aggregation of the tax results amongst group members would not be a suitable measure for certain sectors, such as extractive activities as well as international shipping, inland waterways transport and air transport. It would therefore be important to exclude those from the aggregation as their characteristics do not fit in such context. Any amount of the profit or loss of companies that operate in the field of international traffic which is not covered by a tonnage tax regime (and thus excluded from the preliminary tax results), would have to be kept out of the aggregation while it would be computed by applying the common corporate tax rules.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 166

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Recital 13

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(13) The aggregation of the tax results amongst group members would not be a suitable measure for certain sectors, such as extractive activities. It would therefore be important to exclude those from the aggregation as their characteristics do not fit in such context.

Or. en

Amendment 167

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Recital 13

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(13) The aggregation of the tax results amongst group members would not be a suitable measure for certain sectors, such as extractive activities as well as international shipping, inland waterways transport and air transport and financial services. It would therefore be important to exclude those from the aggregation as their characteristics do not fit in such context. Any amount of the profit or loss of companies that operate in the field of international traffic which is not covered by a tonnage tax regime (and thus excluded from the preliminary tax results), would have to be kept out of the aggregation while it would be computed by applying the common corporate tax rules.

Or. en

Amendment 168

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Recital 14

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(14) To provide space for growth and investment, Member States would also be allowed to individually apply additional post-allocation adjustments (e.g. tax treatment of pension contributions) in areas not covered by the common framework. Member States would also be free to further adjust their allocated share without a ceiling in order to ensure that Member States can make their national policy choices in this area. Most importantly, Directive (EU) 2022/2523 would effectively set a ceiling which would effectively ensure that the effective tax rate is at least 15%.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 169

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Recital 14

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(14) Member States would also be allowed to individually apply additional post-allocation adjustments (e.g. tax treatment of pension contributions) in areas not covered by the common framework. Member States would also be free to further adjust their allocated share without a ceiling in order to ensure that Member States can make their national policy choices in this area. Most importantly, Directive (EU) 2022/2523 would effectively set a ceiling which would effectively ensure that the effective tax rate is at least 15%. The post-allocation adjustments should focus on input-based tax incentives. Member States should refrain from offering output-based tax incentives such as patent boxes and other intellectual property regimes. In addition, each Member State should publish detailed information on the impact of tax expenditures on revenues as obliged under Directive (EU) 2011/84, article 14. At a minimum, each tax expenditure should be associated with one or more policy objectives, state its targeted beneficiaries, and estimate how much revenue has been forgone. Furthermore, it is recommended for Member States, in the context of the green transition, to introduce a qualitative component to ensure minimal coherence with the Sustainable Development Goals. For instance, Member States could carry-on sustainability evaluations on adjustments that apply to their allocated share.

Or. en

Amendment 170

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Recital 14

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 171

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Recital 14 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(14 a) To spur investments to achieve the UN Sustainable Development Goals and to respond to the climate emergency, Member States are incentivised to adopt accelerated depreciation rules at national level. These rules are vital for a swift green transition, aligning economic incentives with environmental goals whilst addressing social inequalities and alleviating poverty. It stimulates economic growth, creating jobs and fostering innovation in sustainable technologies. By encouraging green investments, it accelerates progress towards clean energy, restoring biodiversity and water supplies, and resilient infrastructure. The Member States should lead in sustainability which will ultimately increase the resilience and competitiveness of the internal market. At the same time, this Directive aims at disincentivising further investments in fixed assets in fossil-fuel related activities and those fixed assets with a high carbon content, both in their production and use. To operationalize these incentives and disincentives the Commission is tasked to adopt implementing acts.

Or. en

Amendment 172

Gilles Boyer

Proposal for a directive

Recital 14 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(14 a) While this Directive establishes a common framework for the determination and allocation of the tax base of groups of companies, it does not affect the sovereign right of Member States to determine their national corporate income tax rates and tax incentives. Member States should remain fully competent to apply tax relief measures, such as incentives for R&D activities, to the portion of the tax base allocation to them. The articulation between the common rules and national incentives should be preserved to maintain policy space for supporting innovation and other national priorities.

Or. en

Amendment 173

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Recital 15

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(15) Some Member States operate corporate tax systems which are built on principles that differ from the most common approach, such as distribution-based tax systems. It is therefore of prime importance to put in place the necessary adjustments, in order to ensure a workable interaction with those systems. The solution could be sought in certain post-allocation adjustments. These would entail that the part which would be allocated to a group member under a distribution-based system has to be modified in proportion to the distributions made during the fiscal year. The essence of a distribution-based tax system would be fully retained, considering that the distribution marks a timing point for taxing the allocated part and accordingly determine how much of this would need to be taxed. In this regard, it should be envisaged to operate a carry-forward mechanism, to ensure that the allocated part which is not taxed in the current year would be taxable in the following years.

(15) Some Member States operate corporate tax systems which are built on principles that differ from the most common approach, such as distribution-based tax systems. It is therefore of prime importance to put in place the necessary adjustments, in order to ensure a workable interaction with those systems and not introduce a contradiction between the two systems which discourages business creation as a result of the bureaucratic burden it creates. The solution could be sought in certain post-allocation adjustments. These would entail that the part which would be allocated to a group member under a distribution-based system has to be modified in proportion to the distributions made during the fiscal year. The essence of a distribution-based tax system would be fully retained, considering that the distribution marks a timing point for taxing the allocated part and accordingly determine how much of this would need to be taxed. In this regard, it should be envisaged to operate a carry-forward mechanism, to ensure that the allocated part which is not taxed in the current year would be taxable in the following years.

Or. en

Amendment 174

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Recital 16

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(16) As relations within a group represent only part of the commercial activity of a group of companies, the transactions between members of a group and associated enterprises outside the group constitute another essential aspect to look at. To address this external aspect and as the number of transfer pricing disputes has lately risen considerably, especially with respect to the pricing considerations for routine activities, it would be very useful to provide for a simplified approach to transfer pricing compliance which would decrease compliance costs for the businesses and improve the efficiency of tax administrations in the use of human capital. To this aim, it would be important to enact a common risk assessment framework for transfer pricing based on a commonly accepted benchmark analysis. This assessment would investigate the margins of Earnings Before Interest and Tax for entities operating independently within the internal market. The profit markers so obtained should then be published, to be used as a self-assessment risk tool, and enable groups operating in the internal market to know in advance the arm’s length returns (market based) that they are expected to achieve in transactions with associated enterprises. Each transaction within the scope of the system should be assessed as being of low, medium or high risk, depending on how this compares to the profit markers, which will be set through an implementing act and published on the website of the Commission.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 175

Guillaume Peltier

on behalf of the ECR Group

Proposal for a directive

Recital 16

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 176

Jaroslava Pokorná Jermanová, Ondřej Knotek, Jaroslav Bžoch, Tomáš Kubín, Jana Nagyová, Enikő Győri, Jorge Martín Frías, Pierre Pimpie, Klara Dostalova

Proposal for a directive

Recital 17

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(17) A common framework for corporate taxation would necessarily feature an administration system, which should ideally provide for a degree of tax certainty and simplification. To promote uniformity, the administration system would have to build on the importance of operating a centralised point of reference for dealing with a number of common issues, such as an Information Return for the entire group, and ensuring an adequate degree of coordination and collaboration amongst national tax administrations. At the same time, the administration system should fully respect national tax sovereignty as local tax returns, audits and dispute settlement would have to remain primarily at the level of the Member States.

(17) A common framework for corporate taxation would necessarily feature an administration system, which should ideally provide for a degree of tax certainty and simplification. To promote uniformity, the administration system would have to build on the importance of operating a centralised point of reference for dealing with a number of common issues, such as an Information Return for the entire group, and ensuring an adequate degree of coordination and collaboration amongst national tax administrations. Local tax returns, audits, dispute settlement, tax enforcement, and all decisions with legal effects on taxpayers should remain exclusively within the competence of the Member States. BEFIT Teams should not be granted any supranational authority, decision-making powers, or binding role over Member States’ tax administrations.

Or. en

Amendment 177

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Recital 17

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 178

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Recital 17

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(17) A common framework for corporate taxation would necessarily feature an administration system, which should ideally provide for a degree of tax certainty and simplification. To promote uniformity, the administration system would have to build on the importance of operating a centralised point of reference for dealing with a number of common issues, such as an Information Return for the entire group, and ensuring an adequate degree of coordination and collaboration amongst national tax administrations. At the same time, the administration system should fully respect national tax sovereignty as local tax returns, the possibility to compete on tax, audits and dispute settlement would have to remain primarily at the level of the Member States.

Or. en

Amendment 179

Michalis Hadjipantela, Danuše Nerudová

Proposal for a directive

Recital 17

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(17) A common framework for corporate taxation would necessarily feature an administration system, which should ideally provide for a degree of tax certainty and simplification. To promote uniformity, the administration system would have to build on the importance of operating a centralised point of reference for dealing with a number of common issues, such as an Information Return for the entire group, and ensuring an adequate degree of coordination and collaboration amongst national tax administrations. At the same time, the administration system should fully respect national tax sovereignty as local tax returns, audits and dispute settlement will remain primarily at the level of the Member States.

Or. en

Amendment 180

Gilles Boyer

Proposal for a directive

Recital 17 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(17 a) This Directive establishes a common framework for determining and allocating the tax base of groups of undertakings within the Union. However, it does not harmonise Member States' administrative or procedural rules for corporate income tax. Accordingly, Member States retain full autonomy to organise their national processes for tax assessment, collection, audit, enforcement and dispute resolution, provided that these processes remain consistent with the outcomes produced by the common framework set out in this Directive.

Or. en

Amendment 181

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Recital 18

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(18) To ensure that the rules of the common framework are implemented and enforced correctly, Member States should lay down rules on penalties applicable to infringements of national provisions adopted pursuant to this Directive. Such penalties should be effective, proportionate and dissuasive. Those penalties should be set at a minimum rate of 0,5 % of the turnover of the BEFIT group in case of failure to file the BEFIT information return accordingly.

Or. en

Amendment 182

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Recital 18

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(18) To ensure that the rules of the common framework are implemented and enforced correctly, Member States should lay down rules on penalties applicable to infringements of national provisions adopted pursuant to this Directive. Such penalties should be effective, proportionate and dissuasive. Those penalties should be set at a minimum rate of 0,1 % of the turnover of the BEFIT group in case of failure to file the BEFIT information return accordingly and in case of confirmed intentional misreporting of filing information return.

Or. en

Amendment 183

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Recital 18

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(18) To ensure that the rules of the common framework are implemented and enforced correctly, Member States should lay down rules on penalties applicable to infringements of national provisions adopted pursuant to this Directive. Such penalties should be effective, proportionate and dissuasive. Any changes to penalties should be disclosed to corporate groups in a timely and appropriate manner.

Or. en

Amendment 184

Danuše Nerudová

Proposal for a directive

Recital 18 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(18 a) A key pillar for improving corporate tax compliance is the establishment of a comprehensive one-stop-shop system that enables businesses to fulfil their tax obligations across Member States through a single, streamlined interface, thereby reducing administrative burdens, ensuring consistent enforcement, and enhancing legal certainty in the internal market.

Or. en

Amendment 185

Guillaume Peltier

on behalf of the ECR Group

Proposal for a directive

Recital 19

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 186

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Recital 19

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 187

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Recital 19

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(19) To optimise the benefits of having a common legal framework for computing the corporate tax base in the internal market, the application of the rules should be optional for groups, including SME groups, who earn annual combined revenues of less than EUR 750 000 000 as long as they prepare consolidated financial statements and have a taxable presence in the Union. By keeping the application of the rules open to groups of a smaller size, more groups with cross-border structures and activities may benefit from the simplification that the common framework offers. Three years from the date of application of this Directive, the Commission should issue a legislative proposal to amend this Directive to make this system mandatory for companies with annual combined revenues of EUR 40 000 000 or more in at least two of the last four fiscal years.

Or. en

Amendment 188

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Recital 19

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 189

Danuše Nerudová

Proposal for a directive

Recital 19

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(19) To optimise the benefits of having a common legal framework for computing the corporate tax base in the internal market, the application of the rules should be optional for groups, including SME groups, who earn annual combined revenues of less than EUR 750 000 000 as long as they prepare consolidated financial statements and have a taxable presence in the Union. By keeping the application of the rules open to groups of a smaller size, more groups with cross-border structures and activities may benefit from the simplification that the common framework offers. Companies choosing to be covered by this Directive should benefit from Member States' and the Commission's technical assistance to comply with the new rules and therefore foster their cross-border activities.

Or. en

Amendment 190

Gilles Boyer

Proposal for a directive

Recital 19

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(19) To optimise the benefits of having a common legal framework for computing the corporate tax base in the internal market, the application of the rules should be optional for groups, including SME groups, who earn annual combined revenues of less than EUR 750 000 000 as long as they prepare consolidated financial statements and have a taxable presence in the Union. By keeping the application of the rules open to groups of a smaller size, more groups with cross-border structures and activities may benefit from the simplification that the common framework offers. Companies choosing to be covered by this Directive should easily benefit from Member States' and the European Commission's technical assistance to comply with the new rules and therefore foster their cross-border activities.

Or. en

Amendment 191

Jaroslava Pokorná Jermanová, Ondřej Knotek, Jaroslav Bžoch, Tomáš Kubín, Jana Nagyová, Enikő Győri, Jorge Martín Frías, Pierre Pimpie, Klara Dostalova

Proposal for a directive

Recital 20

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(20) In order to supplement or amend, as the case may be, certain non-essential elements of this Directive, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union should be delegated to the Commission in respect of (i) amending Annexes I and II, as appropriate; and (ii) supplementing by laying down additional rules for insurance undertakings, in particular with regard to the new International Financial Reporting Standard (IFRS) 17 Insurance Contracts. It is of particular importance that the Commission carry out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level, and that those consultations be conducted in accordance with the principles laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement of 13 April 2016 on Better Law-Making5 . In particular, to ensure equal participation in the preparation of delegated acts, the European Parliament and the Council receive all documents at the same time as Member States’ experts, and their experts systematically have access to meetings of Commission expert groups dealing with the preparation of delegated acts.

_________________

5 Interinstitutional Agreement between the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and the European Commission on Better Law-Making (OJ L 123, 12.5.2016, p. 1).

Or. en

Amendment 192

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Recital 21 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(21 a) Each BEFIT group should have a filing entity, which should determine the country of the filing authority and the competent tax authority which will lead the BEFIT team. As a matter of principle, the filing authority should be based in the Member State where the parent company of the BEFIT group is resident for tax purposes. When the BEFIT group is owned by a firm headquartered in a third country, the filing entity should be the European intermediate parent undertaking, where there is one.

Or. en

Amendment 193

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Recital 21 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(21 b) By 31 December 2026, the Commission should, where appropriate, submit a legislative proposal for a harmonised, common European taxpayer identification number. This will in turn not only facilitate the communication between the representatives of Member States and the BEFIT team, but also increase the efficiency of tax information exchange within the Union.

Or. en

Amendment 194

Sirpa Pietikäinen

Proposal for a directive

Recital 21 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(21 a) Before this Directive enters into force, the Commission should, where appropriate, submit a legislative proposal for a harmonised, common European taxpayer identification number. This would not only facilitate the communication between the representatives of Member States and the BEFIT team, but also increase the efficiency and automation of tax information exchange within the Union.

Or. en

Amendment 195

Danuše Nerudová

Proposal for a directive

Recital 21 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(21 a) The Commission should, where appropriate, explore possibilities to submit a legislative proposal for a harmonised, common European taxpayer identification number. This would not only facilitate the communication between the representatives of Member States and the BEFIT team, but also increase the efficiency of tax information exchange within the Union.

Or. en

Amendment 196

Michalis Hadjipantela, Danuše Nerudová

Proposal for a directive

Recital 21 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(21 a) To guarantee an efficient cooperation among the BEFIT teams, the Member States should ensure adequate human resources to the BEFIT team, including by providing content and language training to the BEFIT teams representatives and by relying on the FISCALIS programme.

Or. en

Amendment 197

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Recital 24

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(24) To allow businesses to directly enjoy the benefits of the internal market without incurring an unnecessary additional administrative burden, information on the tax provisions set out in this Directive should be made accessible through the Single Digital Gateway (‘SDG’) in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2018/17248 . The SDG provides a one-stop-shop for cross-border users for the online provision of information, procedures and assistance services relevant to the functioning of the internal market. That one-stop shop should be designed to reduce the burden on businesses, on the basis of the tax base to allow consolidated calculations, doing away with the need to file by country and in consolidated form. The good experience with the VAT one-stop-shop shows how this one-stop-shop should be developed in order for it to operate properly. Businesses should be able to calculate a European tax base and should then file a return broken down by country. Each business will file a country-by-country breakdown only in a single Member State of its choice, thereby avoiding having to file one return per country and then a consolidated return.

_________________

8 Regulation (EU) 2018/1724 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 2 October 2018 establishing a single digital gateway to provide access to information, to procedures and to assistance and problem-solving services and amending Regulation (EU) No 1024/2012 (OJ L 295, 21.11.2018, p. 1).

Or. en

Amendment 198

Danuše Nerudová

Proposal for a directive

Recital 5 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(5 b) Commission and Member states should work on the review of the current EU tax framework to address the shortcomings identified in the global tax rules. This process should also focus on creating a more competitive EU tax environment by evaluating the effectiveness of various existing tax rules.

Or. en

Amendment 199

Jaroslava Pokorná Jermanová, Ondřej Knotek, Jaroslav Bžoch, Tomáš Kubín, Jana Nagyová, Enikő Győri, Jorge Martín Frías, Pierre Pimpie, Klara Dostalova

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1 a. This Directive shall not authorise the Union to establish, collect or appropriate corporate tax revenues as Union own resources. All corporate tax revenues generated under this framework shall remain within the competence and ownership of the Member States concerned.

Or. en

Amendment 200

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(c) for allocating the BEFIT tax base to eligible BEFIT group members based on a formulary apportionment described in article 45a;

Or. en

Amendment 201

Guillaume Peltier

on behalf of the ECR Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point d

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(d) simplifying transfer pricing risk assessments for transactions with associated enterprises outside the group;

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 202

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point e a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(e a) extending the concept of a permanent establishment.

Or. en

Amendment 203

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2 a. This Directive also lays down rules extending the concept of a permanent establishment, as it applies for the purposes of corporate tax in each Member State, so as to include a significant economic presence through which a business is wholly or partly carried on.

Or. en

Amendment 204

Guillaume Peltier

on behalf of the ECR Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. A company or a permanent establishment which is subject to this Directive shall cease to be subject to the national corporate tax law in all Member States where it is established in respect of all matters regulated by this Directive, unless otherwise stated in this Directive.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 205

Jaroslava Pokorná Jermanová, Ondřej Knotek, Jaroslav Bžoch, Tomáš Kubín, Jana Nagyová, Enikő Győri, Klara Dostalova

Proposal for a directive

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. This Directive applies to companies resident for tax purposes in a Member State, including their permanent establishments located in other Member States, and to permanent establishments located in Member States of entities resident for tax purposes in a third country (‘third-country entities’), which comply with the following criteria:

1. This Directive may be applied by companies resident for tax purposes in a Member State, including their permanent establishments located in other Member States, and to permanent establishments located in Member States of entities resident for tax purposes in a third country (‘third-country entities’), which comply with the following criteria:

Or. en

Amendment 206

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a) they belong to a domestic group or to a multinational enterprise group (‘MNE group) which prepares consolidated financial statements and had annual combined revenues of EUR 750 000 000 or more in at least two of the last four fiscal years;

(a) they belong to a domestic group or to a multinational enterprise group (‘MNE group) which prepares consolidated financial statements and had annual combined revenues of EUR 40 000 000 or more in at least two of the last four fiscal years;

Or. en

Amendment 207

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a) they belong to a domestic group or to a multinational enterprise group (‘MNE group) which prepares consolidated financial statements and had annual combined revenues of EUR 1 billion or more in at least two of the last four fiscal years;

Or. en

Amendment 208

Markus Ferber

Proposal for a directive

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a) they belong to a domestic group or to a multinational enterprise group (‘MNE group) which prepares consolidated financial statements and had annual combined revenues exceeding EUR 750 000 000 in at least two of the last four fiscal years;

Or. en

Justification

The scope proposed by the Commission should be maintained.

Amendment 209

Michalis Hadjipantela, Danuše Nerudová

Proposal for a directive

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 210

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a a) Companies shall have the possibility to leave the BEFIT system, making it voluntary. The system shall be attractive enough for businesses to request it for the benefits it offers, not because it is imposed.

Or. en

Amendment 211

Gilles Boyer

Proposal for a directive

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b – point ii

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(ii) they are subject to one of the corporate taxes listed in Annex II, or to a similar tax subsequently introduced;

(ii) they are subject to one of the corporate taxes listed in Annex II. For the purposes of this Directive, no other tax shall be deemed equivalent or similar unless a legislative amendment to this Directive expressly adds it to Annex II through the ordinary legislative procedure.

Or. en

Amendment 212

Gilles Boyer

Proposal for a directive

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c – point i

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(i) they are subject to one of the corporate taxes listed in Annex II or to a similar tax subsequently introduced;

(i) they are subject to one of the corporate taxes listed in Annex II. For the purposes of this Directive, no other tax shall be deemed equivalent or similar unless a legislative amendment to this Directive expressly adds it to Annex II through the ordinary legislative procedure.

Or. en

Amendment 213

Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Proposal for a directive

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c – point i

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(i) they are subject to one of the corporate taxes listed in Annex II or to a similar tax subsequently introduced;

(i) they are subject to one of the corporate taxes listed in Annex II or to a similar tax subsequently introduced without the possibility of an option or of being exempt.

Or. en

Amendment 214

Michalis Hadjipantela, Danuše Nerudová

Proposal for a directive

Article 2 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1 a. The BEFIT system shall be voluntary for the transition period.

Or. en

Amendment 215

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 2 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. By way of derogation from paragraph 1, this Directive shall not apply to companies or permanent establishments with an ultimate parent entity outside the Union where the combined revenues of the group in the Union either do not exceed 5% of the total revenues for the group based on its consolidated financial statements or the amount of EUR 50 million in at least two of the last four fiscal years. This shall be without prejudice to the right of opting in under paragraph 7.

2. By way of derogation from paragraph 1, this Directive shall not apply to companies or permanent establishments with an ultimate parent entity outside the Union where the combined revenues of the group in the Union either do not exceed 2% of the total revenues for the group based on its consolidated financial statements or the amount of EUR 20 million in at least two of the last four fiscal years. This shall be without prejudice to the right of opting in under paragraph 7.

Or. en

Amendment 216

Markus Ferber

Proposal for a directive

Article 2 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. By way of derogation from paragraph 1, this Directive shall not apply to companies or permanent establishments with an ultimate parent entity outside the Union where the combined revenues of the group in the Union either do not exceed 7% of the total revenues for the group based on its consolidated financial statements or the amount of EUR 60 million in at least two of the last four fiscal years. This shall be without prejudice to the right of opting in under paragraph 7.

Or. en

Amendment 217

Danuše Nerudová

Proposal for a directive

Article 2 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. By way of derogation from paragraph 1, this Directive shall not apply to companies or permanent establishments with an ultimate parent entity outside the Union where the combined revenues of the group in the Union either do not exceed 5% of the total revenues for the group based on its consolidated financial statements or the amount of EUR 60 million in at least two of the last four fiscal years. This shall be without prejudice to the right of opting in under paragraph 7.

Or. en

Amendment 218

Michalis Hadjipantela, Danuše Nerudová

Proposal for a directive

Article 2 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 219

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 2 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. Where two or more groups merge to form a single group, the threshold of EUR 750 000 000 referred to in paragraph 1 shall be deemed to be met for any fiscal year prior to the merger if the sum of the combined revenues of the merging groups for that fiscal year, as included in each of their consolidated financial statements, is EUR 750 000 000 or more. The companies and permanent establishments members of that newly formed group shall become subject to this Directive if that threshold was met in at least two of the last four fiscal years.

3. Where two or more groups merge to form a single group, the threshold of EUR 40 000 000 referred to in paragraph 1 shall be deemed to be met for any fiscal year prior to the merger if the sum of the combined revenues of the merging groups for that fiscal year, as included in each of their consolidated financial statements, is EUR 40 000 000 or more. The companies and permanent establishments members of that newly formed group shall become subject to this Directive if that threshold was met in at least two of the last four fiscal years.

Or. en

Amendment 220

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 2 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. Where two or more groups merge to form a single group, the threshold of EUR 1 billion referred to in paragraph 1 shall be deemed to be met for any fiscal year prior to the merger if the sum of the combined revenues of the merging groups for that fiscal year, as included in each of their consolidated financial statements, is EUR 1 billion or more. The companies and permanent establishments members of that newly formed group shall become subject to this Directive if that threshold was met in at least two of the last four fiscal years.

Or. en

Amendment 221

Michalis Hadjipantela, Danuše Nerudová

Proposal for a directive

Article 2 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. Where two or more groups merge to form a single group, the threshold of EUR 750 000 000 referred to in paragraph 1 shall be deemed to be met for any fiscal year prior to the merger if the sum of the combined revenues of the merging groups for that fiscal year, as included in each of their consolidated financial statements, is EUR 750 000 000 or more. The companies and permanent establishments members of that newly formed group shall become subject to this Directive if that threshold as defined in the scope of Directive (EU) 2022/2523 of 14 December 2022 was met in at least two of the last four fiscal years.

Or. en

Amendment 222

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 2 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. Where a company that is not a member of a group (the ‘target’) is acquired by another company or a group (the ‘acquiring entity’) and either the target or the acquiring entity did not have consolidated financial statements in any of the four fiscal years immediately preceding the fiscal year of the acquisition, the threshold of annual combined revenues of EUR 750 000 000 referred to in paragraph 1 shall be deemed to be met for that year if the sum of the revenues included in the financial statements or consolidated financial statements of the target and the acquiring entity for that fiscal year is EUR 750 000 000 or more. The acquiring entity shall become subject to this Directive if that threshold was met in at least two of the four fiscal years immediately preceding the fiscal year in which this Directive started to apply to the acquiring entity.

4. Where a company that is not a member of a group (the ‘target’) is acquired by another company or a group (the ‘acquiring entity’) and either the target or the acquiring entity did not have consolidated financial statements in any of the four fiscal years immediately preceding the fiscal year of the acquisition, the threshold of annual combined revenues of EUR 40 000 000 referred to in paragraph 1 shall be deemed to be met for that year if the sum of the revenues included in the financial statements or consolidated financial statements of the target and the acquiring entity for that fiscal year is EUR 40 000 000 or more. The acquiring entity shall become subject to this Directive if that threshold was met in at least two of the four fiscal years immediately preceding the fiscal year in which this Directive started to apply to the acquiring entity.

Or. en

Amendment 223

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 2 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. Where a company that is not a member of a group (the ‘target’) is acquired by another company or a group (the ‘acquiring entity’) and either the target or the acquiring entity did not have consolidated financial statements in any of the four fiscal years immediately preceding the fiscal year of the acquisition, the threshold of annual combined revenues of EUR 1 billion referred to in paragraph 1 shall be deemed to be met for that year if the sum of the revenues included in the financial statements or consolidated financial statements of the target and the acquiring entity for that fiscal year is EUR 1 billion or more. The acquiring entity shall become subject to this Directive if that threshold was met in at least two of the four fiscal years immediately preceding the fiscal year in which this Directive started to apply to the acquiring entity.

Or. en

Amendment 224

Michalis Hadjipantela, Danuše Nerudová

Proposal for a directive

Article 2 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. Where a company that is not a member of a group (the ‘target’) is acquired by another company or a group (the ‘acquiring entity’) and either the target or the acquiring entity did not have consolidated financial statements in any of the four fiscal years immediately preceding the fiscal year of the acquisition, the threshold of annual combined revenues of EUR 750 000 000 referred to in paragraph 1 and as defined in the scope of Directive (EU) 2022/2523 of 14 December 2022 shall be deemed to be met for that year if the sum of the revenues included in the financial statements or consolidated financial statements of the target and the acquiring entity for that fiscal year is EUR 750 000 000 or more. The acquiring entity shall become subject to this Directive if that threshold was met in at least two of the four fiscal years immediately preceding the fiscal year in which this Directive started to apply to the acquiring entity.

Or. en

Amendment 225

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 2 – paragraph 5 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

5. Where there is a demerger of a group into two or more groups (the ‘demerged groups’), the threshold of EUR 750 000 000 referred to in paragraph 1 shall be deemed to be met by each of the demerged groups where:

5. Where there is a demerger of a group into two or more groups (the ‘demerged groups’), the threshold of EUR 40 000 000 referred to in paragraph 1 shall be deemed to be met by each of the demerged groups where:

Or. en

Amendment 226

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 2 – paragraph 5 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

5. Where there is a demerger of a group into two or more groups (the ‘demerged groups’), the threshold of EUR 1 billion referred to in paragraph 1 shall be deemed to be met by each of the demerged groups where:

Or. en

Amendment 227

Michalis Hadjipantela, Danuše Nerudová

Proposal for a directive

Article 2 – paragraph 5 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

5. Where there is a demerger of a group into two or more groups (the ‘demerged groups’), the threshold of EUR 750 000 000 referred to in paragraph 1 and as defined in the scope of Directive (EU) 2022/2523 of 14 December 2022, shall be deemed to be met by each of the demerged groups where:

Or. en

Amendment 228

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 2 – paragraph 5 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a) in the first fiscal year ending after the demerger, each of the demerged groups has annual combined revenues of EUR 750 000 000 or more in that fiscal year;

(a) in the first fiscal year ending after the demerger, each of the demerged groups has annual combined revenues of EUR 40 000 000 or more in that fiscal year;

Or. en

Amendment 229

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 2 – paragraph 5 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a) in the first fiscal year ending after the demerger, each of the demerged groups has annual combined revenues of EUR 750 000 000 or more in that fiscal year;

(a) in the first fiscal year ending after the demerger, each of the demerged groups has annual combined revenues of EUR 1 billion or more in that fiscal year;

Or. en

Amendment 230

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 2 – paragraph 5 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b) in the second to fourth fiscal years ending after the demerger, each of the demerged groups has annual combined revenues of EUR 750 000 000 or more in at least two of those fiscal years.

(b) in the second to fourth fiscal years ending after the demerger, each of the demerged groups has annual combined revenues of EUR 40 000 000 or more in at least two of those fiscal years.

Or. en

Amendment 231

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 2 – paragraph 5 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b) in the second to fourth fiscal years ending after the demerger, each of the demerged groups has annual combined revenues of EUR 750 000 000 or more in at least two of those fiscal years.

(b) in the second to fourth fiscal years ending after the demerger, each of the demerged groups has annual combined revenues of EUR 1 billion or more in at least two of those fiscal years.

Or. en

Amendment 232

Guillaume Peltier

on behalf of the ECR Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 2 – paragraph 7

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

7. Member States shall ensure that companies which are resident for tax purposes in a Member State and fulfil the conditions laid down in paragraph 1, point (b), including their permanent establishments located in other Member States, as well as permanent establishments, located in Member States, of third-country entities which fulfil the conditions of paragraph 1, point (c), may choose to be covered by this Directive if they belong to an MNE group or domestic group which prepares consolidated financial statements but does not fulfil the conditions laid down in paragraph 1, point (a) regarding the threshold of EUR 750 000 000.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 233

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 2 – paragraph 7

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 234

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 2 – paragraph 7

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 235

Jaroslava Pokorná Jermanová, Ondřej Knotek, Jaroslav Bžoch, Tomáš Kubín, Jana Nagyová, Enikő Győri, Jorge Martín Frías, Klara Dostalova

Proposal for a directive

Article 2 – paragraph 7

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

7. Member States may ensure that companies which are resident for tax purposes in a Member State and fulfil the conditions laid down in paragraph 1, point (b), including their permanent establishments located in other Member States, as well as permanent establishments, located in Member States, of third-country entities which fulfil the conditions of paragraph 1, point (c), may choose to be covered by this Directive if they belong to an MNE group or domestic group which prepares consolidated financial statements but does not fulfil the conditions laid down in paragraph 1, point (a) regarding the threshold of EUR 750 000 000.

Or. en

Amendment 236

Michalis Hadjipantela, Danuše Nerudová

Proposal for a directive

Article 2 – paragraph 7

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 237

Gilles Boyer

Proposal for a directive

Article 2 – paragraph 8

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

8. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 74 to amend Annexes I and II to take account of changes to the laws of the Member States concerning company forms and corporate taxes.

8. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 74 to amend Annexes I and II strictly to reflect technical changes to the laws of the Member States concerning company forms and corporate taxes, without expanding, restricting, or reinterpreting the scope of this Directive. The use of delegated acts shall not affect the substantive coverage or applicability of the Directive.

Or. en

Amendment 238

Gilles Boyer

Proposal for a directive

Article 2 – paragraph 8 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

8 a. The scope of this Directive as defined in this Article shall be strictly limited to the criteria and entities listed herein. It shall not be subject to extension, restriction, or reinterpretation by means of delegated acts, implementing acts, guidelines, or other secondary instruments. Any modification to the scope shall require a legislative amendment through the ordinary legislative procedure.

Or. en

Amendment 239

Gilles Boyer

Proposal for a directive

Article 2 – paragraph 8 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

8 b. Nothing in this Directive shall affect the competence of Member States to determine and apply their national rules and procedures for the assessment, collection, enforcement, and control of corporate income tax, provided that such rules do not undermine the uniform application of the common tax base and the allocation rules, and are applied consistently with the cooperation and coordination mechanisms foreseen in Chapter V.

Or. en

Amendment 240

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 10 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b) if the ultimate parent entity is not located in a Member State, the entity located in a Member State, that has been appointed by the BEFIT group to fulfil the obligations in relation to the BEFIT group information return set out in Article 57 on behalf of the BEFIT group.

(b) if the ultimate parent entity is not located in a Member State, the intermediate parent entity located in a Member State, or, in absence of such, the entity located in a Member State and that has been appointed by the BEFIT group to fulfil the obligations in relation to the BEFIT group information return set out in Article 57 on behalf of the BEFIT group.

Or. en

Amendment 241

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 15

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(15) ‘economic owner’ means the person who receives substantially all the benefits and bears all the risks attached to a fixed asset, regardless of whether that person is the legal owner. A taxpayer who has the right to possess, use and dispose of a fixed asset and bears the risk of its loss or destruction shall in any event be considered the economic owner;

(15) ‘economic owner’ means the person who receives substantially most of the benefits and bears most of the risks attached to a fixed asset, regardless of whether that person is the legal owner. A taxpayer who has the right to possess, use and dispose of a fixed asset and bears the risk of its loss or destruction shall in any event be considered the economic owner;

Or. en

Amendment 242

Michalis Hadjipantela, Danuše Nerudová

Proposal for a directive

Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 15

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(15) ‘economic owner’ has the meaning attributed to it in previous proposals and specifically, means the person who receives substantially all the benefits and bears all the risks attached to a fixed asset, regardless of whether that person is the legal owner. A taxpayer who has the right to possess, use and dispose of a fixed asset and bears the risk of its loss or destruction shall in any event be considered the economic owner;

Or. en

Amendment 243

Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Proposal for a directive

Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 16

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(16) ‘baseline allocation’ means the method for sharing the BEFIT tax base among BEFIT group members in each fiscal year of the transition period in accordance with Article 45.

(16) ‘baseline allocation’ means the method for sharing the BEFIT tax base among BEFIT group members in accordance with Article 45.

Or. en

Amendment 244

Danuše Nerudová

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2 a. Member States may allow full and immediate deduction of capital expenditures related to new or improved tangible and intangible assets aimed at enhancing productivity, energy efficiency, or digitalisation.

Or. en

Amendment 245

Sirpa Pietikäinen

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article4a

Significant economic presence

1. For the purposes of corporate tax, a permanent establishment shall be deemed to exist if a significant economic presence exists through which a business is wholly or partly carried on.

2. Paragraph 1 shall be in addition to, and shall not affect or limit the application of, any other test under Union or national law for determining the existence of a permanent establishment in a Member State for the purposes of corporate tax, whether specifically in relation to the supply of digital services or otherwise.

3. A significant economic presence shall be considered to exist in a Member State in a tax period if total revenues derived by a BEFIT group from that Member State exceed EUR 1 000 000 and/or in the Member State where the majority of the Group’s intellectual property rights, such as patents, exist.

4. The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, lay down a detailed methodology for the sourcing rules to define the revenues. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure.

Or. en

Amendment 246

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article4a

Significant economic presence

1. For the purposes of corporate tax, a permanent establishment shall be deemed to exist if a significant economic presence exists through which a business is wholly or partly carried on.

3. A 'significant economic presence' shall be considered to exist in a Member State in a tax period if total revenues obtained is above EUR 1 000 000.

4. The Commission shall, by means of implementing act, lay down the detailed methodology for the sourcing of the revenues. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 73.

Or. en

Amendment 247

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 4a

Significant economic presence

1. For the purposes of corporate tax, a permanent establishment shall be deemed to exist if a significant economic presence exists through which a business is wholly or partly carried on.

3. A significant economic presence shall be considered to exist in a Member State in a tax period if total revenues derived by a BEFIT group from that Member State exceed EUR 1 000 000.

Or. en

Amendment 248

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a) the company is either the ultimate parent entity of the group or any other company of the group in which the ultimate parent entity holds, directly or indirectly, at least 75% of the ownership rights or of the rights giving entitlement to profit;

(a) the company is either the ultimate parent entity of the group or any other company of the group in which the ultimate parent entity holds, directly or indirectly, at least 25% of the ownership rights or of the rights giving entitlement to profit;

Or. en

Amendment 249

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a) the company is either the ultimate parent entity of the group, the intermediate parent company of the group located in a Member State or or any other company of the group in which the ultimate parent entity holds, directly or indirectly, at least 50% of the ownership rights or of the rights giving entitlement to profit;

Or. en

Amendment 250

Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Proposal for a directive

Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a) the company is either the ultimate parent entity of the group or any other company of the group in which the ultimate parent entity holds, directly or indirectly, at least 50% of the ownership rights or of the rights giving entitlement to profit;

Or. en

Amendment 251

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b) the head office of the permanent establishment is either the ultimate parent entity of the group or any other member (company or entity) of the group in which the ultimate parent entity holds, directly or indirectly, at least 75% of the ownership rights or of the rights giving entitlement to profit.

(b) the head office of the permanent establishment is either the ultimate parent entity of the group or any other member (company or entity) of the group, the intermediate parent company of the group located in a Member State in which the ultimate parent entity holds, directly or indirectly, at least 50% of the ownership rights or of the rights giving entitlement to profit.

Or. en

Amendment 252

Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Proposal for a directive

Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b) the head office of the permanent establishment is either the ultimate parent entity of the group or any other member (company or entity) of the group in which the ultimate parent entity holds, directly or indirectly, at least 50% of the ownership rights or of the rights giving entitlement to profit.

Or. en

Amendment 253

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 5 – paragraph 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2 a. A company or a permanent establishment shall become a BEFIT group member on the date that the thresholds referred to in paragraph 1 are reached.

Or. en

Amendment 254

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 6

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 6

deleted

Holding period requirements

1. A BEFIT group member shall meet the thresholds referred to in Article 5(1) without interruption, throughout the fiscal year.

2. A company or a permanent establishment shall become a BEFIT group member on the date that the thresholds referred to in Article 5(1) are reached. The thresholds shall be met for at least nine consecutive months. If a company or, as applicable, a permanent establishment fails to meet the thresholds for the required period, it shall be treated as if it has never been a BEFIT group member.

3. A company or a permanent establishment ceases to be a BEFIT group member on the day that follows the one on which it no longer meets the thresholds referred to in Article 5(1).

Or. en

Amendment 255

Danuše Nerudová

Proposal for a directive

Article 7 – paragraph 3 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3 a. By way of derogation from paragraph 1, a BEFIT group member may determine its preliminary tax result using a financial accounting standard accepted in its jurisdiction of establishment, provided that the standard ensures a true and fair view and is subject to adequate audit and oversight mechanisms. The Commission shall adopt implementing acts to establish minimum comparability and reliability criteria for such standards to ensure consistency across Member States.

Or. en

Amendment 256

Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Proposal for a directive

Article 7 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. By way of derogation from paragraph 1, where a Member State applies national law which allows groups to prepare, audit and publish financial statements on a jurisdictional basis, the preliminary tax result and the allocation of the BEFIT tax base of the BEFIT group members that are resident for tax purposes in that Member State may also be computed on a jurisdictional basis, provided that the group can identify separately, for each BEFIT group member, the data necessary to calculate such preliminary tax result and post-allocation adjustments in accordance with this Directive.

4. By way of derogation from paragraph 1, where a Member State applies a domestic tax consolidation regime , the preliminary tax result and the allocation of the BEFIT tax base of the BEFIT group members that are resident for tax purposes in that Member State may also be computed on a jurisdictional basis, provided that the group can identify separately, for each BEFIT group member, the data necessary to calculate such preliminary tax result and post-allocation adjustments in accordance with this Directive.

Or. en

Amendment 257

Michalis Hadjipantela, Danuše Nerudová

Proposal for a directive

Article 7 – paragraph 4 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4 a. Where it is not reasonably practicable to determine the financial accounting net income or loss of a constituent entity based on the acceptable financial accounting standard or authorised financial accounting standard used in the preparation of the consolidated financial statements of the ultimate parent entity, the financial accounting net income or loss of the constituent entity for the fiscal year may be determined using another acceptable financial accounting standard or an authorised financial accounting standard in accordance with the provisions outlined in Article 15 paragraph 2 of Directive (EU) 2022/2523 of 14 December 2022, where applicable;

Or. en

Amendment 258

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 8

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 8

deleted

Dividends and other distributions

With the exception of financial assets held for trading, as referred to in Article 11(1), and investments made for the benefit of life insurance policyholders bearing the investment risk in the context of a unit-linked/index-linked life insurance policy, as referred to in Article 14, the financial accounting net income or loss of a BEFIT group member shall be adjusted to exclude 95% of the amount of dividends or other distributions received or accrued during the fiscal year, provided that at the date of distribution, the ownership interest is held by the BEFIT group member for more than one year and this interest carries right to more than 10% of the profits, capital, reserves or voting rights.

Or. en

Amendment 259

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Article 8 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 260

Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Proposal for a directive

Article 8 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

With the exception of financial assets held for trading, as referred to in Article 11(1), and investments made for the benefit of life insurance policyholders bearing the investment risk in the context of a unit-linked/index-linked life insurance policy, as referred to in Article 14, the financial accounting net income or loss of a BEFIT group member shall be adjusted to exclude 100% of the amount of dividends or other distributions received or accrued during the fiscal year, provided that at the date of distribution, the ownership interest is held by the BEFIT group member for more than one year and this interest carries right to more than 10% of the profits, capital, reserves or voting rights.

Or. en

Amendment 261

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 8 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

With the exception of financial assets held for trading, as referred to in Article 11(1), and investments made for the benefit of life insurance policyholders bearing the investment risk in the context of a unit-linked/index-linked life insurance policy, as referred to in Article 14, the financial accounting net income or loss of a BEFIT group member shall be adjusted to exclude 95% of the amount of dividends or other distributions received or accrued during the fiscal year, provided that at the date of distribution, the ownership interest is held by the BEFIT group member for more than one year and this interest carries right to more than 15% of the profits, capital, reserves or voting rights.

Or. en

Amendment 262

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 9 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

With the exception of financial assets held for trading, as referred to in Article 11(1), and investments made for the benefit of life insurance policyholders bearing the investment risk in the context of a unit-linked/index-linked life insurance policy, as referred to in Article 14, the financial accounting net income or loss of a BEFIT group member shall be adjusted to exclude 95% of the amount of gain or loss arising from the disposition of an ownership interest, provided that at the date of disposition, the ownership interest is held by the BEFIT group member for more than one year and this interest carries a right to more than 10% of the profits, capital, reserves or voting rights.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 263

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 9 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

With the exception of financial assets held for trading, as referred to in Article 11(1), and investments made for the benefit of life insurance policyholders bearing the investment risk in the context of a unit-linked/index-linked life insurance policy, as referred to in Article 14, the financial accounting net income or loss of a BEFIT group member shall be adjusted to exclude 95% of the amount of gain or loss arising from the disposition of an ownership interest, provided that at the date of disposition, the ownership interest is held by the BEFIT group member for more than one year and this interest carries a right to more than 10% of the profits, capital, reserves or voting rights.

With the exception of financial assets held for trading, as referred to in Article 11(1), and investments made for the benefit of life insurance policyholders bearing the investment risk in the context of a unit-linked/index-linked life insurance policy, as referred to in Article 14, the financial accounting net income or loss of a BEFIT group member shall be adjusted to exclude 95% of the amount of gain or loss arising from the disposition of an ownership interest, provided that at the date of disposition, the ownership interest is held by the BEFIT group member for more than one year and this interest carries a right to more than 15% of the profits, capital, reserves or voting rights.

Or. en

Amendment 264

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 10 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

With the exception of financial assets held for trading, as referred to in Article 11(1), and investments made for the benefit of life insurance policyholders bearing the investment risk in the context of a unit-linked/index-linked life insurance policy, as referred to in Article 14, the financial accounting net income or loss of a BEFIT group member shall be adjusted to exclude the amount of gain or loss arising from changes in the fair value of an ownership interest, provided that at the date of disposition, the ownership interest is held by the BEFIT group member for more than one year and this interest carries right to more than 10% of the profits, capital, reserves or voting rights.

With the exception of financial assets held for trading, as referred to in Article 11(1), and investments made for the benefit of life insurance policyholders bearing the investment risk in the context of a unit-linked/index-linked life insurance policy, as referred to in Article 14, the financial accounting net income or loss of a BEFIT group member shall be adjusted to exclude the amount of gain or loss arising from changes in the fair value of an ownership interest, provided that at the date of disposition, the ownership interest is held by the BEFIT group member for more than one year and this interest carries right to more than 15% of the profits, capital, reserves or voting rights.

Or. en

Amendment 265

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 11

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 11

deleted

Financial assets held for trading

1. A financial asset or liability shall be treated as being held for trading by a BEFIT group member where it meets any of the following conditions:

(a) it is acquired or incurred mainly for the purpose of selling it or repurchasing it in the short term;

(b) it is part of a portfolio of identified financial instruments, including derivatives, that are managed together and for which there is evidence of a recent actual pattern of short-term profit taking.

Where a financial asset or liability which is held by a BEFIT group member transitions to become an asset or liability held for trading or vice versa, the financial accounting net income or loss shall be adjusted to include any difference between the fair value calculated at the beginning of the fiscal year or at the date of purchase if later, and its fair value calculated at the end of the same fiscal year.

The fair value of a financial asset or liability at the end of the fiscal year during which it transitioned to become an asset or liability held for trading or vice versa shall also be its fair value at the beginning of the fiscal year following the transition.

3. The holding period referred to in Article 9 shall begin or be interrupted when the financial asset or liability is no longer held for trading or is transitioned to become an asset or liability held for trading respectively.

Or. en

Amendment 266

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 11 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 11a

If a financial asset is to be treated as being held for trading, solid demonstrable evidence must be provided. If there is no such evidence or there are any doubts, the financial asset shall not be treated as being held for trading.

Or. en

Amendment 267

Michalis Hadjipantela, Danuše Nerudová

Proposal for a directive

Article 12 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

A qualifying loss of a permanent establishment shall be treated as an expense of the main entity for the computation of its qualifying income or loss to the extent that the loss of the permanent establishment is treated as an expense in the computation of domestic taxable income of such main entity and is not set off against an item of the domestic taxable income that is subject to tax under the laws of both the jurisdiction of the main entity and the jurisdiction of the permanent establishment.

Or. en

Amendment 268

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 13 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. A BEFIT group member shall adjust its financial accounting net income or loss to include the amount of exceeding borrowing costs, as referred to in Article 2 of Council Directive (EU) 2016/1164 of 12 July 2016 laying down rules against tax avoidance practices that directly affect the functioning of the internal market11 , which is not deductible for tax purposes in accordance with the interest limitation rules laid down in the national corporate tax law of the Member State where it is resident for tax purposes.

1. A BEFIT group member shall adjust its financial accounting net income or loss to include the amount of exceeding borrowing costs, which is not deductible for tax purposes in accordance with paragraph 1a.

_________________

11 Council Directive (EU) 2016/1164 of 12 July 2016 laying down rules against tax avoidance practices that directly affect the functioning of the internal market (OJ L 193, 19.7.2016, p. 1)

Or. en

Amendment 269

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Article 13 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

_________________

11 Council Directive (EU) 2016/1164 of 12 July 2016 laying down rules against tax avoidance practices that directly affect the functioning of the internal market (OJ L 193, 19.7.2016, p. 1)

Or. en

Amendment 270

Michalis Hadjipantela, Danuše Nerudová

Proposal for a directive

Article 13 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. A BEFIT group member shall adjust its financial accounting net income or loss to include the amount of exceeding borrowing costs, as referred to in Article 2 of Council Directive (EU) 2016/1164 of 12 July 2016 laying down rules against tax avoidance practices that directly affect the functioning of the internal market11 , and in accordance with Directive (EU) 20XX/XX/EU on laying down rules on a debt-equity bias reduction allowance and on limiting the deductibility of interest for corporate income tax purposes which is not deductible for tax purposes in accordance with the interest limitation rules laid down in the national corporate tax law of the Member State where it is resident for tax purposes.

_________________

11 Council Directive (EU) 2016/1164 of 12 July 2016 laying down rules against tax avoidance practices that directly affect the functioning of the internal market (OJ L 193, 19.7.2016, p. 1)

Or. en

Amendment 271

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 13 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1 a. For the purpose of this article, ‘exceeding borrowing costs’ means the amount by which the deductible borrowing costs of a taxpayer exceed taxable interest revenues and other economically equivalent taxable revenues that the taxpayer receives according to national law. Exceeding borrowing costs shall be deductible up to 75 % in the tax period in which they are incurred. If such amount is higher than 20 % of the taxpayer's earnings before interest, tax, depreciation, and amortisation (EBITDA), the taxpayer is entitled to deduct only the lower of the two amounts in the tax period. The difference between the two amounts shall not be carried forward or back.

Or. en

Amendment 272

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Article 13 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1 a. Exceeding borrowing costs shall be deductible up to 75 % in the tax period in which they are incurred. If such amount is higher than 10 % of the taxpayer's earnings before interest, tax, depreciation, and amortisation (EBITDA), the taxpayer is entitled to deduct only the lower of the two amounts in the tax period.

Articles 4(2), 4(3), 4(4), point (b), 4(5), 4(7) and 4(8) of Council Directive (EU) 2016/1164 shall apply to a BEFIT group.

Or. en

Amendment 273

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 13 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. Paragraph 1 shall not apply to exceeding borrowing costs arising from a transaction between BEFIT group members.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 274

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Article 13 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 13a

Royalty limitation rule

A BEFIT group member shall adjust its financial accounting net income or loss to include the amount of royalty costs for which the corresponding income of the recipient of the royalty or licence fee payment by the BEFIT group is subject to an effective tax rate below 9 %.

Or. en

Amendment 275

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Article 15 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The financial accounting net income or loss of a BEFIT group member carrying out shipping activities shall be adjusted to exclude the amount of revenues, expenses and other deductible items derived from such activities covered by a tonnage tax regime.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 276

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 15 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 277

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Article 17 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The financial accounting net income or loss of a BEFIT group member shall be adjusted to include the amount of any corporate tax, similar taxes on profits and deferred taxes accrued for the fiscal year as well as any amount recorded as current taxes in the financial accounts in relation to the payment of top-up tax due in accordance with Directive (EU) 2022/2523 or in application of a Qualified Domestic Top-up Tax as referred to in Article 11 of that Directive.

Or. en

Amendment 278

Michalis Hadjipantela, Danuše Nerudová

Proposal for a directive

Article 20 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The financial accounting net income or loss of a BEFIT group member shall be adjusted to exclude the following:

The financial accounting net income or loss of a BEFIT group member shall be adjusted in accordance with Article 16(1), point (e), of Directive (EU) 2022/2523 of 14 December 2022.

Or. en

Amendment 279

Michalis Hadjipantela, Danuše Nerudová

Proposal for a directive

Article 20 – paragraph 1 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a) the amount of any unrealised foreign currency exchange gain or loss in relation to fixed assets and liabilities;

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 280

Michalis Hadjipantela, Danuše Nerudová

Proposal for a directive

Article 20 – paragraph 1 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b) the amount of any provision recorded for unrealised foreign currency exchange loss.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 281

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 21 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 21a

Controlled Foreign Companies

1. The financial accounting net income or loss of a BEFIT group member shall be adjusted to include:

(a) the non-distributed income of an entity or permanent establishment which is derived from the following categories:

(i) interest or any other income generated by financial assets;

(ii) royalties or any other income generated from intellectual property;

(iii) dividends and income from the disposal of shares;

(iv) income from financial leasing;

(v) income from insurance, banking, and other financial activities;

(vi) income from invoicing companies that earn sales and services income from goods and services purchased from and sold to associated enterprises, and add no or little economic value; The first subparagraph shall not apply where the controlled foreign company carries out a substantive economic activity supported by staff, equipment, assets, and premises, as evidenced by relevant facts and circumstances. Where the controlled foreign company is resident or situated in a third country that is not party to the EEA Agreement, Member States may decide to refrain from applying the first subparagraph.

(b) the non-distributed income of the entity or permanent establishment arising from non-genuine arrangements which have been put in place for the essential purpose of obtaining a tax advantage. For the purposes of this point, an arrangement or a series thereof shall be regarded as non-genuine to the extent that the entity or permanent establishment would not own the assets or would not have undertaken the risks which generate all, or part of, its income if it were not controlled by a company where the significant people functions, which are relevant to those assets and risks, are carried out and are instrumental in generating the controlled company's income.

2. The income to be included in the tax base shall be calculated according to Article 8 of Directive (EU) 2016/1164.

Or. en

Amendment 282

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 21 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 21b

Controlled foreign companies

1. The financial accounting net income or loss of a BEFIT group member shall be adjusted to include the non-distributed income of an entity or permanent establishment treated as a controlled foreign company as referred to in Article 7(1) of Council Directive (EU) 2016/1164, which is derived from the following categories:

(i) interest or any other income generated by financial assets;

(ii) royalties or any other income generated from intellectual property;

(iii) dividends and income from the disposal of shares;

(iv) income from financial leasing;

(v) income from insurance, banking and other financial activities;

(vi) income from invoicing companies that earn sales and services income from goods and services purchased from and sold to associated enterprises, and add no or little economic value. Paragraph 1 shall not apply where the controlled foreign company carries out a substantive economic activity supported by staff, equipment, assets and premises, as evidenced by relevant facts and circumstances. Where the controlled foreign company is resident or situated in a third country that is not an EEA Member State, Member States may decide to refrain from applying this paragraph.

2. The income to be included in the tax base shall be calculated in accordance with Article 8 of Council Directive (EU) 2016/1164.

Or. en

Amendment 283

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Article 21 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 21a

Controlled Foreign Companies

1. The financial accounting net income or loss of a BEFIT group member shall be adjusted to include the non-distributed income of an entity or permanent establishment, which is treated as a controlled foreign company as referred to Article 7(1) of Directive (EU) 2016/1164, which is derived from the following categories:

(i) interest or any other income generated by financial assets;

(ii) royalties or any other income generated from intellectual property;

(iii) dividends and income from the disposal of shares;

(iv) income from financial leasing;

(v) income from insurance, banking, and other financial activities;

(vi) income from invoicing companies that earn sales and services income from goods and services purchased from and sold to associated enterprises, and add no or little economic value;

The first subparagraph shall not apply where the controlled foreign company carries out a substantive economic activity supported by staff, equipment, assets, and premises, as evidenced by relevant facts and circumstances.

Where the controlled foreign company is resident or situated in a third country that is not party to the EEA Agreement, Member States may decide to refrain from applying the first subparagraph.

2. The income to be included in the tax base shall be calculated according to Article 8 of Directive (EU) 2016/1164.

Or. en

Amendment 284

Danuše Nerudová

Proposal for a directive

Article 22 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. The financial accounting net income or loss of a BEFIT group member shall be adjusted to exclude in the fiscal year of acquisition any fixed tangible asset that has a book value before depreciation which is below EUR 5000.

Or. en

Amendment 285

Markus Ferber

Proposal for a directive

Article 22 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 286

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 22 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 287

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 22 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 288

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 22 – paragraph 2 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a) all buildings as well as any other type of immovable property and structure in use for the business: 28 years;

(a) all buildings as well as any other type of immovable property and structure in use for the business: 50 years;

Or. en

Amendment 289

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Article 22 – paragraph 2 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a) all buildings as well as any other type of immovable property and structure in use for the business: 28 years;

(a) all buildings as well as any other type of immovable property and structure in use for the business: 30 years;

Or. en

Amendment 290

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 22 – paragraph 2 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a) all buildings as well as any other type of immovable property and structure in use for the business: 28 years;

(a) all buildings as well as any other type of immovable property and structure in use for the business: 30 years;

Or. en

Amendment 291

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Article 22 – paragraph 2 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b) all other fixed tangible assets: their useful life as assessed in accordance with the acceptable accounting standard in the Union referred to in Article 7;

(b) all other fixed tangible assets: their useful life as assessed in accordance with the acceptable accounting standard in the Union referred to in Article 7, but not less than 10 years;

Or. en

Amendment 292

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 22 – paragraph 2 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b) all other fixed tangible assets: their useful life as assessed in accordance with the acceptable accounting standard in the Union referred to in Article 7;

(b) all other fixed tangible assets: their useful life as assessed in accordance with the acceptable accounting standard in the Union referred to in Article 7, but not less than 5 years.

Or. en

Amendment 293

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 22 – paragraph 2 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(c) fixed intangible assets, including acquired goodwill: the period for which the asset enjoys legal protection or for which the right has been granted and, where that period cannot be determined, 5 years.

Or. en

Amendment 294

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Article 22 – paragraph 2 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 295

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Article 22 – paragraph 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2 a. By way of derogation from paragraph 2, fixed assets with a large carbon footprint, both in their production and in their use, shall be depreciated up until half their market value.

The Commission shall, by means of implementing act, lay down the criteria to define the values constuting a large carbon footprint. The rules shall be updated every 3 years. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 73.

Or. en

Amendment 296

Danuše Nerudová

Proposal for a directive

Article 22 – paragraph 5 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

5 a. The Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts to supplement this Directive by establishing temporary rules on accelerated depreciation for the cost of eligible assets and improvements that contribute to strengthening the Union’s defence capabilities and develop new dual-use technologies.

Or. en

Amendment 297

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 22 – paragraph 5 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

5 a. Member States are not allowed to grant further entitlement to depreciate to a BEFIT group member other than those specified in this Section.

Or. en

Amendment 298

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Article 22 – paragraph 5 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

5 a. Member States are not allowed to grant further entitlement to depreciate to a BEFIT group member other than those specified in this Section.

Or. en

Amendment 299

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Article 22 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article22a

Accelerated Green and Social depreciation rules

1. By way of derogation from Article 22, fixed assets acquired by BEFIT group members in the Union or in low-income countries that contribute significantly to the climate goals and the UN 2030 Sustainable Development Goals shall be subject to accelerated depreciation rules at Member State level.

2. The Commission shall, by means of implementing act, lay down the necessary framework and criteria to operationalize paragraph 1. The rules shall be updated every 3 years. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 73.

3. Member States shall inform the Commission on their existing accelerated depreciation rules at national level, according to paragraphs 1 and 2, three months after this Directive starts to apply and in accordance to the obligation in Article 48(2).

4. After this Directive starts to apply, Member States shall inform the Commission on their new accelerated depreciation rules 6 months prior to their entry into force at national level and in accordance with the obligation in Article 48(2).

Or. en

Amendment 300

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a a) fixed assets used in fossil fuel-related activities;

Or. en

Amendment 301

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b a) all intangible assets for which the useful life cannot be defined.

Or. en

Amendment 302

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 37 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Where the share of the BEFIT tax base that has been allocated to a BEFIT group member in a fiscal year is not sufficient to fully deduct the amounts referred to in the first and third subparagraphs, the unrelieved amounts shall be carried forward and offset by the BEFIT group member against its share of the BEFIT tax base in the following fiscal years.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 303

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 38

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 38

deleted

Pre-entry losses

Or. en

Amendment 304

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Article 38 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Where a company or a permanent establishment enters a BEFIT group, any unrelieved losses incurred up until five years before the entry date, in accordance with the corporate tax law of the Member State of its tax residence or location respectively, shall be deducted from its share of the BEFIT tax base as determined in accordance with Chapter III.

Or. en

Amendment 305

Michalis Hadjipantela, Danuše Nerudová

Proposal for a directive

Article 38 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Where a company or a permanent establishment enters a BEFIT group, any unrelieved losses incurred before the entry date, in accordance with the corporate tax law of the Member State of its tax residence or location respectively, shall be deducted from its share of the BEFIT tax base as determined in accordance with Chapter III, to the extent that they are deductible under the corporate tax law of the Member State in which the BEFIT group member is resident for tax purposes or situated in the form of a permanent establishment.

Or. en

Amendment 306

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 41 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Notwithstanding Article 9, where, as a result of a disposition of shares, a BEFIT group member leaves the BEFIT group and during that or the previous fiscal year, this BEFIT group member acquired, in an intra-BEFIT group transaction, one or more fixed assets, an amount corresponding to the gain or loss arising from the intra-BEFIT group disposition of these fixed assets shall be included in the financial accounting net income or loss of the BEFIT group member which owned the assets prior to the intra-BEFIT group disposition.

Notwithstanding Article 9, where, as a result of a disposition of shares, a BEFIT group member leaves the BEFIT group and during that or the previous fiscal year, this BEFIT group member acquired, in an intra-BEFIT group transaction, one or more fixed assets, the amount corresponding to the gain or loss arising from the intra-BEFIT group disposition of these fixed assets shall be included in the financial accounting net income or loss of the BEFIT group member which owned the assets prior to the intra-BEFIT group disposition.

Or. en

Amendment 307

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 41 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The first subparagraph shall not apply if the BEFIT group member demonstrates that the intra-BEFIT group transaction was carried out for valid commercial reasons.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 308

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 41 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The first subparagraph shall not apply if the BEFIT group member demonstrates that the intra-BEFIT group transaction was carried out for valid commercial reasons.

The first subparagraph shall not apply if the BEFIT group member demonstrates that the intra-BEFIT group transaction was carried out for valid commercial reasons and within the parameters of the free market.

Or. en

Amendment 309

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 42 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 42a

Computation of the BEFIT Global tax base

1. Where possible, all BEFIT groups shall declare a global consolidated tax base, aggregating the financial result of all group members, located in Member States and in third-country jurisdictions.

2. The BEFIT EU tax base described under article 42 shall be corrected upward accordingly in case the amount resulting from paragraph 1 is higher.

3. Where the BEFIT tax base in a given year is a positive amount, the profit shall be allocated in accordance with the rule set under Article 45a.

Or. en

Amendment 310

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 42 – title

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Computation of the BEFIT tax base

Computation of the BEFIT EU tax base

Or. en

Amendment 311

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 42 – paragraph 2 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. Where the BEFIT tax base in a given year is:

2. Where the BEFIT EU tax base in a given year is:

Or. en

Amendment 312

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 42 – paragraph 2 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a) a positive amount, the profit shall be allocated in accordance with Article 45;

(a) a positive amount, the profit shall be allocated in accordance with the rule set under Article 45a;

Or. en

Amendment 313

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 42 – paragraph 2 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b) a negative amount, the loss shall be carried forward and shall be set off against the next positive BEFIT tax base.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 314

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Article 42 – paragraph 2 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b) a negative amount, the loss shall be carried forward and shall be set off against the next positive BEFIT tax base.

(b) a negative amount, the loss shall be carried forward for a maximum of five years and shall be set off against the next positive BEFIT tax base.

Or. en

Amendment 315

Markus Ferber

Proposal for a directive

Article 42 – paragraph 2 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b) a negative amount, the loss shall be carried forward and shall be set off against the next positive BEFIT tax base.

(b) a negative amount, the loss shall be carried forward and shall be set off against the next positive BEFIT tax base once it occurs.

Or. en

Justification

There should be no time restrictions for the carry-forward.

Amendment 316

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 43 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Member States shall not impose withholding taxes or any other source taxation on intra-BEFIT group transactions unless the beneficial owner of the payment is not a BEFIT group member.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 317

Danuše Nerudová

Proposal for a directive

Article 43 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1 a. The Commission shall provide clear and harmonised criteria for determining beneficial ownership. These criteria shall aim to ensure the consistent application of the exemption system, reduce legal uncertainty, and prevent abuse. The criteria shall be developed in consultation with Member States and aligned, where appropriate, with international standards.

Or. en

Amendment 318

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 44 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Where a BEFIT group member derives income that has been taxed in another Member State or in a third country, a tax credit shall be granted in line with the applicable double taxation convention or its national law and shared amongst the BEFIT group members using the baseline allocation method referred to in Article 45.

1. Where a BEFIT group member derives income that has been taxed in another Member State or in a third country, a tax credit can be granted in line with the applicable double taxation convention or its national law and shared amongst the BEFIT group members using the baseline allocation method referred to in Article 45, as long as a minimum level of effective taxation is guaranteed.

Or. en

Amendment 319

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 45

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

[...]

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 320

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Article 45 – title

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Transition allocation rule

Formulary allocation rule

Or. en

Amendment 321

Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Proposal for a directive

Article 45 – title

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Transition allocation rule

Baseline allocation rule

Or. en

Amendment 322

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Article 45 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

For each fiscal year between 1 July 2028 and 30 June 2035 at the latest (the ‘transition period’), the BEFIT tax base shall be allocated to the BEFIT group members in accordance with the baseline allocation percentage.

For each fiscal year the BEFIT tax base shall be allocated to the BEFIT group members on the basis of a formula that gives equal weight to two factors: number of employees and unrelated third party revenues.

Or. en

Amendment 323

Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Proposal for a directive

Article 45 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The BEFIT tax base shall be allocated to the BEFIT group members in accordance with the baseline allocation percentage. This rule shall become void upon the adoption of Pillar 1 by at least 30 jurisdictions that ratify the Multilateral Convention to Implement Amount A of Pillar One under the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework on BEPS, provided that the conditions set out in that agreement are fulfilled, including that the ratifying jurisdictions collectively represent at least 600 points, as defined in Annex I.A of the Convention.

Or. en

Amendment 324

Gilles Boyer

Proposal for a directive

Article 45 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

For each fiscal year until the Union adopts a permanent allocation method to replace the transitional regime, the BEFIT tax base shall be allocated to the BEFIT group members in accordance with the baseline allocation percentage.

Or. en

Amendment 325

Michalis Hadjipantela, Danuše Nerudová

Proposal for a directive

Article 45 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

For each fiscal year between 1 July 2030 and 30 June 2035 at the latest (the ‘transition period’), the BEFIT tax base shall be allocated to the BEFIT group members in accordance with the baseline allocation percentage.

Or. en

Amendment 326

Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Proposal for a directive

Article 45 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

For groups that become subject to this Directive after the end of the first fiscal year when this Directive starts to apply, the transition period referred to in the first subparagraph shall be terminated by 30 June 2035 at the latest.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 327

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Article 45 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 328

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Article 45 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Baseline allocation =*100

Share A = (1/2 * 〖Unrelated third party revenues〗A/〖Unrelated third party revenues〗Group + 1/2 * (No.〖Employees〗A) /〖No.Employees〗Group ) * Con' d Tax Base

Or. en

Amendment 329

Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Proposal for a directive

Article 45 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Where:

deleted

(a)

the taxable result of a BEFIT group member shall be the average of the taxable results in the three previous fiscal years.

In the first fiscal year in which a BEFIT group is subject to this Directive, those taxable results shall be determined in accordance with the national corporate tax rules of the Member State in which the BEFIT group member is resident for tax purposes or is situated in the form of a permanent establishment.

In the second fiscal year in which a BEFIT group is subject to this Directive, those taxable results shall be determined, for the first fiscal year in which a BEFIT group is subject to this Directive, in accordance with Chapter II of this Directive and for the two preceding fiscal years, in accordance with the national rules of the respective Member State.

In the third fiscal year in which a BEFIT group is subject to this Directive, those taxable results shall be determined, for the first two fiscal years in which a BEFIT group is subject to this Directive, in accordance with Chapter II of this Directive and for the fiscal year that immediately precedes, in accordance with the national rules of the respective Member State.

As from the fourth fiscal year in which a BEFIT group is subject to this Directive, those taxable results shall be determined in accordance with Chapter II of this Directive.

(b) the total taxable result of the BEFIT group shall be the addition of the average of the taxable results, as referred to in point (a), of all BEFIT group members in the three previous fiscal years.

Or. en

Amendment 330

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Article 45 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Where:

deleted

(a)

the taxable result of a BEFIT group member shall be the average of the taxable results in the three previous fiscal years.

As from the fourth fiscal year in which a BEFIT group is subject to this Directive, those taxable results shall be determined in accordance with Chapter II of this Directive.

Or. en

Amendment 331

Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Proposal for a directive

Article 45 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a) the taxable result of a BEFIT group member shall be the average of the taxable results in the three previous fiscal years.

deleted

As from the fourth fiscal year in which a BEFIT group is subject to this Directive, those taxable results shall be determined in accordance with Chapter II of this Directive.

Or. en

Amendment 332

Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Proposal for a directive

Article 45 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – point a – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

the taxable result of a BEFIT group member shall be the average of the taxable results in the three previous fiscal years.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 333

Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Proposal for a directive

Article 45 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – point a – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 334

Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Proposal for a directive

Article 45 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – point a – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 335

Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Proposal for a directive

Article 45 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – point a – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 336

Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Proposal for a directive

Article 45 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – point a – paragraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

As from the fourth fiscal year in which a BEFIT group is subject to this Directive, those taxable results shall be determined in accordance with Chapter II of this Directive.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 337

Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Proposal for a directive

Article 45 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – point a a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a a) Taxable results shall be determined in accordance with Chapter II of this Directive.

Or. en

Amendment 338

Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Proposal for a directive

Article 45 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 339

Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Proposal for a directive

Article 45 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b) the total taxable result of the BEFIT group shall be the addition of the average of the taxable results, as referred to in point (a), of all BEFIT group members.

Or. en

Amendment 340

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Article 45 – paragraph 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2 a. The Commission shall, by means of delegated acts laying down the necessary criteria identifying the two factors, including detailed rules on the calculation of these factors taking into account specific sectors such as digital service providers and international transport. Those delegated acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 74.

Or. en

Amendment 341

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Article 45 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. For the purpose of paragraph 2, Member States shall structure their risk assessment framework for the pricing of intra-BEFIT group transactions as follows:

deleted

(a) low-risk zone: where the expense incurred, or the income earned, by a BEFIT group member from intra-BEFIT group transactions increase in a fiscal year by less than 10% compared to the average expense or income of the previous three fiscal years from intra-BEFIT group transactions;

(b) high-risk zone: where the expense incurred, or the income earned, by a BEFIT group member from intra-BEFIT group transactions increase in a fiscal year by 10% or more compared to the average expense or income of the previous three fiscal years from intra-BEFIT group transactions.

Or. en

Amendment 342

Michalis Hadjipantela, Danuše Nerudová

Proposal for a directive

Article 45 – paragraph 3 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a) low-risk zone: where the expense incurred, or the income earned, by a BEFIT group member from intra-BEFIT group transactions increase in a fiscal year by less than 15% compared to the average expense or income of the previous three fiscal years from intra-BEFIT group transactions;

Or. en

Amendment 343

Markus Ferber

Proposal for a directive

Article 45 – paragraph 3 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 344

Markus Ferber

Proposal for a directive

Article 45 – paragraph 3 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b) high-risk zone: where the expense incurred, or the income earned, by a BEFIT group member from intra-BEFIT group transactions increase in a fiscal year by 15% or more compared to the average expense or income of the previous three fiscal years from intra-BEFIT group transactions.

Or. en

Amendment 345

Michalis Hadjipantela, Danuše Nerudová

Proposal for a directive

Article 45 – paragraph 3 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 346

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Article 45 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. Member States shall take the appropriate measures in order to structure their approach to risk compliance in accordance with the following principles:

deleted

(a) low-risk zone: the competent authorities of the Member States concerned shall presume that the pricing of intra-BEFIT group transactions of a specific BEFIT group member is consistent with the arm’s length principle;

(b) high-risk zone: the competent authorities of the Member States concerned shall presume that the pricing of intra-BEFIT group transactions of a specific BEFIT group member does not comply with the arm’s length principle and the part of the increase which goes beyond 10% shall not be recognized for the purpose of computing the baseline allocation percentage of that BEFIT group member.

Notwithstanding the rule set out in the first sub-paragraph of point (b), a BEFIT group member shall be entitled to provide evidence to the competent authority of the Member State in which it is resident for tax purposes or situated in the form of a permanent establishment that the pricing of the relevant intra-BEFIT group transactions is set in accordance with the arm’s length principle. In such case, the full amount of expense from the intra-BEFIT group transactions in question, as evidenced, shall be recognized for the purpose of computing the baseline allocation percentage of that BEFIT group member.

Or. en

Amendment 347

Markus Ferber

Proposal for a directive

Article 45 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b) high-risk zone: the competent authorities of the Member States concerned shall presume that the pricing of intra-BEFIT group transactions of a specific BEFIT group member does not comply with the arm’s length principle and the part of the increase which goes beyond 15% shall not be recognized for the purpose of computing the baseline allocation percentage of that BEFIT group member.

Or. en

Amendment 348

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 45 – paragraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

5. Notwithstanding Article 13(2), the exceeding borrowing costs as referred to in Article 2 of Council Directive (EU) 2016/1164 which arise from a transaction between BEFIT group members shall not be recognized for the purpose of computing the baseline allocation percentage of the BEFIT group member which incurs such costs.

Or. en

Amendment 349

Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Proposal for a directive

Article 45 – paragraph 6

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

6. If the structure of the BEFIT group changes during the transition period referred to in paragraph 1 due to new members joining the group or members leaving the group, the baseline allocation percentage shall be re-computed in accordance with paragraph 2. For each BEFIT group member, the BEFIT tax base shall be allocated in accordance with the new baseline allocation percentage for the time that remains until the end of this period, unless subsequent changes in the structure of the BEFIT group require a new re-computation of the baseline allocation percentage.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 350

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Article 45 – paragraph 6

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 351

Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Proposal for a directive

Article 45 – paragraph 7

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

7. If the structure of the BEFIT group changes during the transition period referred to in paragraph 1 due to the creation of one or more new companies which qualify as BEFIT group members, the rules for allocating the BEFIT tax base, as laid down in paragraph 2, shall not apply to the new BEFIT group members in the first fiscal year. For subsequent fiscal years until the end of that transition period, the baseline allocation percentage of the new BEFIT group members shall be computed in accordance with paragraph 2.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 352

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Article 45 – paragraph 7

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 353

Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Proposal for a directive

Article 45 – paragraph 8

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

8. If a group becomes subject to the rules of this Directive later than 1 July 2028, the baseline allocation shall be computed in accordance with paragraph 2. By way of derogation from paragraphs 1 and 2, the BEFIT tax base shall be allocated to the BEFIT group members over the remaining part of the transition period referred to in paragraph 1.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 354

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Article 45 – paragraph 8

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 355

Michalis Hadjipantela, Danuše Nerudová

Proposal for a directive

Article 45 – paragraph 8

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

8. If a group becomes subject to the rules of this Directive later than 1 July 2030, the baseline allocation shall be computed in accordance with paragraph 2. By way of derogation from paragraphs 1 and 2, the BEFIT tax base shall be allocated to the BEFIT group members over the remaining part of the transition period referred to in paragraph 1.

Or. en

Amendment 356

Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Proposal for a directive

Article 45 – paragraph 9

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

9. The Commission shall carry out a comprehensive review of the transition rule as part of which it shall prepare a study on the possible composition and weight of selected formula factors and submit a report to the Council by the end of the third fiscal year during the transition period referred to in paragraph 1. If the Commission deems it appropriate, taking into account the conclusions of this report, it may adopt a legislative proposal during the transition period, to amend this Directive by introducing a method for the allocation of the BEFIT tax base using formulary apportionment and based on factors.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 357

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Article 45 – paragraph 9

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

9. The Commission shall carry out a comprehensive review of the allocation rule as part of which it shall prepare a study on the composition and weight of the formula and submit a report to the Council by the end of the third fiscal year. If the Commission deems it appropriate, taking into account the conclusions of this report, it may adopt a legislative proposal, to amend this Directive by introducing a different method for the allocation of the BEFIT tax base and include where needed sector-specific allocation rule.

Or. en

Amendment 358

Michalis Hadjipantela, Danuše Nerudová

Proposal for a directive

Article 45 – paragraph 9

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

9. A year before the last year of the transitional period the Commission shall carry out a comprehensive review of the transition rule as part of which it shall prepare a study on the interaction with Directive (EU) 2022/2523 of 14 December 2022 and on a study on the possible composition and weight of selected formula factors that will be effective and beneficial for all Member States and submit a report to the Council by the end of the third fiscal year during the transition period referred to in paragraph 1. If the Commission deems it appropriate, taking into account the conclusions of this report, it may adopt a legislative proposal during the transition period, to amend this Directive by introducing a method for the allocation of the BEFIT tax base using formulary apportionment and based on factors.

Or. en

Amendment 359

Danuše Nerudová

Proposal for a directive

Article 45 – paragraph 9

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

9. The Commission shall carry out a comprehensive review of the transition rule and shall submit a report to the Council and the European parliament by the end of the third fiscal year during the transition period referred to in paragraph 1. If the Commission deems it appropriate, taking into account the conclusions of this report, it may adopt a legislative proposal during the transition period, to amend this Directive by introducing a method for the allocation of the BEFIT tax base using formulary apportionment and based on factors.

Or. en

Amendment 360

Gilles Boyer

Proposal for a directive

Article 45 – paragraph 9 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

9 a. In designing a permanent allocation method to replace the transitional allocation rule established under this Directive, the Union shall closely monitor the international implementation of the Multilateral Convention on Amount A of Pillar One of the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework. Should all major jurisdictions ratify and implement the Convention, the Commission may propose to align the BEFIT allocation method with the profit allocation rules defined therein, to ensure coherence and minimise risks of double taxation.

Or. en

Amendment 361

Gilles Boyer

Proposal for a directive

Article 45 – paragraph 9 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

9 b. In the absence of such global implementation, and taking into account the need to ensure a level playing field for EU businesses operating globally, the Commission may propose a Union-specific allocation formula. This formula shall reflect economic substance and may draw on elements of the OECD Pillar One approach or establish a distinct method based on objective indicators of real economy.

Or. en

Amendment 362

Gilles Boyer

Proposal for a directive

Article 45 – paragraph 9 c (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

9 c. Prior to proposing such a formula, the Commission shall conduct a comprehensive impact assessment. This assessment shall evaluate the global uptake of Pillar One, the effects of the proposed allocation method on Member States' tax revenues, business competitiveness, compliance burdens, and the legal and administrative implications of diverging from international standards. The findings of the assessment shall inform the design of any future apportionment mechanism and shall be made public.

Or. en

Amendment 363

Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Proposal for a directive

Article 45 – paragraph 10

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

10. The rules laid down in paragraphs 1 to 8 shall continue to apply until any amendment thereof has come into effect.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 364

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Article 45 – paragraph 10

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

10. The rules laid down in paragraphs 1 to 8 shall continue to apply until any amendment thereof has come into effect.

deleted

Or. en

Justification

As GreensEFA we believe that BEFIT should be adopted including formulary apportionment, including a test phase, but without a transition period. There is no justification to not include formulary apportionment from the start onwards besides political motives. Technically, several formulas have already been tested by academia and the Commission in earlier proposals. However, if no Parliamentary majority shares this view, we believe that the transition period should be shortned, and the formula should already be agreed to kick in after the transition period unless the collected data and impact assessment indicate a different formula is needed. Most importantly, no cross-border loss relief should be allowed during the transition period, or at the very least this should be limited, as this would potentially impact severely the tax revenues of certain Member States. Finally, the risk assessment framework as proposed by the Commission should be stricter in its application if the transition period where to remain.

Amendment 365

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 45 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 45a

Allocation rule based on tangible factors

1. As of 1 July 2027, the BEFIT tax base shall be allocated to the BEFIT group members in each tax year on the basis of a formula that gives equal weight to the factors of sales, labour, and assets according to Articles 45b to 45h: Share A = (SalesA / (3 * SalesGroup) + PayrollA / (6 * PayrollGroup) + No.EmployeesA / (6 * No.EmployeesGroup) + AssetsA/ (3* AssetsGroup) ) * Con'dTaxBase

2. The consolidated tax base of a BEFIT group shall be shared only where it is positive.

3. The calculations for sharing the consolidated tax base shall be done at the end of the tax year of the BEFIT group.

4. A period of 15 days or more in a calendar month shall be considered as a whole month.

5. When determining the apportioned share of a BEFIT group member, equal weight shall be given to the factors of sales, labour, and assets.

Or. en

Amendment 366

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 45 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 45b

Composition of the labour factor

1. The labour factor shall consist, as to one half, of the total amount of the payroll of a BEFIT group member as its numerator and the total amount of the payroll of the BEFIT group as its denominator, and as to the other half, of the number of employees of a BEFIT group member as its numerator and the number of employees of the BEFIT group as its denominator. Where an individual employee is included in the labour factor of a BEFIT group member, the payroll relating to that employee shall be allocated to the labour factor of the same BEFIT group member.

2. The number of employees shall be measured at the end of the tax year.

3. The definition of an employee shall be determined by the national law of the Member State where the employment is exercised.

Or. en

Amendment 367

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 45 c (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 45c

Allocation of employees and payroll

1. Employees shall be included in the labour factor of the group member from which they receive remuneration. Employees with all types of contracts should be included.

2. By way of derogation from paragraph 1, where employees physically exercise their employment under the control and responsibility of an entity other than that from which they receive remuneration, those employees as well as the amount of payroll related to them shall be included in the labour factor of the former entity. This rule shall only apply where all of the following conditions are met:

(a) the employment lasts for an uninterrupted period of at least three months;

(b) those employees represent at least 5 % of the overall number of employees of the group member from which they receive remuneration.

3. Employees shall include persons who, although not employed directly by a BEFIT group member, perform tasks similar to those performed by employees.

4. Payroll shall include all costs of salaries, wages, bonuses and all other employee compensation, including related pension and social security costs borne by the employer as well as expenses of the employer corresponding to the cost of persons as referred to in paragraph 3.

5. Payroll costs shall be valued at the amount of expenses that are treated as deductible by the employer in a tax year.

Or. en

Amendment 368

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 45 d (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 45d

Composition of the asset factor

1. The asset factor shall consist of the average value of all fixed tangible assets owned, rented or leased by a BEFIT group member as its numerator and the average value of all fixed tangible assets owned, rented or leased by the group as its denominator.

2. In the five years that follow a taxpayer joining an existing or new BEFIT group, its asset factor shall also include the total amount of costs incurred for research, development, marketing, and advertising by the taxpayer over the six years that preceded its joining the group.

Or. en

Amendment 369

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 45 e (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 45e

Allocation of assets

1. Without prejudice to Article 22(2) and (3), an asset shall be included in the asset factor of its economic owner. Where the economic owner cannot be identified, the asset shall be included in the asset factor of the legal owner. However, an asset that is not effectively used by its economic owner shall be included in the factor of the BEFIT group member that effectively uses that asset, provided that the asset represents more than 5 % of the value for tax purposes of all fixed tangible assets of the BEFIT group member that effectively uses it.

2. Except in the case of leases between BEFIT group members, leased assets shall be included in the asset factor of the BEFIT group member that is the lessor or the lessee of the asset. The same shall apply to rented assets.

Or. en

Amendment 370

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 45 f (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 45f

Valuation

1. Land and other non-depreciable fixed tangible assets shall be valued at their original cost.

2. An individually depreciable fixed tangible asset shall be valued at the average of its value for tax purposes at the beginning and at the end of a tax year. Where, as a result of one or more intra-group transactions, an individually depreciable fixed tangible asset is included in the asset factor of a BEFIT group member for less than a tax year, the value to be taken into account shall be calculated having regard to the number of months that the asset was included in the asset factor of that BEFIT group member.

3. The renter or lessee of an asset of which it is not the economic owner shall value that rented or leased asset at eight times the net annual rental or lease payment due, less any amounts receivable from sub-rentals or sub-leases. A BEFIT group member renting out or leasing an asset of which it is not its economic owner shall value that rented or leased asset at eight times the net annual rental or lease payment due.

4. An asset sold by a BEFIT group member to a person outside the BEFIT group following an intra-group transfer in the same or the previous tax year shall be included in the asset factor of the transferring BEFIT group member for the period between the intra-group transfer and the sale to the person outside the BEFIT group, except where the BEFIT group members concerned demonstrate that the intra-group transfer was made for genuine commercial reasons.

Or. en

Amendment 371

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 45 g (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 45g

Composition of the sales factor

1. The sales factor shall consist of the total sales allocated to a BEFIT group member as its numerator and the total sales of the BEFIT group as its denominator.

Or. en

Amendment 372

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 45 h (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 45h

Sales by destination

1. Sales of goods shall be included in the sales factor of the BEFIT group member located in the Member State where the dispatch or transport of the goods to the person acquiring them ends. Where that place cannot be determined, the sales of goods shall be attributed to the BEFIT group member located in the Member State of the last identifiable location of the goods.

2. Supplies of services shall be included in the sales factor of the BEFIT group member located in the Member State where the services are physically carried out or actually supplied.

3. Where there is no BEFIT group member in the Member State where the goods are delivered or the services are supplied, or where goods are delivered or services are supplied in a third country, the sales of goods and supplies of services shall be included in the sales factor of all BEFIT group members in proportion to their labour and asset factors.

4. Where there is more than one BEFIT group member in the Member State where the goods are delivered or the services are supplied, the sales shall be included in the sales factor of all BEFIT group members located in that Member State in proportion to their labour and asset factors.

Or. en

Amendment 373

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 46 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

By way of derogation from Articles 42 to 45, where a BEFIT group member conducts its principal business in the field of extractive activities, its revenues, expenses and other deductible items which stem from such activities shall be attributed to the BEFIT group member located in the Member State where the extraction takes place.

By way of derogation from Articles 42 to 45a, where a BEFIT group member conducts its principal business in the field of extractive activities, its revenues, expenses and other deductible items which stem from such activities shall be attributed to the BEFIT group member located in the Member State where the extraction takes place.

Or. en

Amendment 374

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 46 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. By way of derogation from Article 42 to 45, where there is no BEFIT group member in the Member State of extraction, or where the extraction takes place in a third country jurisdiction, the revenues, expenses and other deductible items which stem from such activities shall be attributed to the BEFIT group member to which they accrued.

2. By way of derogation from Article 42 to 45a, where there is no BEFIT group member in the Member State of extraction, or where the extraction takes place in a third country jurisdiction, the revenues, expenses and other deductible items which stem from such activities shall be attributed to the BEFIT group member to which they accrued.

Or. en

Amendment 375

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 47

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 47

deleted

Exception for shipping not covered by a tonnage tax regime, inland waterways transport and air transport

By way of derogation from Article 42 to 45 and without prejudice to Article 15, the revenues, expenses and other deductible items which stem from the following activities shall be excluded from the BEFIT tax base in any of the following cases:

(a) the operation of ships in international traffic where the taxable result is not covered by a tonnage tax regime;

(b) the operation of aircraft in international traffic;

The revenues, expenses and other deductible items as referred to in the first subparagraph shall be attributed to that BEFIT group member on a transaction-by-transaction basis and be subject to adjustments for pricing in accordance with the arm’s length principle.

2. Any participation in and by the BEFIT group member as referred to in paragraph 1 shall be taken into account for the purpose of Article 5.

Or. en

Amendment 376

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Article 47

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 47

deleted

Exception for shipping not covered by a tonnage tax regime, inland waterways transport and air transport

(a) the operation of ships in international traffic where the taxable result is not covered by a tonnage tax regime;

(b) the operation of aircraft in international traffic;

2. Any participation in and by the BEFIT group member as referred to in paragraph 1 shall be taken into account for the purpose of Article 5.

Or. en

Amendment 377

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 47 – title

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Exception for shipping not covered by a tonnage tax regime, inland waterways transport and air transport

Exception for shipping not covered by a tonnage tax regime, inland waterways transport, air transport and financial services

Or. en

Amendment 378

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 47 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point c a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(c a) financial services.

Or. en

Amendment 379

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 48

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

[...]

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 380

Gilles Boyer

Proposal for a directive

Article 48 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. In addition to the adjustments listed in paragraph 1, a Member State may allow for increasing or decreasing, through additional items, the allocated part of BEFIT group members that are resident for tax purposes or situated in the form of a permanent establishment in that Member State. Such additional items may include deductions, allowances, tax credits or other national corporate income tax measures, including those promoting research and development or other policy objectives, provided that such measures apply only to the allocated share of the tax base and do not affect the consolidated tax base or the allocation mechanism under this Directive.

Or. en

Amendment 381

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Article 48 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. In addition to the adjustments listed in paragraph 1, a Member State may allow for increasing or decreasing, through additional items, subject to the provisions of Directive (EU) 2022/2523, the allocated part of BEFIT group members that are resident for tax purposes or situated in the form of a permanent establishment in that Member State. Adjustments that effectively result in revenue forgone must be made public annually as set forth in Directive 2011/85/EU in the form of a tax expenditure report.

Or. en

Amendment 382

Gilles Boyer

Proposal for a directive

Article 48 – paragraph 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2 a. In order to prevent double taxation arising from the interaction between this Directive and bilateral tax treaties with third countries, Member States shall, where applicable, provide corresponding adjustments in accordance with their treaty obligations. The Commission may facilitate coordination and, where appropriate, issue guidelines to promote a consistent application across Member States.

Or. en

Amendment 383

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Article 48 – paragraph 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2 a. The Commission shall prepare a detailed annual report on adjustments, as referred to in paragraph 2, applied in the Member States. The report shall be made publicly available.

Or. en

Amendment 384

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Article 48 – paragraph 2 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2 b. By 6 months after the entry into force of this Directive, the Commission shall issue guidelines on the annual publication of revenue foregone according to Directive 2011/85/EU as set forth in paragraph 2.

Or. en

Amendment 385

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 48 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 48a

Output-based incentives

A Member State providing incentives for research and development should not offer output-based incentives, such as patent boxes, which would decrease the allocated part of BEFIT group members that are resident for tax purposes or situated in the form of a permanent establishment in that Member State.

Or. en

Amendment 386

Gilles Boyer

Proposal for a directive

Article 49 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 49a

Temporary National Measures in the Absence of BEFIT or Pillar One Implementation

1. In the event that this Directive has not been adopted or is not in force, and pending the adoption of a global framework such as the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework's Pillar One or the establishment of a permanent EU-level mechanism for profit allocation, Member States may implement temporary national measures to ensure the fair taxation of multinational enterprises operating within their territories.

2. Such temporary measures shall respect the principles of Union law, including the internal market and the prohibition of discrimination between Member States or economic operators.

3. Member States shall notify the Commission of any such measures adopted under this Article within three months of their entry into force.

Or. en

Amendment 387

Guillaume Peltier

on behalf of the ECR Group

Proposal for a directive

Chapter IV

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

[...]

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 388

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 50

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

[...]

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 389

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 51

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 51

deleted

Compliance framework

1. Member States shall structure their risk assessment framework for the activities mentioned in Article 50 in such a way as to consist of three transfer pricing risk zones.

2. The risk zones shall be determined using the interquartile range of the profit performance resulting from the Union public benchmarks referred to in Article 53.

3. The activities mentioned in Article 50 shall be risk assessed as being of low, medium or high risk, depending on how their profit performance in a given year, determined under Article 52, compares to the interquartile range of the most recent set of public benchmarks prepared before the end of that year.

4. Member States shall apply the following risk framework:

[...]

5. Member States shall take the appropriate measures, in order to structure their approach to risk compliance in accordance with the following principles:

(a) Low-risk zone: the competent authorities of the Member States may not dedicate additional compliance resources to further review the transfer pricing results. Notwithstanding this, the competent authorities of the Member States shall retain the right to perform transfer pricing adjustments of the profit margins of the taxpayer that falls within the low-risk zone.

(b) Medium-risk zone: the competent authorities of the Member States may monitor the results, using available data, and contact the taxpayer, to seek a better understanding of its circumstances before deciding whether to allocate compliance resources to carrying out risk assessments and audits.

(c) High-risk zone: the competent authorities of the Member States may recommend that the taxpayer reviews its transfer pricing policies and may decide to initiate a review or audit.

Or. en

Amendment 390

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 52

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 52

deleted

Measure of the performance

1. Member States shall lay down the appropriate legal framework, so that their competent authorities measure the profitability of the distribution activity mentioned in Article 50(2) using Earnings Before Interest and Tax relative to sales as a profit level indicator.

2. Member States shall lay down the appropriate legal framework, so that their competent authorities measure the profitability of the manufacturing activity mentioned in Article 50(3) using Earnings before Interest and Tax relative to total costs as profit level indicator.

Or. en

Amendment 391

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 53

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 53

deleted

Public Benchmarks

1. The risk zone for the activities referred to in Article 50 shall be determined respectively via public benchmarks for distribution and manufacturing activities.

2. The public benchmarks for distribution activity shall be representative of the profit performance of independent entities operating in the internal market and performing predominantly distribution activity with similar characteristics to the activity described in Article 50(2).

3. The public benchmark for manufacturing activity shall be representative of the profit performance of independent entities operating in the internal market and performing predominantly manufacturing activity with similar characteristics to the activity described in Article 50(3).

4. The risk zone shall be determined using the interquartile range of the 5-year average profit performance of independent entities resulting from the public benchmarks.

5. The Commission shall, by means of implementing act laying down the necessary practical arrangements, set the search criteria to identify comparables for establishing the appropriate benchmarks for low-risk distribution and contract manufacturing activities. The results of the benchmarks shall be published on the Commission website, for the purpose of allowing taxpayers to determine the risk zone of their activities. The benchmarks shall be updated every 3 years. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 73.

Or. en

Amendment 392

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 56 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The filing entity may not be changed, unless it ceases to meet the conditions as referred to in Article 3(10). A new filing entity shall then be designated by the group in accordance with the conditions of Article 3(10). If the group fails to designate a filing entity within two months after the previous filing entity ceased to meet the conditions, the BEFIT team as referred to in Article 60 shall then designate a filing entity for the BEFIT group.

The filing entity may be changed when the group considers it appropriate, giving two months’ notice to the competent authorities, and for well-founded reasons. A new filing entity shall be designated by the group in accordance with the conditions of Article 3(10). If the group fails to designate a filing entity within two months after the previous filing entity ceased to meet the conditions or of its own accord, the BEFIT team as referred to in Article 60 shall then designate a filing entity for the BEFIT group.

Or. en

Amendment 393

Michalis Hadjipantela, Danuše Nerudová

Proposal for a directive

Article 57 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. The BEFIT information return shall be submitted to the filing authority no later than four months after the end of the fiscal year.

2. The BEFIT information return shall be submitted to the filing authority no later than ten months after the end of the fiscal year.

Or. en

Amendment 394

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 57 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. The BEFIT information return shall be submitted to the filing authority no later than four months after the end of the fiscal year.

2. The BEFIT information return shall be submitted to the filing authority no later than six months after the end of the fiscal year.

Or. en

Amendment 395

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 57 – paragraph 3 – point d – point ii

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(ii) the BEFIT tax base;

(ii) the BEFIT EU tax base and the BEFIT global tax base;

Or. en

Amendment 396

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 57 – paragraph 3 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3 a. All supporting documentation that was used to build the BEFIT tax base referred to in paragraph 3, point (d)(ii) shall be kept for at least ten years to be made available to the competent authorities of all Member States in which the BEFIT group members are resident for tax purposes or situated in the form of a permanent establishment.

Or. en

Amendment 397

Gilles Boyer

Proposal for a directive

Article 57 – paragraph 4 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4 a. BEFIT teams shall make full use of existing procedures and administrative arrangements established under Directive 2011/16/EU on Administrative Cooperation (DAC) to ensure effective information exchange and coordinated implementation.

Or. en

Amendment 398

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 58 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. The filing entity shall notify the filing authority of errors in the BEFIT information return within two months of the timely submission of such return.

1. The filing entity shall notify the filing authority of errors in the BEFIT information return within three months of the timely submission of such return.

Or. en

Amendment 399

Michalis Hadjipantela, Danuše Nerudová

Proposal for a directive

Article 58 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. The filing entity shall notify the filing authority of errors in the BEFIT information return within two months of the timely submission of such return.

1. The filing entity shall notify the filing authority of errors in the BEFIT information return within three months of the timely submission of such return.

Or. en

Amendment 400

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 60 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. A BEFIT team shall be convened within one month after filing the BEFIT information return, as referred to in Article 57, in order to perform the tasks set out in Article 61. In addition, the BEFIT team shall provide a framework for communication and consultation amongst the competent authorities of the Member States where members of the same BEFIT group are resident for tax purposes or situated in the form of a permanent establishment. When a member of a BEFIT team consults other members, it shall receive a response within a reasonable time.

1. A BEFIT team shall be convened within three months after filing the BEFIT information return, as referred to in Article 57, in order to perform the tasks set out in Article 61. In addition, the BEFIT team shall provide a framework for communication and consultation amongst the competent authorities of the Member States where members of the same BEFIT group are resident for tax purposes or situated in the form of a permanent establishment. When a member of a BEFIT team consults other members, it shall receive a response within a reasonable time.

Or. en

Amendment 401

Jaroslava Pokorná Jermanová, Ondřej Knotek, Jaroslav Bžoch, Tomáš Kubín, Jana Nagyová, Enikő Győri, Jorge Martín Frías, Klara Dostalova

Proposal for a directive

Article 60 – paragraph 3 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3 a. BEFIT Teams shall operate solely as non-binding forums for exchange of information and coordination between Member State tax administrations. They shall have no power to adopt binding decisions on the allocation of the tax base, tax assessments, tax audits, enforcement actions or any other act with legal effects on taxpayers. All such decisions shall remain exclusively within the competence of the competent authorities of the Member States concerned.

Or. en

Amendment 402

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 61 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. If the BEFIT team is unable to achieve consensus pursuant to paragraph 2 within four months of the date when all information required under Article 57 was reported, such consensus shall be deemed to be achieved if the members of the BEFIT team give their consent, by the simple majority of the present members in accordance with paragraph 5, to the BEFIT information return at the end of the fifth month from the date when the information was reported. The filing authority to which the BEFIT information return has been submitted shall notify the BEFIT information return to the filing entity.

4. If the BEFIT team is unable to achieve consensus pursuant to paragraph 2 within six months of the date when all information required under Article 57 was reported, such consensus shall be deemed to be achieved if the members of the BEFIT team give their consent, by the simple majority of the present members in accordance with paragraph 5, to the BEFIT information return at the end of the fifth month from the date when the information was reported. The filing authority to which the BEFIT information return has been submitted shall notify the BEFIT information return to the filing entity.

Or. en

Amendment 403

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Chapter V – Section 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

[...]

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 404

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 62 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Each BEFIT group member shall file its individual tax return with the competent authority of the Member State in which that BEFIT group member is resident for tax purposes or situated in the form of a permanent establishment no later than three months after receipt of the notice from the filing authority pursuant to Article 61(3), (4) or (5), or in case of a domestic group, no later than eight months from the end of the fiscal year.

1. The group shall decide in which State to submit the consolidated return no later than five months after receipt from the filing authority pursuant to Article 61 (3), (4) or (5) or, in case of a domestic group, no later than ten months after the fiscal year.

Or. en

Amendment 405

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 62 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1 a. To avoid increasing bureaucratic burden, groups shall be excluded from submitting a declaration in each country and turn in a consolidated declaration. Returns shall be submitted via the one- stop shop, consolidating all group corporate taxes in a single tax return.

Or. en

Amendment 406

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 63 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. A BEFIT group member shall notify the competent authority of the Member State in which it is resident for tax purposes or situated in the form of a permanent establishment of errors in the individual tax return within two months of the timely submission of such return.

1. A BEFIT group member shall notify the competent authority of the Member State in which it is resident for tax purposes or situated in the form of a permanent establishment of errors in the individual tax return within four months of the timely submission of such return.

Or. en

Amendment 407

Michalis Hadjipantela, Danuše Nerudová

Proposal for a directive

Article 63 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. A BEFIT group member shall notify the competent authority of the Member State in which it is resident for tax purposes or situated in the form of a permanent establishment of errors in the individual tax return within four months of the timely submission of such return.

Or. en

Amendment 408

Danuše Nerudová

Proposal for a directive

Article 63 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. A BEFIT group member shall notify the competent authority of the Member State in which it is resident for tax purposes or situated in the form of a permanent establishment of errors in the individual tax return within four months of the timely submission of such return.

Or. en

Amendment 409

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 65 – paragraph 6

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

6. Notwithstanding paragraph 5, no amended tax assessment shall be issued, in order to adjust the BEFIT tax base, where the difference between the initially declared BEFIT tax base and the revised BEFIT tax base does not exceed the lower of EUR 10 000 or 1% of the BEFIT tax base.

Or. en

Amendment 410

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 66 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. The filing entity may appeal against the content of the BEFIT information return, in accordance with Article 59, within two months after the return was issued or notified. The appeal shall be heard by an administrative body that, in accordance with the law of the Member State of the filing authority, is competent to hear appeals at first instance. The administrative appeal shall be governed by the law of the Member State of the filing authority. Where there is no such administrative body in the Member State of the filing authority, the BEFIT group member may lodge a judicial appeal directly.

1. The filing entity may appeal against the content of the BEFIT information return, in accordance with Article 59, within four months after the return was issued or notified. The appeal shall be heard by an administrative body that, in accordance with the law of the Member State of the filing authority, is competent hear appeals at first instance. The administrative appeal shall be governed by the law of the Member State of the filing authority. Where there is no such administrative body in the Member State of the filing authority, the BEFIT group member may lodge a judicial appeal directly.

Or. en

Amendment 411

Danuše Nerudová

Proposal for a directive

Article 67 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. A BEFIT group member may appeal against the content of the individual tax assesment made pursuant to Article 64 before the competent authority of the Member State where that BEFIT group member is resident for tax purposes or situated in the form of a permanent establishment within two months after the assessment was notified to it. The administrative appeal shall be heard by an administrative body that, in accordance with the law of the Member State of the BEFIT group member, is competent to hear appeals at first instance. The administrative appeal shall be governed by the law of the Member State in which the BEFIT group member is resident for tax purposes or situated in the form of a permanent establishment. Where there is no such administrative body in the Member State where the BEFIT group member is resident for tax purposes or situated in the form of a permanent establishment, the BEFIT group member may lodge a judicial appeal directly.

1. A BEFIT group member may appeal against the content of the individual tax assesment made pursuant to Article 64 before the competent authority of the Member State where that BEFIT group member is resident for tax purposes or situated in the form of a permanent establishment within four months after the assessment was notified to it. The administrative appeal shall be heard by an administrative body that, in accordance with the law of the Member State of the BEFIT group member, is competent to hear appeals at first instance. The administrative appeal shall be governed by the law of the Member State in which the BEFIT group member is resident for tax purposes or situated in the form of a permanent establishment. Where there is no such administrative body in the Member State where the BEFIT group member is resident for tax purposes or situated in the form of a permanent establishment, the BEFIT group member may lodge a judicial appeal directly.

Or. en

Amendment 412

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 67 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. A BEFIT group member may appeal against the content of the individual tax assesment made pursuant to Article 64 before the competent authority of the Member State where that BEFIT group member is resident for tax purposes or situated in the form of a permanent establishment within four months after the assessment was notified to it. The administrative appeal shall be heard by an administrative body that, in accordance with the law of the Member State of the BEFIT group member, is competent to hear appeals at first instance. The administrative appeal shall be governed by the law of the Member State in which the BEFIT group member is resident for tax purposes or situated in the form of a permanent establishment. Where there is no such administrative body in the Member State where the BEFIT group member is resident for tax purposes or situated in the form of a permanent establishment, the BEFIT group member may lodge a judicial appeal directly.

Or. en

Amendment 413

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 68 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Where the decision pursuant to Article 66 has been confirmed or varied, the filing entity shall have the right to appeal directly to the courts of the Member State where it is resident for tax purposes or situated in the form of a permanent establishment within two months of the receipt of the decision of the administrative appeals body. A judicial appeal shall be governed by the law of the Member State where the filing entity is resident for tax purposes or situated in the form of a permanent establishment.

1. Where the decision pursuant to Article 66 has been confirmed or varied, the filing entity shall have the right to appeal directly to the courts of the Member State where it is resident for tax purposes or situated in the form of a permanent establishment within four months of the receipt of the decision of the administrative appeals body. A judicial appeal shall be governed by the law of the Member State where the filing entity is resident for tax purposes or situated in the form of a permanent establishment.

Or. en

Amendment 414

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 68 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. Notwithstanding paragraph 3, no amended tax assessment shall be issued in order to adjust the BEFIT tax base, where the difference between the initially declared BEFIT tax base and the revised BEFIT tax base does not exceed the lower of EUR 10,000 or 1% of the BEFIT tax base.

Or. en

Amendment 415

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 69 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Where the decision pursuant to Article 67 has been confirmed or varied, a BEFIT group member shall have the right to appeal to the courts of the Member State where it is resident for tax purposes or situated in the form of a permanent establishment within two months after the decision of the administrative appeals body referred to in Article 67 was notified to it. The judicial appeal shall be governed by the law of the Member State in which the BEFIT group member is resident for tax purposes or situated in the form of a permanent establishment.

1. Where the decision pursuant to Article 67 has been confirmed or varied, a BEFIT group member shall have the right to appeal to the courts of the Member State where it is resident for tax purposes or situated in the form of a permanent establishment within four months after the decision of the administrative appeals body referred to in Article 67 was notified to it. The judicial appeal shall be governed by the law of the Member State in which the BEFIT group member is resident for tax purposes or situated in the form of a permanent establishment.

Or. en

Amendment 416

Danuše Nerudová

Proposal for a directive

Article 69 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Where the decision pursuant to Article 67 has been confirmed or varied, a BEFIT group member shall have the right to appeal to the courts of the Member State where it is resident for tax purposes or situated in the form of a permanent establishment within four months after the decision of the administrative appeals body referred to in Article 67 was notified to it. The judicial appeal shall be governed by the law of the Member State in which the BEFIT group member is resident for tax purposes or situated in the form of a permanent establishment.

Or. en

Amendment 417

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 70 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Where the outcome of an administrative or judicial appeal requires amendments to the individual tax assessment of one or more member of a BEFIT group, Member States shall take the appropriate measures to ensure that such amendments remain possible, notwithstanding any time limits in the domestic laws of Member States.

Where the outcome of an administrative or judicial appeal requires amendments to the tax assessment of the BEFIT group, Member States shall take the appropriate measures to ensure that such amendments remain possible in a time frame of 10 years.

Or. en

Amendment 418

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 70 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 419

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Article 72 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Member States shall lay down rules on penalties applicable to infringements of national provisions adopted pursuant to this Directive and shall take all necessary measures to ensure that they are implemented and enforced. Penalties and compliance measures provided for shall be effective, proportionate and dissuasive.

Penalties shall be set at a minimum of 0,1 % of the turnover of the BEFIT group in case of failure to file the BEFIT information return in accordance with Article 59 and in case of confirmed intentional misreporting when filing the information return.

Or. en

Amendment 420

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 72 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 421

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 72 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Penalties shall be set at a minimum of 0,5 % of the turnover of the BEFIT group in case of failure to file the BEFIT information return in accordance with Article 59.

Or. en

Amendment 422

Gilles Boyer

Proposal for a directive

Article 74 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1 a. Delegated acts adopted pursuant to this Article shall not be used to extend, restrict, or reinterpret the scope of this Directive as defined in Article 2. They shall be limited to strictly technical adjustments necessary to reflect changes in company forms and corporate taxes listed in Annexes I and II.

Or. en

Amendment 423

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Article 74 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Articles 2(8) and 14(3) shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period starting on [the date of entry into force of this Directive].

2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Articles 2(8), 14(3) and 45(2a) shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period starting on [the date of entry into force of this Directive].

Or. en

Amendment 424

Jaroslava Pokorná Jermanová, Ondřej Knotek, Jaroslav Bžoch, Tomáš Kubín, Jana Nagyová, Enikő Győri, Jorge Martín Frías, Pierre Pimpie, Klara Dostalova

Proposal for a directive

Article 74 – paragraph 3 – point 1 (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(1) Delegated acts adopted pursuant to this Article shall not:

(a) extend the scope of this Directive beyond the matters explicitly provided for in this Directive;

(b) alter the allocation of competences between the Union and the Member States in the field of taxation;

(d) affect the fiscal sovereignty of the Member States, including in the areas of tax rates, tax collection, and tax enforcement.”

Or. en

Amendment 425

Enikő Győri

Proposal for a directive

Article 77 – title

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Review by the Commission of the operation of BEFIT

Commission Report and Standstill Clause

Or. en

Amendment 426

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Article 77 – paragraph -1 (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

-1. Three years after this Directive starts to apply, the Commission shall issue a legislative proposal to amend this Directive to make this system mandatory for companies with annual combined revenues of EUR 40 000 000 or more in at least two of the last four fiscal years, in line with the definition of large groups within the meaning of Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council.

Or. en

Amendment 427

Enikő Győri

Proposal for a directive

Article 77 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. In light of current uncertainties surrounding the international implementation of the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework on Pillar II, the application of this Directive shall be suspended. Prior to any further steps, the Commission shall carry out a comprehensive assessment of the Directive’s compatibility with global standards, its impact on tax certainty and business competitiveness, and the administrative burden on Member States and taxpayers.

Or. en

Amendment 428

Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Proposal for a directive

Article 77 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Five years after this Directive starts to apply, the Commission shall examine and evaluate its functioning and report to the European Parliament and the Council to that effect.

Or. en

Amendment 429

Danuše Nerudová

Proposal for a directive

Article 77 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Four years after this Directive starts to apply, the Commission shall examine and evaluate its functioning and report to the European Parliament and the Council to that effect. The report shall, where appropriate, be accompanied by a proposal to amend this Directive.

Two year after this Directive begins to apply, the Commission shall publish a comprehensive impact assessment to evaluate how the Directive meets its objectives and aligns with the context of international negotiations on taxation rules.

Or. en

Amendment 430

Gilles Boyer

Proposal for a directive

Article 77 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Five years after this Directive starts to apply, the Commission shall examine and evaluate its functioning and report to the European Parliament and the Council to that effect. The report shall, where appropriate, be accompanied by a proposal to amend this Directive. That review shall include an assessment of the impact of the allocation of the tax base on Member States' revenues, and of the evolution of the compliance costs for companies covered by the Directive.

Or. en

Amendment 431

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Article 77 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1 a. Eight years after this Directive starts to apply, the Commission shall assess the impact of making this system mandatory for all companies with cross-border activities and, if appropriate, issue a legislative proposal to amend this Directive accordingly.

Or. en

Amendment 432

Enikő Győri

Proposal for a directive

Article 77 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. Member States shall communicate to the Commission relevant information for the evaluation of the Directive in accordance with paragraph 3, including aggregated data on BEFIT group members which are resident for tax purposes in their jurisdiction and permanent establishments thereof operating in their jurisdiction, in order to properly assess the impact of the transition allocation rule and of Directive (EU) 2022/2523 as well as assessing the situation regarding Pillar One of the Statement on a Two-Pillar Solution to Address the Tax Challenges Arising from the Digitalisation of the Economy agreed by the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework on BEPS on 8 October 2021.

2. The Commission shall submit a detailed report to the European Parliament and the Council no later than 1 January 2027. This report shall assess whether it is appropriate to proceed with the implementation of this Directive, or whether the proposal should be withdrawn or substantially revised in light of international tax developments. By the same date of 1 January 2027, the Commission shall, where appropriate, submit a legislative proposal to the European Parliament and the Council to amend the entry into force of this Directive.

Or. en

Amendment 433

Michalis Hadjipantela, Danuše Nerudová

Proposal for a directive

Article 77 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. Member States shall communicate to the Commission and the European Parliament relevant information for the evaluation of the Directive in accordance with paragraph 3, including aggregated data on BEFIT group members which are resident for tax purposes in their jurisdiction and permanent establishments thereof operating in their jurisdiction, in order to properly assess the impact of the transition allocation rule and of Directive (EU) 2022/2523 and present an assessment of the additional costs that were incurred by companies falling under both Directives as well as assessing the situation regarding Pillar One of the Statement on a Two-Pillar Solution to Address the Tax Challenges Arising from the Digitalisation of the Economy agreed by the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework on BEPS on 8 October 2021.

Or. en

Amendment 434

Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Proposal for a directive

Article 77 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. Member States shall communicate to the Commission relevant information for the evaluation of the Directive in accordance with paragraph 3, including aggregated data on BEFIT group members which are resident for tax purposes in their jurisdiction and permanent establishments thereof operating in their jurisdiction, in order to properly assess the impact of Directive (EU) 2022/2523 as well as assessing the situation regarding Pillar One of the Statement on a Two-Pillar Solution to Address the Tax Challenges Arising from the Digitalisation of the Economy agreed by the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework on BEPS on 8 October 2021.

Or. en

Amendment 435

Rasmus Andresen

Proposal for a directive

Article 77 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. Member States shall communicate to the Commission relevant information for the evaluation of the Directive in accordance with paragraph 3, including aggregated data on BEFIT group members which are resident for tax purposes in their jurisdiction and permanent establishments thereof operating in their jurisdiction, in order to properly assess the impact of Directive (EU) 2022/2523 as well as assessing the situation regarding Pillar One of the Statement on a Two-Pillar Solution to Address the Tax Challenges Arising from the Digitalisation of the Economy agreed by the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework on BEPS on 8 October 2021.

Or. en

Amendment 436

Danuše Nerudová

Proposal for a directive

Article 77 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. Member States shall communicate to the Commission and the European Parliament relevant information for the evaluation of the Directive in accordance with paragraph 3, including aggregated data on BEFIT group members which are resident for tax purposes in their jurisdiction and permanent establishments thereof operating in their jurisdiction, in order to properly assess the impact of the transition allocation rule and of Directive (EU) 2022/2523 as well as assessing the situation regarding Pillar One of the Statement on a Two-Pillar Solution to Address the Tax Challenges Arising from the Digitalisation of the Economy agreed by the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework on BEPS on 8 October 2021.

Or. en

Amendment 437

Enikő Győri

Proposal for a directive

Article 77 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, specify the information to be provided by Member States for the purpose of evaluating the functioning of this Directive, as referred to in paragraph 2, as well as the format and the conditions for the communication of such information.

3. Until the review referred to in paragraph 2 is completed and formal decision has been taken by the Council in consultation with the European Parliament on whether to proceed, no further legislative, administrative, or implementation steps shall be taken by Member States under this Directive.

Or. en

Amendment 438

Enikő Győri

Proposal for a directive

Article 77 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. Information communicated to the Commission under paragraph 2 shall be kept confidential by the Commission in accordance with the provisions applicable to Union institutions and Article 76 of this Directive.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 439

Enikő Győri

Proposal for a directive

Article 77 – paragraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

5. Information communicated to the Commission by a Member State in accordance with paragraph 2, as well as any report or document produced by the Commission using such information, may be transmitted to other Member States. The transmitted information shall be covered by the obligation of official secrecy, as laid down regarding similar information in the national law of the Member State(s) which received it.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 440

Gilles Boyer

Proposal for a directive

Article 77 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article77a

BEFIT Revenue Contribution

In line with the legally binding roadmap on new own resources set out in the Interinstitutional Agreement of 16 December 20201a and the 2021 Commission Communication "An adjusted package for the next generation of own resources," part of the revenues generated through the application of this Directive may be allocated to the general budget of the Union, in accordance with the applicable procedures under the Own Resources Decision.

_________________

1a Interinstitutional Agreement between the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and the European Commission on budgetary discipline, on cooperation in budgetary matters and on sound financial management, as well as on new own resources, including a roadmap towards the introduction of new own resources (OJ L 433I, 22.12.2020, p. 28–46).

Or. en

Amendment 441

Enikő Győri

Proposal for a directive

Article 78 – title

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Transposition

Suspension of Transposition

Or. en

Amendment 442

Enikő Győri

Proposal for a directive

Article 78 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Member States shall adopt and publish the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive by 1 January 2028. They shall forthwith communicate to the Commission the text of those provisions.

1. By way of derogation from the original timeline, Member States shall not transpose this Directive until the suspension under Article 77(1) is lifted by a formal legislative act of the Council in consultation with the European Parliament, following the Commission’s assessment of the Directive’s relevance and feasibility.

Or. en

Amendment 443

Michalis Hadjipantela, Danuše Nerudová

Proposal for a directive

Article 78 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Member States shall adopt and publish the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive by 1 January 2030. They shall forthwith communicate to the Commission the text of those provisions.

Or. en

Amendment 444

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 78 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Member States shall adopt and publish the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive by 1 January 2027. They shall forthwith communicate to the Commission the text of those provisions.

Or. en

Amendment 445

Enikő Győri

Proposal for a directive

Article 78 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. They shall apply those provisions from 1 July 2028.

2. The original transposition and application dates of 1 January 2028 and 1 July 2028, respectively, are hereby suspended. New dates, if any, shall be determined based on the outcome of the Commission’s reassessment report referred to in Article 77(2).

Or. en

Amendment 446

Michalis Hadjipantela, Danuše Nerudová

Proposal for a directive

Article 78 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. They shall apply those provisions from 1 July 2028.

2. They shall apply those provisions from 1 July 2030.

Or. en

Amendment 447

Manon Aubry

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 78 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. They shall apply those provisions from 1 July 2028.

2. They shall apply those provisions from 1 July 2027.

Or. en

Amendment 448

Enikő Győri

Proposal for a directive

Article 78 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. When Member States adopt those provisions, they shall include a reference to this Directive or accompany them with such a reference on the occasion of their official publication. Member States shall determine how such reference is to be made.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 449

Enikő Győri

Proposal for a directive

Article 78 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. As soon as this Directive has entered into force, Member States shall ensure that the Commission is informed, in sufficient time for it to submit its comments on any draft laws, regulations or administrative provisions which they intend to adopt in the field covered by this Directive.

deleted

Or. en