Sittings · Document

Draft report (2025/2211(INI)) 2026-04-22

Feasibility of a 28th tax regime and its potential to support EU competitiveness

Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs

Official HTML ↗ PDF DOCX

AM_Com_NonLegReport

Amendment 1

Pierre Pimpie, Auke Zijlstra, Tomáš Kubín

Motion for a resolution

Citation -– (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

– having regard to the Commission proposal of 18 March 2026 for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the 28th Regime Corporate Legal Framework – ‘EU Inc.’ (COM(2026)0321 – 2026/0074(COD))

Or. en

Amendment 2

Bruno Gonçalves, Niels Fuglsang, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Citation – a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

– having regard to the Commission proposal of 18 March 2026 for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the 28th regime corporate legal framework – ‘EU Inc.’, COM (2026) 321

Or. en

Amendment 3

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Motion for a resolution

Citation 5 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

– Having regard to the Commission's proposal for a Regulation on the 28th regime corporate legal framework - 'EU Inc.' of 18 March 2026;

Or. en

Amendment 4

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Motion for a resolution

Citation 5 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

– Having regard to the Commission's recommendation of 18 March 2026 on the definition of innovative enterprises, innovative startups and innovative scaleups;

Or. en

Amendment 5

Bruno Gonçalves, Niels Fuglsang, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Citation 14 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

– having regard to the Flash Eurobarometer 559, from February to April 2025, on “Startups, scaleups and entrepreneurship”

Or. en

Amendment 6

Bruno Gonçalves, Niels Fuglsang, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Citation 14 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

– having regard to the Flash Eurobarometer 562, from April 2025, on “Citizens’ attitudes towards taxation”

Or. en

Amendment 7

Bruno Gonçalves, Niels Fuglsang, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Citation 15 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

15 a having regard to the European Council meeting conclusions of 19 March 2026,

Or. en

Amendment 8

Marco Falcone, Fulvio Martusciello, Herbert Dorfmann

Motion for a resolution

Recital A

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

A. whereas the EU, as the largest integrated market in the world, with more than 450 million consumers, is losing its economic competitive edge4;

A. whereas the EU, as the largest integrated market in the world, with more than 450 million consumers, is losing its economic competitive edge4; not least in view of the increasingly intense global competition to attract capital, businesses and talent, as well as the risk of a progressive weakening of the European industrial base and a reduced ability to attract investment and productive activities compared to other large global economies;

_________________

4 Draghi report.

Or. it

Amendment 9

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea, Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Motion for a resolution

Recital A

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

A. whereas the EU, as the largest integrated market in the world, with more than 450 million consumers, is losing its economic competitive edge4;

A. whereas the EU, as the largest integrated market in the world, with more than 450 million consumers, is losing its economic competitive edge4 owing to the confluence of structural weaknesses, a disproportionately high tax burden relative to other jurisdictions, excessive bureaucracy, and a regulatory framework that stifles the competitiveness and growth of European businesses;

_________________

4 Draghi report.

Or. es

Amendment 10

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Motion for a resolution

Recital A

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

A. whereas the EU, as the largest integrated market in the world, with more than 450 million consumers, is losing its economic competitive edge4 ;

A. whereas the EU, as the largest integrated market in the world, with more than 450 million consumers, is losing its economic competitive edge4 ; whereas further harmonisation and the deepening of the internal market are instrumental in boosting EU competitiveness;

_________________

4 Draghi report.

Or. en

Amendment 11

Ľudovít Ódor

Motion for a resolution

Recital A a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

A a. whereas economic competitiveness, at the core of most relevant European Union policies and urgent political priority, indicated by internal market integration, productivity growth, substantial public and private investment, and the digital and green transitions, may bolster EU’s prosperity by creating quality jobs, sustain our economic and social model, and consequently invigorate the welfare of our people and societies;

Or. en

Amendment 12

Roberts Zīle

Motion for a resolution

Recital A a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

A a. Whereas according to the Treaties, and in particular Articles 113 and 115 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), taxation remains firmly a competence of the Member States, requiring unanimity in the Council for any harmonisation of legislation concerning direct and indirect taxes that directly affect the establishment or functioning of the internal market

Or. en

Amendment 13

Enikő Győri

Motion for a resolution

Recital A a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

A a. Whereas taxation is a key element of Member State sovereignty and competence; whereas, pursuant to the Treaties, decisions in the field of taxation at Union level require unanimity in the Council; whereas any discussion or development of taxation-related elements in the context of a potential 28th regime must fully respect Member States’ competences and follow the appropriate legislative procedures, including prior examination in the relevant Council working parties and unanimous adoption by the Council;

Or. en

Amendment 14

Bruno Gonçalves, Niels Fuglsang, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Recital A a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

A a. whereas the capacity to deliver greater harmonisation in the field of tax matters, thus simplifying the regulatory framework, remains restricted by the unanimity requirement applicable to this policy area;

Or. en

Amendment 15

Roberts Zīle

Motion for a resolution

Recital A b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

A b. Whereas the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality, as enshrined in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU), dictate that Union action shall not exceed what is necessary to achieve the objectives of the Treaties; whereas, therefore, any framework for a 28th regime must strictly adhere to these principles by focusing on the removal of practical barriers, and avoid any substantive harmonisation of tax or labour law where the objectives can be sufficiently achieved by the Member States

Or. en

Amendment 16

Bruno Gonçalves, Niels Fuglsang, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Recital A b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

A b. whereas the use of EU directives has demonstrated limitations in achieving regulatory harmonisation in the internal market due to diverging national transpositions of the same legal act, consequently delivering lesser reductions of the administrative burden and cost of cross-border economic activity;

Or. en

Amendment 17

Roberts Zīle

Motion for a resolution

Recital A c (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

A c. Whereas Member States retain the sovereign prerogative to design their corporate tax systems and incentives to reflect their specific economic circumstances and priorities; whereas fair and transparent tax competition between Member States is a legitimate and inherent feature of the internal market that encourages economic efficiency, supports the economic viability of smaller Member States, and drives overall European competitiveness

Or. en

Amendment 18

Marco Falcone, Fulvio Martusciello, Herbert Dorfmann

Motion for a resolution

Recital A a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Aa. whereas, moreover, boosting the EU's competitiveness is closely connected to consolidating its strategic autonomy and being able to reduce external economic dependencies in strategic and critical sectors;

Or. it

Amendment 19

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea, Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Motion for a resolution

Recital B

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

B. whereas internal trade barriers in the EU’s single market are estimated to be the equivalent of a tariff rate of 44 % for goods and 110 % for services5;

B. whereas internal trade barriers in the EU’s single market are estimated to be the equivalent of a tariff rate of 44 % for goods and 110 % for services5, which continue to represent a significant burden for businesses; whereas this situation limits the potential for business growth and investments in the EU and highlights the need to move towards a more integrated, simplified and ambitious framework;

_________________

5 Speech of 16 December 2024 by Alfred Kammer, Director of the European Department, International Monetary Fund, entitled ‘Europe’s Choice: Policies for Growth and Resilience’.

5 Speech of 16 December 2024 by Alfred Kammer, Director of the European Department, International Monetary Fund, entitled ‘Europe’s Choice: policies for growth and resilience'.

Or. es

Amendment 20

Bruno Gonçalves, Niels Fuglsang, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Recital B

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

B. whereas internal trade barriers in the EU’s single market are estimated to be the equivalent of a tariff rate of 44 % for goods and 110 % for services5 ;

B. whereas internal trade barriers in the EU’s single market are estimated to be the equivalent of a tariff rate of 44 % for goods and 110 % for services5 ; whereas the “One Europe, One Market” agenda was launched in pursuit of a highly competitive social market economy and further deepening the internal market and all its fundamental freedoms;

_________________

5 Speech of 16 December 2024 by Alfred Kammer, Director of the European Department, International Monetary Fund, entitled ‘Europe’s Choice: Policies for Growth and Resilience’.

Or. en

Amendment 21

Michalis Hadjipantela

Motion for a resolution

Recital B

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

B. whereas internal trade barriers in the EU’s single market are estimated to be the equivalent of a tariff rate of 44 % for goods and 110 % for services5 ;

B. whereas internal trade barriers in the EU’s single market are estimated to be the equivalent of a tariff rate of 44 % for goods and 110 % for services5 highlighting the significant economic cost of regulatory fragmentation;

_________________

5 Speech of 16 December 2024 by Alfred Kammer, Director of the European Department, International Monetary Fund, entitled ‘Europe’s Choice: Policies for Growth and Resilience’.

Or. en

Amendment 22

Piotr Müller, Marlena Maląg

Motion for a resolution

Recital B a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Ba. whereas healthy tax competition between EU countries helps the economy; stresses that the new EU regime must fully respect the right of countries to set their own tax rates and focus exclusively on removing unnecessary formalities;

Or. pl

Amendment 23

Bruno Gonçalves, Niels Fuglsang, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Recital B a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

B a. whereas the European Council’s conclusions of March 2026 prioritise the adoption of an optional harmonised 28th regime for companies, while also stating that “harmonised EU-wide rules that replace 27 sets of national rules, in itself brings simplification”;

Or. en

Amendment 24

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Motion for a resolution

Recital C

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

C. whereas enterprises across the EU, specifically small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), start-ups and scale-ups, and their innovative potential are structurally stifled by the persistent fragmentation of regulatory frameworks between Member States; whereas regulatory diversity and the associated costs of navigating unfamiliar environments hinder the pan-European financing and scaling up of companies, and there is an urgent need to address this competitiveness gap6 ;

_________________

6 European Parliament resolution of 20 January 2026 with recommendations to the Commission on the 28th Regime: a new legal framework for innovative companies.

Or. en

Amendment 25

Bruno Gonçalves, Niels Fuglsang, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Recital C

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

C. whereas enterprises across the EU, specifically small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), start-ups and scale-ups, and their innovative potential are structurally stifled by the persistent fragmentation of regulatory frameworks between Member States; whereas harmonisation constitutes an effective approach to foster regulatory simplification in the internal market; whereas regulatory diversity and the associated costs of navigating unfamiliar environments hinder the pan-European financing and scaling up of companies, and there is an urgent need to address this competitiveness gap6 ;

_________________

6 European Parliament resolution of 20 January 2026 with recommendations to the Commission on the 28th Regime: a new legal framework for innovative companies.

Or. en

Amendment 26

Herbert Dorfmann, Marco Falcone

Motion for a resolution

Recital C

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

C. whereas enterprises across the EU, specifically small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), start-ups and scale-ups, and their innovative potential are structurally stifled by the persistent fragmentation of regulatory frameworks between Member States; whereas regulatory and tax diversity and the associated costs of navigating 27 distinct and often incompatible national systems, represent primary structural barriers to hinder the pan-European financing and scaling up of companies, and there is an urgent need to address this competitiveness gap6 ;

_________________

6 European Parliament resolution of 20 January 2026 with recommendations to the Commission on the 28th Regime: a new legal framework for innovative companies.

Or. en

Amendment 27

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea, Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Motion for a resolution

Recital C

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

C. whereas all enterprises in the EU, specifically small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs and SMCs), start-ups and scale-ups, and their innovative potential are structurally stifled by the persistent fragmentation of regulatory frameworks between Member States; whereas regulatory diversity and the associated costs of navigating unfamiliar environments hinder the pan-European financing and scaling up of companies, and there is an urgent need to address this competitiveness gap6;

_________________

6 European Parliament resolution of 20 January 2026 with recommendations to the Commission on the 28th Regime: a new legal framework for innovative companies.

Or. es

Amendment 28

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea, Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Motion for a resolution

Recital C a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Ca. whereas private entrepreneurship is the main driver of economic growth, job creation and innovation in the EU; whereas a favourable, predictable and proportionate regulatory environment is essential to enable companies to invest, grow and compete globally; whereas the EU should strengthen its commitment to entrepreneurial freedom and the removal of barriers, ensuring that public policies support, not hinder, the dynamism of the business fabric;

Or. es

Amendment 29

Marco Falcone, Fulvio Martusciello, Herbert Dorfmann

Motion for a resolution

Recital C a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Ca. whereas completing the single market calls for an inclusive approach that reflects the EU's varied business fabric, including businesses operating in traditional industries; whereas, also, the 28th regime should contribute to reducing economic and territorial disparities in the EU, ensuring balanced access and development conditions across different regions;

Or. it

Amendment 30

Bruno Gonçalves, Niels Fuglsang, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Recital C a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

C a. whereas the lack of regulatory harmonisation in the internal market for tax matters is responsible for additional and unnecessary administrative burden to SMEs, start-ups and scale-ups, to their detriment, but also increases loopholes for aggressive tax planning and other tax avoidance practices that hinder the level playing field and undermine fair taxation;

Or. en

Amendment 31

Luděk Niedermayer, Michalis Hadjipantela

Motion for a resolution

Recital C a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

C a. Whereas the report by Enrico Letta ‘Much more than a market’1a highlights that regulatory fragmentation may turn the Single Market into an obstacle for small and medium-sized enterprises and identifies the 28th regime as a key tool to enable them to fully benefit from the Single Market;

_________________

1a Enrico Letta "Much more than a market"

Or. en

Amendment 32

Fernando Navarrete Rojas, Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Motion for a resolution

Recital C a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

C a. Whereas reducing the debt-equity bias through a more neutral tax base may lessen the tax incentive to rely on intra-group debt financing, thereby reducing the economic significance of transfer pricing in this area and contributing to a simpler and less distortive framework for companies operating across borders;

Or. en

Amendment 33

Pascal Canfin, Billy Kelleher

Motion for a resolution

Recital C a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

C a. whereas the overall administrative burden reduction of Regulation 2026/0074 establishing the 28th Regime is estimated between EUR 328 million and 440 million over 10 years1a;

_________________

1a Proposal for a Regulation on the 28th Regime corporate Legal Framework - 'EU INC.'

Or. en

Amendment 34

Fernando Navarrete Rojas, Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Motion for a resolution

Recital C b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

C b. Whereas the landscape of R&D tax incentive regimes remains highly fragmented, thereby generating uncertainty as to the practical value of such incentives and imposing substantial compliance costs on companies operating across borders;

Or. en

Amendment 35

Ľudovít Ódor

Motion for a resolution

Recital D

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

D. whereas for SMEs, start-ups and scale-ups the difficulties in understanding the different business environments in the EU, including due to language barriers, access to information or rules and requirements, taxation issues and business authorisation, represent the most significant barriers to their cross-border operations within the EU; whereas taxation, particularly Value Added Tax (VAT) related issues, permitting and authorisations dominate the hindrances of their scaling up in other EU countries7a;

_________________

7a European Commission’s report ‘Flash Eurobarometer 559 – Startups, scaleups and entrepreneurship’, 2025

Or. en

Amendment 36

Michalis Hadjipantela

Motion for a resolution

Recital D

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

D. whereas for SMEs, start-ups and scale-ups the difficulties in understanding the different business environments in the EU, including due to language barriers, access to information or rules and requirements, taxation issues and business authorisation, represent the most significant barriers to their cross-border operations and to scaling up within the EU; whereas reducing administrative and regulatory burdens and ensuring streamlined procedures is essential to enabling SMEs, start-ups and scale-ups to operate efficiently and scale across the internal market;

Or. en

Amendment 37

Bruno Gonçalves, Niels Fuglsang

Motion for a resolution

Recital D

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

D. whereas for SMEs, start-ups and scale-ups the difficulties in understanding the different business environments in the EU, including due to language barriers, access to information or rules and requirements, taxation issues and business authorisation, represent the most significant barriers to their cross-border operations and to scaling up within the EU; whereas a recent survey6a, with more than 12000 participating SMEs, points towards tax as the most prevalent barrier that prevents enterprises from scaling up in other EU countries;

_________________

6a European Commission, Flash Eurobarometer 559 – Startups, scaleups and entrepreneurship (page 66), https://europa.eu/eurobarometer/surveys/detail/3359

Or. en

Amendment 38

Damian Boeselager

Motion for a resolution

Recital D

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

D. whereas for SMEs, start-ups and scale-ups the difficulties in understanding the different business environments in the EU, including due to language barriers, access to information or rules and requirements, taxation issues, employee stock option taxation, labour-tax compliance, payroll administration and business authorisation, represent the most significant barriers to their cross-border operations and to scaling up within the EU;

Or. en

Amendment 39

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea, Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Motion for a resolution

Recital D

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

D. whereas for SMEs, SMCs, start-ups and scale-ups the difficulties in understanding the different business environments in the EU, including due to language barriers, access to information or rules and requirements, taxation issues and business authorisation, represent the most significant barriers to their cross-border operations and to scaling up within the EU;

Or. es

Amendment 40

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea, Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Motion for a resolution

Recital E

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

E. whereas a significant portion of fast-growing, innovative companies is leaving the EU to scale-up elsewhere, due to better access to large markets, a supportive business environment, better access to venture capital, heightened availability and mobility of talented and skilled workers, an unfragmented regulatory framework and a less complex tax environment, which would be conducive to cross-border investment7;

E. whereas between 2008 and 2021, 30 % of European start-ups valued at over EUR 1 billion moved their headquarters outside the European Union; whereas a large proportion of companies are leaving the European Union to find the necessary capital in other jurisdictions, especially fast-growing, innovative companies7 a; whereas this is due to better access to large markets, a supportive business environment, better access to venture capital, heightened availability and mobility of talented and skilled workers, an unfragmented regulatory framework and a less complex tax environment, which would be conducive to cross-border investment7;

_________________

7 Draghi report.

7 a EUIPO – IP-backed financing in Europe: State of play and way forward – Towards a European market for intellectual property financing

Or. es

Amendment 41

Marco Falcone, Fulvio Martusciello, Herbert Dorfmann

Motion for a resolution

Recital E

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

E. whereas a significant portion of fast-growing, innovative companies is leaving the EU to scale-up elsewhere, due to better access to large markets, a supportive business environment, better access to venture capital, heightened availability and mobility of talented and skilled workers, an unfragmented regulatory framework and a less complex tax environment, driving a relocation effect of EU companies towards third jurisdictions that have more favourable conditions for cross-border investment and for attracting and retaining economic and industrial activity in their economic systems;

_________________

7 Draghi report.

Or. it

Amendment 42

Damian Boeselager

Motion for a resolution

Recital E

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

E. whereas a significant portion of fast-growing, innovative companies is leaving the EU to scale-up elsewhere, due to better access to large markets, a supportive business environment, better access to venture capital, heightened availability and mobility of talented and skilled workers, an unfragmented regulatory framework and a less complex tax environment, the wider availability of employee ownership schemes and more predictable labour-tax treatment, which would be conducive to cross-border investment7 ;

_________________

7 Draghi report.

Or. en

Amendment 43

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Motion for a resolution

Recital E

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

E. whereas a significant portion of fast-growing, innovative companies is leaving the EU to scale-up elsewhere, due to better access to large markets and to venture capital, an unfragmented regulatory framework and a less complex tax environment, which would be conducive to cross-border investment7 ;

_________________

7 Draghi report.

Or. en

Amendment 44

Ľudovít Ódor

Motion for a resolution

Recital E a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

E a. whereas, as stated in Mario Draghi’s report, for innovative companies, […] a voluntary 28th company rulebook harmonising legislation concerning corporate law and insolvency, as well as a few key aspects of labour law and taxation, to be made progressively more ambitious, could be explored under enhanced cooperation by willing Member States8a;

_________________

8a Mario Draghi’s report ‘The future of European competitiveness’, 2024

Or. en

Amendment 45

Lídia Pereira

Motion for a resolution

Recital E a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

E a. whereas the tax dimension of the 28th regime should respect the competence framework provisioned by the treaties and be designed to support the full lifecycle of innovative companies, in particular innovation-friendly regulation, better finance, faster market uptake and expansion, support for the best talent and access to infrastructure, networks and services;

Or. en

Amendment 46

Ľudovít Ódor

Motion for a resolution

Recital E b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

E b. whereas, as stated in Enrico Letta’s report, tax is another area where complexity is a major barrier to cross-border trade and investment. The different tax systems in place in each EU Member State make it difficult and expensive for businesses to operate in multiple countries8b;

_________________

8b Enrico Letta’s report ‘Much more than a market’, 2024

Or. en

Amendment 47

Fernando Navarrete Rojas, Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Motion for a resolution

Recital E a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

E a. Whereas cross-border investments in the EU may be discouraged by the absence of an effective system ensuring the smooth relief of withholding taxes, as well as by the lack of mechanisms for offsetting losses across jurisdictions, thereby favouring domestic investments and further fragmenting the single market;

Or. en

Amendment 48

Pascal Canfin, Billy Kelleher

Motion for a resolution

Recital E a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

E a. whereas the Draghi report shows that Europe lacks venture capital investment at each development stage of startups (seed, early stage and late stage) compared to the United States due to a lack of scaling possibilities;

Or. en

Amendment 49

Pascal Canfin, Billy Kelleher

Motion for a resolution

Recital E b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

E b. whereas Europe only had 331 unicorns compared with 1963 in the U.S as of 2025 and whereas between 2008 and 2021 close to 30% of them relocated their headquarters abroad1a;

_________________

1a Draghi Report

Or. en

Amendment 50

Jussi Saramo, Manon Aubry, Anthony Smith, Pasquale Tridico

on behalf of The Left Group

Motion for a resolution

Recital F

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

F. whereas the establishment of a common corporate tax base at Union level, building on previous initiatives such as the CCCTB and BEFIT, would significantly simplify tax compliance for companies operating across borders, reduce legal uncertainty and limit opportunities for aggressive tax planning by multinational enterprises; whereas a common consolidated tax base with formulary apportionment based on labour, tangible assets and sales would constitute both a simplification tool and an instrument to fight tax avoidance; whereas it is necessary to ensure clarity and legal certainty for European and foreign investors by using simpler and better harmonised rules that enable them to invest cross-border;

Or. en

Amendment 51

Herbert Dorfmann, Marco Falcone

Motion for a resolution

Recital F

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

F. whereas the potential benefits of an optional pan-European business regime, vastly simplifying the whole process of future expansion to new markets, both within and outside of the EU, lie in enhanced legal certainty, lower compliance costs, simplified regulatory and tax procedures, and a level playing field with competing jurisdictions outside the EU; whereas it is necessary to ensure clarity and legal certainty for European and foreign investors by providing simpler and better harmonised rules, including in the area of taxation, that enable them to invest cross-border with confidence; whereas the aggregate fiscal compliance burden borne by innovative companies operating across multiple Member States - estimated to be equivalent to a tariff barrier - must be substantially reduced if the EU is to compete globally for innovative talent and capital;

Or. en

Amendment 52

Jussi Saramo, Manon Aubry, Anthony Smith, Pasquale Tridico

on behalf of The Left Group

Motion for a resolution

Recital F a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

F a. whereas the Union should actively engage in international negotiations with a view to promoting the global harmonisation of tax rules and the allocation of taxing rights based on a formula reflecting tangible factors such as labour, assets and sales; whereas the ongoing negotiations within the United Nations on international tax cooperation constitute a unique and timely opportunity in that regard; whereas the abstention of the EU Member States in the vote on the establishment of the United Nations Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation was regrettable; whereas the Union and its Member States should now engage constructively and proactively in those negotiations;

Or. en

Amendment 53

Marco Falcone, Fulvio Martusciello

Motion for a resolution

Recital F a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Fa. whereas an optional pan-European business regime should simplify the whole company lifecycle, from incorporation to growth through to restructuring or, where necessary, closing down, in order to ensure legal certainty, reduce administrative costs and facilitate the cross-border operations and expansion of companies within the single market;

Or. it

Amendment 54

Marco Falcone, Fulvio Martusciello, Herbert Dorfmann

Motion for a resolution

Recital G

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

G. whereas to address these policies and political goals, the EU and its Member States must act boldly and ambitiously;

G. whereas to address these policies and political goals, the EU and its Member States must act using a coordinated, ambitious and results-oriented approach;

Or. it

Amendment 55

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea, Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Motion for a resolution

Recital G a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Ga. whereas completing the Savings and Investments Union is essential to mobilise private capital in the EU and channel it efficiently into the economy, in particular towards SMEs, start-ups and scale-ups; whereas a deeper, more integrated and more accessible capital market would improve access to finance and encourage long-term investment; whereas further integration of European financial markets is key to strengthening the EU’s competitiveness, preventing the flight of innovative companies to other jurisdictions and ensuring that European savings finance growth and innovation within the internal market;

Or. es

Amendment 56

Roberts Zīle

Motion for a resolution

Recital G a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

G a. Whereas the fragmentation of regulatory frameworks poses a significant barrier to cross-border operations primarily due to disproportionate administrative complexity and compliance costs; whereas addressing these barriers through targeted procedural simplification, digitalisation, and mutual recognition of national frameworks can effectively deepen the internal market without necessitating or justifying the substantive harmonisation of national corporate tax bases

Or. en

Amendment 57

Jussi Saramo, Manon Aubry, Anthony Smith, Pasquale Tridico

on behalf of The Left Group

Motion for a resolution

Recital G a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

G a. whereas the creation of a parallel Union regime must not result in rules that are weaker than those applicable in the majority of Member States, in particular as regards taxation, labour law, social security and workers’ rights, in order to avoid a levelling down of existing standards and, notably, lower overall tax revenues at Union level;

Or. en

Amendment 58

Jussi Saramo, Manon Aubry, Anthony Smith

on behalf of The Left Group

Motion for a resolution

Recital G b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

G b. whereas trade unions, including the ETUC and UNI Europa, have expressed strong concerns that a 28th regime could allow certain companies to circumvent national labour standards and create new opportunities for social dumping, including with regard to workers’ rights, trade union rights, the right to strike, employment protection and social security;

Or. en

Amendment 59

Jussi Saramo, Manon Aubry, Anthony Smith

on behalf of The Left Group

Motion for a resolution

Recital G c (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

G c. whereas any digital one-stop-shop or fast-track registration mechanism must be accompanied by robust due diligence, transparency and substance requirements in order to prevent the proliferation of shell and letterbox companies, forum shopping and social dumping;

Or. en

Amendment 60

Jussi Saramo, Manon Aubry, Anthony Smith

on behalf of The Left Group

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 1

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

1. Welcomes the Commission’s legislative proposal for a 28th regime for companies;

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 61

Ľudovít Ódor

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 1

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

1. Welcomes the Commission’s legislative proposal for a 28th regime for companies;

1. Welcomes the Commission’s legislative proposal for a 28th regime for companies; welcomes the European Parliament’s adoption of the resolution with recommendations to the Commission on the 28th regime: a new legal framework for innovative companies;

Or. en

Amendment 62

Bruno Gonçalves, Niels Fuglsang, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 1

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

1. Welcomes the Commission’s legislative proposal for a 28th regime for companies;

1. Welcomes the Commission’s legislative proposal for a 28th regime for companies; underlines the 28th regime for companies must not constitute a replacement for further legislative efforts to reduce fragmentation and disparities between the regulatory framework of the Member States;

Or. en

Amendment 63

Marco Falcone, Fulvio Martusciello, Herbert Dorfmann

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 1

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

1. Welcomes the Commission’s legislative proposal for a 28th regime for companies;

1. Welcomes the Commission’s legislative proposal for a 28th regime for companies, recognising the potential systemic impact on the functioning of the single market and the overall competitiveness of the EU economy;

Or. it

Amendment 64

Luděk Niedermayer, Michalis Hadjipantela

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 1

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

1. Welcomes the Commission’s legislative proposal for a 28th regime for companies;

1. Welcomes the Commission’s legislative proposal for a 28th regime (‘EU Inc’) for companies;

Or. en

Amendment 65

Ľudovít Ódor

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 1 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

1 a. Stresses the fact that taxation, as enshrined in the Treaties, is an exclusive competence of the Member States and broadly respected national sovereignty, yet there is – in terms of procedures – a space for further simplification or targeted harmonisation tackling different compliance regimes, complex and fragmented corporate tax treatment, reporting obligations and treatment of cross-border investment;

Or. en

Amendment 66

Enikő Győri

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 1 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

1 a. Emphasises that matters on taxation fall within the exclusive competences of the Member States; recalls that, in accordance with the Treaties, decisions in the field of taxation at Union level are subject to unanimity in the Council; stresses, therefore, that any initiative should not prejudge or pre-empt Member States’ competences in taxation and should not be interpreted as advocating the inclusion of binding tax provisions outside the appropriate legal framework;

Or. en

Amendment 67

Enikő Győri

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 1 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

1 b. Underlines that any possible initiative, measure or reference related to taxation within the context of a potential 28th regime must be discussed separately by the competent preparatory bodies of the Council and must ultimately be adopted by unanimity in the Council;

Or. en

Amendment 68

Bruno Gonçalves, Niels Fuglsang, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 1 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

1 a. Welcomes the adoption of the "One Europe, One Market" agenda to unlock the potential of the single market; takes note of the European Council’s call for the adoption of a 28th regime for company law; regrets the European Council’s lack of references to tax policy harmonisation under the “One Europe, One Market” agenda, particularly given SMEs selected tax and VAT fragmentation as the most prevalent barrier to scaling-up in other Member States;

Or. en

Amendment 69

Pierre Pimpie, Enikő Győri, Auke Zijlstra, Tomáš Kubín

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 2

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

2. Reiterates that the 28th regime should remain focused, proportionate and optional in its substance, with corporate law simplification at its core, in order to allow SMEs and innovative companies to scale up and operate more easily within the EU’s single market, while fully respecting Member States’ competences in taxation and social matters;

Or. en

Amendment 70

Luděk Niedermayer

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 2

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

2. Reiterates that the ‘new regimes’ refer to the proposed 28th regime and the ‘28+ regime’ established herein (which may be referred to as ‘EU Inc+’), the latter being the 28th regime supplemented by additional provisions in the area of taxation.

Or. en

Amendment 71

Bruno Gonçalves, Niels Fuglsang

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 2

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

2. Reiterates that the 28th regime must be ambitious and comprehensive in its substance, in order to promote seamless cross-border economic activity within the EU’s single market;

Or. en

Amendment 72

Herbert Dorfmann, Marco Falcone

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 2

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

2. Reiterates that the 28th regime must be ambitious and comprehensive in its substance, including on taxation aspects, in order to allow SMEs and innovative companies to scale-up and operate seamlessly within the EU’s single market; stresses that ambition in the tax domain must translate into concrete, measurable simplification - including a single tax identification number, a unified digital filing portal, cross-border loss relief, and harmonised treatment of equity compensation - rather than a mere recalibration of existing national procedures; emphasises that the regime must be sufficiently attractive from a fiscal compliance perspective to constitute a genuine alternative to incorporating outside the European Union;

Or. en

Amendment 73

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 2

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

2. Reiterates that the 28th regime must be ambitious and comprehensive in its substance, including on taxation aspects, in order to allow SMEs, SMCs and innovative companies to scale-up and operate seamlessly across borders within the EU’s single market; Underlines that the 28th regime must support and safeguard social rights, including workers’ rights, diversity at the workplace, innovation by young entrepreneurs and SMEs, transparency of company policies as well as tax justice;

Or. en

Amendment 74

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea, Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 2

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

2. Reiterates that the 28th regime must be ambitious and comprehensive in its substance, including on taxation aspects, in order to allow companies, especially SMEs and innovative companies to scale-up and operate without transnational barriers within the EU’s single market;

Or. es

Amendment 75

Lídia Pereira

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 2

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

2. Reiterates that the 28th regime must be ambitious and comprehensive in its substance, including on taxation aspects, fully respecting the Treaties, in order to allow SMEs and innovative companies to scale-up and operate seamlessly within the EU’s single market;

Or. en

Amendment 76

Luděk Niedermayer

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 2

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

2. Calls for the initiatives to be ambitious and comprehensive in its substance, including on taxation aspects, in order to allow SMEs and innovative companies to scale-up and operate seamlessly within the EU’s single market;

Or. en

Amendment 77

Roberts Zīle

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 2 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

2 b. Insists that any European initiative aimed at reducing cross-border compliance costs under a 28th regime must be strictly limited to procedural and administrative simplification, such as the development of interoperable digital tools, standardised forms, and single access points; explicitly rejects the use of such a regime as a vehicle for substantive tax integration, stressing that procedural simplification must never encroach upon the sovereign fiscal and labour policies of the Member States

Or. en

Amendment 78

Roberts Zīle

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 2 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

2 a. Underlines that fair tax competition between Member States is a fundamental driver of economic efficiency, investment, and innovation within the single market; warns that introducing a substantive harmonised 28th tax regime could undermine this competitive dynamic, imposing rigid structures that hinder, rather than help, European companies in their efforts to scale up and compete globally

Or. en

Amendment 79

Bruno Gonçalves, Niels Fuglsang, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 2 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

2 a. Underlines the 28th regime must not, under any circumstance, enable the circumvention of mandatory domestic protections for workers, their representatives and trade unions, nor become a vehicle to undermine, reduce or weaken existing levels of protection at the Union or national level;

Or. en

Amendment 80

Marco Falcone, Fulvio Martusciello (PPE), Herbert Dorfmann

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 2 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

2a. Calls on the Commission to include in the 28th regime measures aimed at supporting the dimensional growth and scalability of companies, in particular by encouraging the removal of legal and tax obstacles that limit development and expansion on a cross-border scale;

Or. it

Amendment 81

Piotr Müller, Marlena Maląg

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 2 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

2a. Stresses that the 28th regime must remain a fully opt-in system and opposes any form of conditionality that would force companies to adopt an EU regime in exchange for access to EU funds or participation in public procurement;

Or. pl

Amendment 82

Luděk Niedermayer

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 2 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

2 a. Stresses that the benefits of digitalisation and the simplification of compliance requirements under the 28th regime should be made available to a broader range of companies;

Or. en

Amendment 83

Michalis Hadjipantela

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 2 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

2 a. Considers that the 28th regime is a strategic step towards further deepening the internal market, thereby advancing European integration and competitive strength;

Or. en

Amendment 84

Pierre Pimpie, Enikő Győri, Auke Zijlstra, Tomáš Kubín

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 3

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

3. Stresses that the 28th regime must embrace all relevant aspects of corporate, insolvency, labour and tax law, must cover the whole life cycle of companies, and must be continuously evaluated against international benchmarks; considers that its potential benefits are substantial in terms of lower compliance costs, simplified regulatory procedures, enhanced legal certainty or smoother access to cross-border markets;

3. Stresses that the 28th regime should primarily address corporate law and administrative simplification, and that any future extension to other areas should be assessed separately, on the basis of subsidiarity, proportionality and proven added value;

Or. en

Amendment 85

Roberts Zīle

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 3

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

3. Stresses that the 28th regime must embrace all genuinely expedient and justified aspects of corporate and insolvency law, must cover the whole life cycle of companies, and must be continuously evaluated against international benchmarks; recalls, however, that tax and labour law remain core competences of the Member States

Or. en

Amendment 86

Luděk Niedermayer

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 3

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

3. Stresses that the 28th regime should provide a coherent framework focused in particular on reducing burdens for firms entering that regime, including through the digitalisation of certain processes, and covering key aspects of corporate, insolvency and labour law applicable throughout the life cycle of companies, with a transparent and economically feasible mechanism for exit from the regime; considers that the more ambitious 28+ regime, available only to certain firms, should extend this framework, in particular in the field of taxation, while remaining targeted and proportionate; underlines that both regimes should be subject to continuous evaluation against international benchmarks; considers that their potential benefits include lower compliance costs, simplified regulatory procedures, enhanced legal certainty and smoother access to cross-border markets.

Or. en

Amendment 87

Pascal Canfin, Billy Kelleher

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 3

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

3. Stresses that the 28th regime must be composed of several texts; understands that the Regulation 2026/0074(COD) proposed by the European Commission on establishing a corporate legal framework ('EU INC.') is a first step on which other building blocks can be added; consider these future building blocks to cover relevant aspects of corporate, insolvency, labour and tax law throughout the life cycle of companies, and must be continuously evaluated against international benchmarks; considers that its potential benefits are substantial in terms of lower compliance costs, simplified regulatory procedures, enhanced legal certainty or smoother access to cross-border markets;

Or. en

Amendment 88

Bruno Gonçalves, Niels Fuglsang, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 3

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

3. Stresses that the 28th regime must embrace all relevant aspects of corporate law, must cover the whole life cycle of companies, and must be continuously evaluated against international benchmarks; considers that its potential benefits are substantial in terms of lower compliance costs, simplified regulatory procedures, enhanced legal certainty or smoother access to cross-border markets; calls on the Commission to assess the benefits of implementing a 28th tax regime for companies, to share this analysis publicly, and to follow-up with a legislative proposal, if deemed appropriate;

Or. en

Amendment 89

Damian Boeselager

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 3

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

3. Stresses that the 28th regime must embrace all relevant aspects of corporate, insolvency, employee participation, employee equity frameworks, labour-related tax and payroll compliance, and tax law must cover the whole life cycle of companies, and must be continuously evaluated against international benchmarks; considers that its potential benefits are substantial in terms of lower compliance costs, simplified regulatory procedures, enhanced legal certainty or smoother access to cross-border markets;

Or. en

Amendment 90

Marco Falcone, Fulvio Martusciello

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 3

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

3. Stresses that the 28th regime must embrace all relevant aspects of corporate, insolvency (providing minimum levels of convergence and interoperability of insolvency procedures), labour and tax law, must cover the whole life cycle of companies, and must be continuously evaluated against international benchmarks; considers that its potential benefits are substantial in terms of lower compliance costs, simplified regulatory procedures, enhanced legal certainty or smoother access to cross-border markets;

Or. it

Amendment 91

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 3

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

3. Stresses that the 28th regime must embrace relevant aspects of corporate, insolvency, labour and tax law, must cover the whole life cycle of companies, and must be continuously evaluated against international benchmarks; considers that its potential benefits are substantial in terms of lower compliance costs, simplified regulatory procedures, enhanced legal certainty or smoother access to cross-border markets and delivering a truly European single market; ;

Or. en

Amendment 92

Lídia Pereira

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 3

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 93

Roberts Zīle

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 3 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

3 a. Believes that the deepening of the internal market should rely first and foremost on the principle of mutual trust and the removal of existing practical barriers between Member States; stresses that the mutual recognition of national corporate and administrative frameworks often provides a more proportionate, flexible, and effective solution for cross-border businesses than sweeping EU-level harmonisation, which should only be considered where its long-term added value can be unequivocally demonstrated

Or. en

Amendment 94

Jussi Saramo, Manon Aubry, Anthony Smith

on behalf of The Left Group

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 3 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

3 a. Stresses, however, that simplification must in no case come at the expense of high tax, labour and social standards and that any optional Union regime must guarantee at least the highest applicable standards in the Union in those fields, while effectively preventing tax dumping, social dumping and regulatory arbitrage;

Or. en

Amendment 95

Pascal Canfin, Billy Kelleher

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 3 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

3 a. Understands the 28th tax regime to be one or several separated legislative proposals added to the main corporate law Regulation 2026/0074(COD);

Or. en

Amendment 96

Pierre Pimpie, Auke Zijlstra, Tomáš Kubín

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 4

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

4. Recalls that any tax-related discussion linked to the 28th regime must fully respect the Treaty framework, including the requirement of unanimity in taxation where applicable; warns against using enhanced cooperation, opt-in or opt-out structures, or sunset clauses as instruments to circumvent the lack of political consensus among Member States on sensitive tax matters.

Or. en

Amendment 97

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 4

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

4. Regrets that taxation matters remain subject to the unanimity rule, thereby hampering progress towards a more harmonised and coherent tax framework across the internal market; highlights that diverging national tax policies contribute to market fragmentation and create an uneven playing field, preventing citizens and businesses from fully benefiting from the internal market; invites the Commission to consider alternative avenues, in case a satisfactory outcome cannot be reached because of the unanimity rule ;

Or. en

Amendment 98

Bruno Gonçalves, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 4

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

4. Regrets that tax policy remains subject to unanimity in the Council of the EU, which is a limiting factor for regulatory harmonisation; recommends the transition towards other voting methods for tax matters, in order to avoid the abuse of veto power; supports the use of qualified majority voting in certain aspects of tax policy, such as implementation of international agreements signed by all Member States, certain administrative procedures or legal definitions; Notes that for a 28th tax regime to be attainable under the existing Treaty framework, it may take the form of enhanced cooperation, either within an opt-in or opt-out structure of the relevant directive in the field of taxation, or by including a ‘sunset clause’, or through a combination of these approaches;

Or. en

Amendment 99

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea, Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 4

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

4. Notes that for a 28th tax regime to be attainable under the existing Treaty framework, it may take the form of enhanced cooperation, either within an opt-in or opt-out structure of the relevant directive in the field of taxation, or by including a ‘sunset clause’, or through a combination of these approaches; whereas such a scheme should be conceived as an optional, clear and legally secure system, open to the accession of other Member States at any time, thereby avoiding further fragmentation and ensuring the coherence of the internal market;

Or. es

Amendment 100

Piotr Müller, Marlena Maląg

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 4

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

4. Stresses that, irrespective of the legal route chosen, the priority must be simplicity and real benefit for businesses. Warns that the use of mechanisms such as ‘enhanced cooperation’ should not lead to unnecessarily complicated rules in the single market. Considers that the regime should be designed to be an attractive and transparent alternative which naturally incentivises innovation, rather than creating further legal barriers;

Or. pl

Amendment 101

Marco Falcone, Fulvio Martusciello

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 4

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Or. it

Amendment 102

Bruno Gonçalves, Niels Fuglsang

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 4

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

4. Notes that, under the existing Treaty framework and when the applicable legislative procedure does not yield results, recourse to enhanced cooperation in order to address tax policy shortcomings cannot be excluded;

Or. en

Amendment 103

Luděk Niedermayer

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 4

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

4. Notes that for the 28th regime and especially for the 28+ regime to be attainable under the existing Treaty framework, it may take the form of enhanced cooperation, either within an opt-in or opt-out structure of the relevant legislation in the field of taxation, or by including a ‘sunset clause’, or through a combination of these approaches;

Or. en

Amendment 104

Ľudovít Ódor

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 4

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

_________________

8c European Parliament, Policy Department for Economy and Growth; Filip Debelva, Joris Luts, Anne Mieke Vandekerkhove, Niels Bammens study ‘Feasibility of a 28th Tax Regime and Its Potential to Support EU Competitiveness’, 2026

Or. en

Amendment 105

Luděk Niedermayer

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 5

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

5. Stresses that the 28th regime must effectively reduce compliance complexity for participating companies and must not create a parallel rule book that is layered on top of national legal systems;

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 106

Paolo Borchia

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 5

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

5. Stresses that the 28th regime must effectively reduce compliance complexity for participating companies and must not create a parallel rule book that is layered on top of national legal systems;

5. Stresses that the 28th regime must effectively reduce compliance complexity for participating companies and must not create a parallel rule book that is layered on top of national legal systems; stressed, at this regard, that, although the 28th regime is optional, it is necessary to ensure proper coordination between it and national legal frameworks governing access to and the exercise of economic activities, in order to avoid legal uncertainty and regulatory fragmentation;

Or. en

Amendment 107

Marco Falcone, Fulvio Martusciello, Herbert Dorfmann

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 5

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

5. Stresses that the 28th regime must effectively reduce compliance complexity for participating companies and must not create a parallel rule book that is layered on top of national legal systems;

5. Stresses that the 28th regime must effectively reduce compliance complexity for participating companies, serving as an alternative, clear, self-sufficient regime, not replacing national systems, however, and able to ensure legal coherence and avoid regulatory overlaps;

Or. it

Amendment 108

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea, Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 5

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

5. Stresses that the 28th regime must effectively reduce compliance complexity for participating companies and must not create a parallel rule book that is layered on top of national legal systems;

5. Stresses that the 28th regime must effectively reduce compliance complexity for participating companies and must not create a parallel rule book that is layered on top of national legal systems; recalls that the main objective of the new regime is simplification and competitiveness and that these must be ensured at all times;

Or. es

Amendment 109

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 5

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

5. Stresses that the 28th regime must effectively reduce compliance complexity for participating companies and must not create a parallel rule book that is layered on top of national legal systems;

Or. en

Amendment 110

Ľudovít Ódor

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 5

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

5. Stresses that the 28th regime must effectively reduce compliance complexity for participating companies and must not create a parallel rule book that is layered on top of national legal systems;

Or. en

Amendment 111

Bruno Gonçalves, Niels Fuglsang, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 5

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

5. Stresses that the 28th regime must effectively reduce compliance complexity for participating companies and must not create a parallel rule book that is layered on top of national legal systems;

5. Stresses that the 28th regime must effectively reduce compliance complexity for participating companies and must not create a separate rule book that increases legal distortions, overlaps or inconsistencies, or adds administrative burden on top of national legal systems;

Or. en

Amendment 112

Damian Boeselager

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 5

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

5. Stresses that the 28th regime must effectively reduce compliance complexity for participating companies and must not create a parallel rule book that is layered on top of national legal systems;

5. Insists that the 28th regime must effectively reduce compliance complexity for participating companies and must not create a parallel rule book that is layered on top of national legal systems;

Or. en

Amendment 113

Luděk Niedermayer

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 5 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

5 a. Emphasises that the objective of both regimes is not to create an unfair tax advantage for companies or their employees, but to substantially reduce the complexity and administrative burden arising from different obligations, while respecting the specific characteristics of such companies;

Or. en

Amendment 114

Luděk Niedermayer

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 6

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

6. Emphasises that in order to avoid further complexity, the provisions of the 28th regime should be in line with any other major proposals of the Commission in the field of taxation;

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 115

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 6

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

6. Emphasises that in order to avoid further complexity, the provisions of the 28th regime should be in line with any other major proposals of the Commission in the field of taxation;

6. Stresses that provisions within a 28th tax regime should be in line with existing EU legislation, or, where no or limited EU legislation exits, be built on OECD or UN guidelines to ensure a maximum level of harmonisation and avoid legal fragmentation

Or. en

Amendment 116

Bruno Gonçalves, Niels Fuglsang, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 6

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

6. Emphasises that in order to avoid further complexity, the provisions of the 28th regime should be in line with any other major proposals of the Commission in the field of taxation;

6. Emphasises that in order to avoid further complexity, the provisions of a 28th tax regime should be in line with any other major proposals of the Commission in the field of taxation and applicable tax legislation, notably in the field of prevention of tax evasion and avoidance ;

Or. en

Amendment 117

Lídia Pereira

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 6

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

6. Emphasises that in order to avoid further complexity, the provisions of the 28th regime should be in line with any other major proposals of the Commission in the field of taxation;

6. Emphasises that in order to avoid further complexity, the provisions of the 28th regime should be in line with any other major proposals of the Commission regarding greater integration within the single market, namely in the field of taxation;

Or. en

Amendment 118

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea, Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 6

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

6. Emphasises that in order to avoid further complexity, the provisions of the 28th regime should be in line with any other major proposals of the Commission in the field of taxation;

6. Emphasises that in order to avoid further complexity, the provisions of the 28th regime should be in line with any other major proposals of the Commission that affect companies and that can improve the 28th regime;

Or. es

Amendment 119

Damian Boeselager

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 6

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

6. Emphasises that in order to avoid further complexity, the provisions of the 28th regime should be in line with any other major proposals of the Commission in the field of taxation;

6. Emphasises that the provisions of the 28th regime should be in line with any other major proposals of the Commission in the field of taxation to reduce further complexity at EU and national level ;

Or. en

Amendment 120

Luděk Niedermayer

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 6 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

6 a. Stresses that the development of the 28th regime should remain fully consistent with existing Union anti-avoidance frameworks, including the Anti-Tax Avoidance Directive (ATAD); Calls for clear and transparent definition of beneficial ownership that would identify real owners of such firms;

Or. en

Amendment 121

Luděk Niedermayer

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 7

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

7. Calls for a layered, modular and pilot-based approach with corporate law in the forefront; yet insists on a roadmap, of what should be added and when, to be known from the outset and continuously adjusted as a result of a periodic review process;

7. Calls for a layered, modular and pilot-based approach to the implementation of the new regimes; stresses that those regimes must effectively reduce compliance complexity for participating companies; emphasises that their provisions should be designed in a coherent manner with existing or planned Union initiatives in the field of taxation, in order to avoid further fragmentation and legal uncertainty; insists, on the establishment of a roadmap setting out what should be added and when, reflecting the urgency of this reform for the Union economy and the need to create a predictable environment for firms and investors, and to be continuously adjusted through a periodic review process.

Or. en

Amendment 122

Damian Boeselager

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 7

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

7. Calls for an immediate and comprehensive approach focused on developing a 28th corporate law framework, including provisions on the taxation of employee stock ownership plans (ESOPs) whilst ensuring a continuous adjustments of rules, if necessary as a result of periodic review procedures;

Or. en

Amendment 123

Marco Falcone, Fulvio Martusciello, Herbert Dorfmann

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 7

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

7. Calls for a layered and modular approach based on an initial structured pilot phase, accompanied by a clear, time-based roadmap, measurable intermediate targets and transparent evaluation criteria, as a basis for progressive extension of the regime depending on the results achieved;

Or. it

Amendment 124

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 7

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

7. Calls for a layered and modular approach for the 28th regime with corporate law in the forefront; yet insists on a roadmap, of what should be added and when, to be known from the outset and continuously adjusted as a result of a periodic review process;

Or. en

Amendment 125

Bruno Gonçalves, Niels Fuglsang, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 7

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

7. Calls for a layered, modular and pilot-based approach with corporate law in the forefront; recommends the adoption of a roadmap regarding what should be added and when, to be continuously adjusted as a result of a periodic democratic review process;

Or. en

Amendment 126

Marco Falcone, Fulvio Martusciello

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 7 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

7a. Highlights the need to provide a simplified access regime for small and medium-sized enterprises, based on administrative obligations proportional to their operational capacity and on a path of gradual integration into the full framework of the 28th regime;

Or. it

Amendment 127

Fernando Navarrete Rojas, Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 8

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

8. Emphasises that the scope of the 28th regime, notably in the area of taxation, should be limited to, as a starting point, a restricted category of companies, such as innovative firms or cross-border growth-oriented start-ups, being defined by the criteria such as their R&D expenditure, size, qualification of their workforce, ownership of intellectual property rights or defined by the forthcoming European innovation act;

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 128

Pascal Canfin, Billy Kelleher

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 8

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

8. Is of the opinion that the scope of the 28th regime, notably in the area of taxation, should be opened to all limited liability companies, and specifically targeted to the needs of young, high-growth and innovative companies; stresses that a limited scope would create administrative burden and uncertainty for companies as they can easily be in and out of the 28th regime due to changes in their size and R&D expenditure;

Or. en

Amendment 129

Bruno Gonçalves, Niels Fuglsang

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 8

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

8. Emphasises that the scope of the 28th regime, notably in the area of taxation, should be limited to, as a starting point, a restricted category of companies, such as innovative firms or cross-border growth-oriented start-ups, being defined by the criteria such as their R&;D expenditure, size, qualification of their workforce, ownership of intellectual property rights or defined by the forthcoming European innovation act;

8. Emphasises that the scope of the 28th regime, notably in the area of taxation, must be able to include innovative firms or cross-border growth-oriented start-ups;

Or. en

Amendment 130

Luděk Niedermayer

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 8

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

8. Emphasises that the scope of the 28+ regime, should be limited to a restricted category of companies, such as innovative firms or cross-border growth-oriented scale-ups, being defined by the criteria such as their R&D expenditure, size, qualification of their workforce, ownership of intellectual property rights or defined by the forthcoming European innovation act;

Or. en

Amendment 131

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 8

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

8. Emphasises that the scope of the 28th regime, in the area of taxation, should be limited to, as a starting point, innovative companies, innovative start-ups and innovative scale-up as defined in the Commission recommendation of 18th March 2026;

Or. en

Amendment 132

Marco Falcone, Fulvio Martusciello

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 8

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Or. it

Amendment 133

Ľudovít Ódor

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 8

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

8. Emphasises in this context, that aiming at (political) feasibility, the scope of the 28th regime, notably in the area of taxation, should be limited to, as a starting point, a restricted category of companies, such as innovative firms or cross-border growth-oriented start-ups, being defined by the criteria such as their R&D expenditure, size, qualification of their workforce, ownership of intellectual property rights or defined by the forthcoming European innovation act;

Or. en

Amendment 134

Jussi Saramo, Manon Aubry, Anthony Smith

on behalf of The Left Group

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 8 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

8 a. Warns that, although the 28th regime is being presented as an optional framework specifically targeted at start-ups and innovative companies, there is a serious risk that it will gradually be extended to all companies across the board; notes that, while start-ups and venture capital investors are among its most visible supporters, several major corporate lobby groups are also actively promoting such a regime and explicitly calling for it to be made available to all businesses; notes in particular that France Digitale, in its non-paper to the Commission, called for the 28th regime to be “an optional framework available at incorporation in each Member State, alongside existing national regimes”, to be “open to all businesses across the continent, not just SMEs or innovative companies”, while “ensuring existing companies can transition into it”; notes further that EuroCommerce has likewise called for “clear, unified regulations for businesses of all sizes, from startups to established companies”; stresses, therefore, that any such regime must remain strictly limited in scope and must under no circumstances become a general parallel framework open to all companies;

Or. en

Amendment 135

Jussi Saramo, Manon Aubry, Anthony Smith, Pasquale Tridico

on behalf of The Left Group

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 8 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

8 b. Stresses that, even where the scope of the 28th regime is formally limited to companies fulfilling specific criteria, there is a significant risk that multinational enterprises will artificially restructure their activities or corporate arrangements in order to appear to meet those criteria and thereby benefit from the regime’s advantages, especially in tax matters; calls, therefore, for strict substance-based eligibility requirements, robust anti-abuse provisions and effective monitoring mechanisms to ensure that the regime cannot be misused for tax avoidance, regulatory arbitrage or unfair competitive advantage;

Or. en

Amendment 136

Luděk Niedermayer

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 8 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

8 a. Emphasises that in order to preserve Member States’ control over a substantial part of their tax policies as provided under existing legal frameworks, any harmonisation of tax regimes for firms within the 28th regime should be limited to a clearly defined subset of firms eligible to use the regime;

Considers that such harmonisation, referred to as the 28+ regime, should be restricted primarily to innovative start-ups and scale-ups, which typically generate only limited corporate income tax revenues for Member States;

Or. en

Amendment 137

Roberts Zīle

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 8 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

8 a. Reiterates that the most effective and inclusive way to support SMEs, start-ups, and scale-ups is through a horizontal reduction of existing regulatory burdens across all 27 Member States; calls on the Commission to prioritise the rigorous enforcement of existing single market rules and the swift reduction of red tape over the creation of parallel, highly complex regulatory regimes that may inadvertently lead to legal fragmentation and uncertainty for the broader business community;

Or. en

Amendment 138

Roberts Zīle

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 8 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

8 a. Expresses concern that extensive harmonisation in tax and labour law risks disproportionately favouring the economic models, interests, and preferences of larger Member States; calls for ironclad guarantees that any optional pan-European business framework will not create competitive disadvantages for smaller Member States or restrict their sovereign ability to tailor their regulatory and fiscal frameworks to the companies they consider most vital to their specific economic needs

Or. en

Amendment 139

Lídia Pereira

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 8 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

8 a. Calls for fiscal measures that encourage structured cooperation between eligible companies and Europe’s research base, including favourable treatment for co-development agreements, technology-transfer arrangements and shared IP commercialisation with universities, research institutes and technology transfer offices;

Or. en

Amendment 140

Georgios Aftias

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 8 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

8a. Stresses that participating companies should benefit from significantly simplified reporting obligations, including the introduction of minimum annual tax reporting and the use of fully automated digital compliance procedures;

Or. el

Amendment 141

Pierre Pimpie, Enikő Győri, Auke Zijlstra, Tomáš Kubín

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 8 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

8 a. Stresses that the 28th regime should remain strictly optional, limited in scope, and subject to regular review, in order to ensure that it serves innovative companies without becoming a de facto harmonised default regime across the Union.

Or. en

Amendment 142

Georgios Aftias

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 8 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

8b. Underlines that all tax incentives under the 28th regime should be fully compatible with State aid rules and designed in a way that avoids harmful tax competition, while ensuring a level playing field within the single market;

Or. el

Amendment 143

Pierre Pimpie, Enikő Győri, Auke Zijlstra, Tomáš Kubín

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 8 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

8 b. Emphasises that the primary purpose of the 28th regime should be to support start-ups, scale-ups and genuinely innovative SMEs facing disproportionate cross-border administrative burdens, rather than to create new optimisation opportunities for large groups.

Or. en

Amendment 144

Paolo Borchia

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 8 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

8 a. Considers that the introduction of a simplified optional framework could be a potential tool for simplification, in particular for small enterprises operating cross-border;

Or. en

Amendment 145

Paolo Borchia

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 9

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

9. Reiterates that companies which voluntarily opt into the 28th regime should be bound by its rules and that their choice to opt into the 28th regime must be automatically recognised in the Member States’ legal frameworks; recalls that an exit from the regime must be mandatory upon the achievement of an initial public offering or after the specified period has elapsed;

9. Reiterates that companies which voluntarily opt into the 28th regime should be bound by its rules and that their choice to opt into the 28th regime must be automatically recognised in the Member States’ legal frameworks; recognises the potential benefit of the 28th regime for startups and scale-ups, while noting that its current design may not adequately reflect the structural characteristics of traditional SMEs, which are generally less oriented towards risk capital and require greater organisational stability; calls therefore for the introduction of proportionate and differentiated mechanisms;

Or. en

Amendment 146

Pascal Canfin, Billy Kelleher

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 9

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

9. Reiterates that companies which voluntarily opt into the 28th regime should be bound by its rules and that their choice to opt into the 28th regime must be automatically recognised in the Member States’ legal frameworks; recalls that an exit from the regime must be mandatory upon the achievement of an initial public offering or after the specified period has elapsed;

Or. en

Amendment 147

Fernando Navarrete Rojas, Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 9

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

9. Reiterates that companies which voluntarily opt into the 28th regime should be bound by its rules and that their choice to opt into the 28th regime must be automatically recognised in the Member States’ legal frameworks; recalls that an exit from the regime must be mandatory upon the achievement of an initial public offering or after the specified period has elapsed;

Or. en

Amendment 148

Bruno Gonçalves, Niels Fuglsang

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 9

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

9. Reiterates that companies which voluntarily opt into the 28th regime should be bound by its rules and that their choice to opt into the 28th regime must be automatically recognised in the Member States’ legal frameworks; recalls that an exit from the regime must be mandatory upon the achievement of an initial public offering or after the specified period has elapsed;

9. Reiterates that companies which voluntarily opt into the 28th regime should be bound by its rules and that their choice to opt into the 28th regime must be automatically recognised in the Member States’ legal frameworks; recalls that an exit from the regime must be subject to specific criteria, such as a mandatory exit upon the achievement of an initial public offering; notes that conditions of exit must be established for companies deciding to opt-out on their own initiative, including notice requirements, possible minimum participation periods, and the entry into force of the withdrawal;

Or. en

Amendment 149

Ľudovít Ódor

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 9

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

9. Reiterates that companies which voluntarily opt into the 28th regime should be bound by its rules and that their choice to opt into the 28th regime must be automatically recognised in the Member States’ legal frameworks; recalls that an exit from the regime must be mandatory upon the achievement of an initial public offering or after the specified period has elapsed;

9. Reiterates that companies which voluntarily opt into the 28th regime should be bound by its rules and that their choice to opt into the 28th regime must be automatically recognised in the Member States’ legal frameworks; recalls that entry into the 28th regime shall be optional, yet the exit shall be mandatory upon achievement of an Initial Public Offering (IPO) stage or after the duly specified period of time will have elapsed; highlights in this context that the non-discrimination principle vis-à-vis national company legal forms shall be applied;

Or. en

Amendment 150

Luděk Niedermayer

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 9

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

9. Reiterates that companies which voluntarily opt into the 28th regime should be bound by its rules and that their choice to opt into the 28th regime must be automatically recognised in the Member States’ legal frameworks; recalls that an exit from the regime must be mandatory upon the achievement of an initial public offering or after the specified period has elapsed;

9. Reiterates that companies which voluntarily opt into the 28+ regime should be bound by its rules and that their choice must be automatically recognised in the Member States’ legal frameworks; recalls that an exit from the 28+ regime must be mandatory upon the achievement of clearly defined criteria, which may include an initial public offering or after the specified period has elapsed; Once the relevant criteria for exit are met, sufficient time must be provided to allow for the necessary transformation of companies;

Or. en

Amendment 151

Lídia Pereira

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 9

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

9. Reiterates that companies which voluntarily opt into the 28th regime should be bound by its rules and that their choice to opt into the 28th regime must be automatically recognised in the Member States’ legal frameworks; recalls that an exit from the regime must be mandatory upon the achievement of an initial public offering or after the specified period has elapsed;

9. Reiterates that companies which voluntarily opt into the 28th regime should be bound by its rules and that their choice to opt into the 28th regime must be automatically recognised in the Member States’ legal frameworks; stresses that any transition out of the regime should be predictable and gradual, with appropriate grandfathering of employee participation schemes, loss carry-forwards and other accrued rights, and should not be triggered solely by the passage of time;

Or. en

Amendment 152

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 9

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

9. Reiterates that companies which voluntarily opt into the 28th regime should be bound by its rules and that their choice to opt into the 28th regime must be automatically recognised in the Member States’ legal frameworks; recalls that an exit from the regime must be mandatory upon the achievement of an initial public offering or after the specified period has elapsed;

9. Reiterates that companies which voluntarily opt into the 28th regime should be bound by its rules and that their choice to opt into the 28th regime must be automatically recognised in all Member States’ legal frameworks to operate as any other nationally registered company on its market; recalls that an exit from the regime must be mandatory upon the achievement of an initial public offering;

Or. en

Amendment 153

Damian Boeselager

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 9

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

9. Reiterates that companies which voluntarily opt into the 28th regime should be bound by its rules and that their choice to opt into the 28th regime must be automatically recognised in the Member States’ legal frameworks; recalls that an exit from the regime must be mandatory upon the achievement of an initial public offering or after the specified period has elapsed;

9. Reiterates that companies which opt into the 28th regime should be bound by its rules and must be automatically recognised in the Member States’ legal frameworks to operate as any other nationally registered company on its market; recalls that an exit from the regime must be mandatory upon the achievement of an initial public offering or after the specified period has elapsed;

Or. en

Amendment 154

Ľudovít Ódor

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 9 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

9 a. Acknowledges that legal form neutrality and fiscal non-discrimination are essential in ensuring sufficient demand for the regime; recalls that the Parent Subsidiary Directive and Interest and Royalties Directive’s extension to the companies in the 28th regime shall not be omitted8d;

_________________

8d European Parliament, Policy Department for Economy and Growth; Filip Debelva, Joris Luts, Anne Mieke Vandekerkhove, Niels Bammens study ‘Feasibility of a 28th Tax Regime and Its Potential to Support EU Competitiveness’, 2026

Or. en

Amendment 155

Luděk Niedermayer

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 10

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 156

Paolo Borchia

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 10

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

10. Is of the opinion that in the early stages of a company’s life cycle, speed and simplicity, without the need to establish separate legal forms in each Member State, are crucial in transforming an innovative concept into a viable entity; stresses that for the 28th regime a single, fully digital registration at the One-Stop Shop, along with the provision of a single tax number, including fully standardised documentation, templates and a single tax-filing interface, and respect for the English-first principle, must be set by default; takes note of the interconnection of national business registers through the Business Registers Interconnection System (BRIS), while highlighting remaining uncertainties regarding the allocation of competences, as well as control, verification and liability mechanisms concerning registered data; calls for further clarification to ensure legal certainty and overall system reliability;

Or. en

Amendment 157

Roberts Zīle

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 10

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

10. Is of the opinion that in the early stages of a company’s life cycle, speed and simplicity, without the need to establish separate legal forms in each Member State, are crucial in transforming an innovative concept into a viable entity; stresses that for the 28th regime a single, fully digital registration at the One-Stop Shop, along with the provision of a single tax number, including fully standardised documentation, templates and a single tax-filing interface must be set by default; supports the possibility of drawing up the articles of association and related documentation in English, provided that they are also available in the relevant official language of the Member State in which the company is established, and strictly stresses that the English version must not enjoy a higher legal value than the corresponding national language version

Or. en

Amendment 158

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea, Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 10

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Or. es

Amendment 159

Lídia Pereira

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 10

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 160

Marco Falcone, Fulvio Martusciello

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 10

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

10. Is of the opinion that in the early stages of a company’s life cycle, speed and simplicity, without the need to establish separate legal forms in each Member State, are crucial in transforming an innovative concept into a viable entity; stresses that for the 28th regime a single, fully digital registration at the One-Stop Shop, along with the provision of a single tax number, including fully standardised documentation, templates and a single tax-filing interface, and respect for the principle of a functional multilingualism that ensures operational efficiency in accordance with the EU's linguistic diversity, must be set by default, in order to reduce administrative costs and facilitate faster access to the single market;

Or. it

Amendment 161

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 10

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

10. Is of the opinion that in the early stages of a company’s life cycle, speed and simplicity, without the need to establish separate legal forms in each Member State, are crucial in transforming an innovative concept into a viable entity able to scale across borders; stresses that for the 28th regime a single, fully digital registration at the One-Stop Shop, along with the provision of a single tax number, including fully standardised documentation, templates and a single tax-filing interface, and respect for the English-first principle, must be set by default; highlights the synergies with the proposal on European Business Wallets, designed to establish a seamless and secure environment for digital interaction between economic operators and public sector bodies;

Or. en

Amendment 162

Ľudovít Ódor

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 10

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

10. Is of the opinion that in the early stages of a company’s life cycle, speed and simplicity, without the need to establish separate legal forms in each Member State, are crucial in transforming an innovative concept into a viable entity; stresses that for the 28th regime a single, fully digital registration at the One-Stop Shop, along with the provision of a single tax number, including fully standardised documentation, templates and a single tax-filing interface, and respect for the English-first principle, must be set by default; reminds that the 28th regime shall combine clear legal architecture, meaningful and ex ante quantifiable benefit to companies, and robust institutional support;

Or. en

Amendment 163

Luděk Niedermayer, Michalis Hadjipantela

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 10 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

10 a. Is of the opinion that, in the early stages of a company’s life cycle, speed and simplicity are crucial in transforming an innovative concept into a viable entity, without the need to establish separate legal forms in each Member State; stresses that, for the 28th regime, a single, fully digital registration at the One-Stop Shop, along with the provision of a single tax number, including fully standardised documentation, templates and a single tax-filing interface, and respect for the English-first principle, must be set by default;

Or. en

Amendment 164

Luděk Niedermayer

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 10 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

10 b. Notes that the One-Stop Shop, or alternatively a different central hub, should also function as a digital platform supporting companies throughout their life cycle within the 28+ regime; highlights that it should provide streamlined access to relevant regulatory, tax and administrative information across Member States, ensuring transparency and legal certainty; underlines that such a system should significantly reduce administrative burdens and facilitate the seamless cross-border operation and scaling-up of companies;

Or. en

Amendment 165

Piotr Müller, Marlena Maląg

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 10 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

10a. Calls for full implementation of the once-only principle under the 28th regime. Stresses that the regime’s digital interface must be fully interoperable with national systems in order to avoid duplication of reporting obligations and minimise the administrative burden for the smallest operators;

Or. pl

Amendment 166

Paolo Borchia

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 10 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

10 a. consider the “once-only” principle as a possible element of simplification, while noting that its effective implementation presupposes a high level of interoperability between national systems, the adoption of common data standards and a clear allocation of responsibilities among competent authorities;

Or. en

Amendment 167

Georgios Aftias

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 10 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

10a. Underlines the need for specific and simplified tax rules for SMEs opting into the 28th regime, including lower tax rates in the early stages of development and simplified methods for calculating the tax base;

Or. el

Amendment 168

Marco Falcone, Fulvio Martusciello

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 10 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

10b. Calls for the promotion of the full digitalisation and cross-border interoperability of public services supporting companies, in order to limit the administrative burden and boost the efficiency of the internal market;

Or. it

Amendment 169

Bruno Gonçalves, Niels Fuglsang, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 10 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

10 a. Stresses that the 28th tax regime should not lead to the creation of shell or letterbox companies, as such practices undermine regulatory integrity, distort fair competition and erode genuine economic activity within the Union; underlines the 28th tax regime must never become a tool to increase the risk of regulatory arbitrage by companies and “tax shopping” and must, under no circumstances, become a vehicle to unduly reduce or circumvent existing levels of taxation at Union or national level;

Or. en

Amendment 170

Ľudovít Ódor

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 10 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

10 a. Without prejudice to any further protective measures, emphasises that anti-tax avoidance measures laid down by the existing EU law must be applied thoroughly;

Or. en

Amendment 171

Bruno Gonçalves, Niels Fuglsang, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 10 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

10 b. Considers that a company for which infringement of binding rules regarding fraud, tax, social security evasion or employee participation have been officially established, should not be allowed to opt in to the 28th tax regime;

Or. en

Amendment 172

Marco Falcone, Fulvio Martusciello, Herbert Dorfmann

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 10 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

10a. Affirms the importance of promoting the full digitalisation of the administrative and decision-making processes of companies, including the possibility of setting up, managing and closing down businesses entirely by digital means;

Or. it

Amendment 173

Pierre Pimpie, Enikő Győri, Auke Zijlstra, Tomáš Kubín

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 10 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

10 a. Stresses that the success of the 28th regime should be measured by tangible reductions in registration time, compliance costs and legal uncertainty, and not by the degree of tax harmonisation it may trigger.

Or. en

Amendment 174

Damian Boeselager

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 11

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

11. Highlights that the single accounting standards must be applied by default;

11. Highlights that companies operating under the 28th regime should apply a single, harmonised accounting standard by default across all participating Member States, in order to reduce compliance costs, facilitate cross-border operations and improve comparability for investors;

Or. en

Amendment 175

Ľudovít Ódor

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 11

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

11. Highlights that the single accounting standards must be applied by default;

11. Highlights, as transparent, accountable and efficient financial reporting frameworks being a necessity, that Single Accounting Standards shall be applied by default;

Or. en

Amendment 176

Luděk Niedermayer

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 11

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

11. Highlights that the single accounting standards must be applied by default;

11. Highlights that the single accounting standards must be applied by default; building, where appropriate, on internationally recognised standards such as IFRS;

Or. en

Amendment 177

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 11 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

11 a. Stresses that only companies with real economic activities within the EU should have access to the 28th regime; reiterates its disappointment of the Commission’s decision to withdraw the Unshell directive, that aimed at ensuring that companies with no or minimal activity within the EU do not benefit from tax advantage; urges the Commission to explore alternative for anti-abuse measures, and in particular regarding the 28th regime; calls on the Commission and Member States to monitor that the 28th regime is not used to create letter-box companies or used as a vehicle for regulatory and tax arbitrage purposes;

Or. en

Amendment 178

Georgios Aftias

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 11 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

11a. Calls for the establishment of mechanisms to ensure tax stability and predictability for companies under the regime, including non-worsening clauses for a defined period, in order to enhance investment certainty;

Or. el

Amendment 179

Pierre Pimpie, Enikő Győri, Auke Zijlstra, Tomáš Kubín

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 12

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

12. Stresses that the 28th regime should not pre-empt broader unresolved debates on corporate tax base harmonisation, and should instead focus on reducing administrative burdens and legal uncertainty for participating companies; recalls that the Commission’s proposal on EU Inc.8a was intentionally designed as a targeted and optional company law framework, with only limited tax implications, in order to remain politically and legally workable; stresses therefore that the 28th regime should not be used to revive unresolved debates on a harmonised or consolidated corporate tax base, which belong to separate legislative discussions requiring Member States’ full political consent;

_________________

8a Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL on THE 28TH REGIME CORPORATE LEGAL FRAMEWORK - 'EU INC.'

Or. en

Amendment 180

Roberts Zīle

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 12

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

12. Stresses that reducing tax-related compliance burdens for cross-border businesses must focus strictly on procedural simplification and administrative coordination; explicitly rejects the introduction of a single consolidated corporate tax base or any uniform method for determining taxable income under the 28th regime, as this represents an unjustified shift towards substantive tax harmonisation

Or. en

Amendment 181

Billy Kelleher

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 12

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

12. Proposes that the 28th regime should seek to simplify tax administration and reduce cross-border uncertainty, including, where possible, by standardising tax returns, avoiding duplicative returns, improving communication amongst tax authorities, and the application of the "digital first" principle; notes that, drawing from the debt-equity bias reduction allowance proposal, the regime should ensure neutrality between debt and equity financing;

Or. en

Amendment 182

Herbert Dorfmann, Marco Falcone

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 12

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

12. Proposes that the 28th regime must aim for a single consolidated corporate tax base for participating companies across the EU; recalls earlier initiatives, such as the Common Corporate Tax Base, the CCCTB, BEFIT, and the Head Office Tax System for SMEs model, and proposes that the 28th regime should build on this acquis to provide a uniform, simplified and immediately operational method for determining taxable income, thereby eliminating fragmentation in tax base calculation and reducing cross-border uncertainty; stresses that the harmonised tax base must be more streamlined and administratively lighter than existing proposals, particularly for small innovative companies in the early stages of growth and that it must under no circumstances be used as a mechanism to harmonise corporate tax rates, which remain exclusively within the competence of Member States; notes that, drawing from the debt-equity bias reduction allowance proposal, the regime should ensure neutrality between debt and equity financing, and that this neutrality is particularly important for start-ups and scale-ups that rely primarily on equity financing in the early stages of their development;

Or. en

Amendment 183

Bruno Gonçalves, Niels Fuglsang, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 12

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

12. Considers that lack of corporate tax policy harmonisation represents a significant obstacle to cross-border economic activity within the Union, while also increasing risks of aggressive tax planning; proposes that the 28th regime must aim for a single consolidated corporate tax base for participating companies across the EU; recalls earlier initiatives, such as the Common Corporate Tax Base, the CCCTB, BEFIT, and the Head Office Tax System for SMEs model, and proposes that the 28th regime should provide a uniform method for determining taxable income, thereby eliminating fragmentation in tax base calculation and reducing cross-border uncertainty; notes that, drawing from the debt-equity bias reduction allowance proposal, the regime should ensure neutrality between debt and equity financing;

Or. en

Amendment 184

Luděk Niedermayer

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 12

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

12. Proposes that, to provide a clear, effective and transparent tax regime, the 28 + regime should be based on a single consolidated corporate tax base for participating companies across the EU; recalls earlier initiatives, such as the Common Corporate Tax Base, the CCCTB, BEFIT, and the Head Office Tax System for SMEs model, and proposes that the 28+ regime and to some extent 28th regime, should provide a uniform method for determining taxable income, thereby eliminating fragmentation in tax base calculation and reducing cross-border uncertainty; notes that, drawing on the debt-equity bias reduction allowance proposal (DEBRA), the regime should ensure neutrality between debt and equity financing;

Or. en

Amendment 185

Jussi Saramo, Manon Aubry, Anthony Smith

on behalf of The Left Group

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 12

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 186

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 12

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 187

Ľudovít Ódor

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 12

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 188

Bruno Gonçalves, Niels Fuglsang, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 12

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

12. Proposes that the 28th tax regime must aim for a single consolidated corporate tax base for participating companies across the EU; recalls earlier initiatives, such as the Common Corporate Tax Base, the CCCTB, BEFIT, and the Head Office Tax System for SMEs model, and proposes that the 28th tax regime should provide a uniform method for determining taxable income, thereby eliminating fragmentation in tax base calculation and reducing cross-border uncertainty, but also addressing prevalent loopholes that enable aggressive tax planning; notes that the regime should promote neutrality between debt and equity financing;

Or. en

Amendment 189

Pascal Canfin

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 12

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

12. Proposes that the 28th regime must aim in a later proposal for a single consolidated corporate tax base for participating companies across the EU; recalls earlier initiatives, such as the Common Corporate Tax Base, the CCCTB, BEFIT, and the Head Office Tax System for SMEs model, and proposes that the 28th regime should provide a uniform method for determining taxable income, thereby eliminating fragmentation in tax base calculation and reducing cross-border uncertainty; notes that, drawing from the debt-equity bias reduction allowance proposal, the regime should ensure neutrality between debt and equity financing;

Or. en

Amendment 190

Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 12 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

12 a. Regrets that the BEFIT proposal did not provide for genuine consolidation at Union level, but rather for the aggregation and subsequent allocation of tax results; further regrets that it sought to introduce Pillar One at EU level through a factor-based formulary apportionment despite the absence of an OECD agreement on Pillar One; stresses that the 28th regime should instead prioritise genuine consolidation in order to ensure an effective cross-border offset of losses, thereby incentivising cross-border investment;

Or. en

Amendment 191

Jussi Saramo, Manon Aubry, Anthony Smith

on behalf of The Left Group

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 12 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

12 a. Recalls that the existence of 27 different corporate income tax systems in the Union creates significant compliance costs and legal uncertainty and may distort competition, in particular where multinational enterprises exploit mismatches and differences between national systems to engage in aggressive tax planning, thereby placing SMEs at a relative disadvantage; stresses, therefore, that any tax component of the 28th regime should build, to the greatest extent possible, on a common corporate tax base at Union level and on formulary apportionment, as envisaged in previous Union proposals such as the CCCTB;

Or. en

Amendment 192

Pierre Pimpie, Enikő Győri, Auke Zijlstra, Tomáš Kubín

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 13

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

13. Proposes that, even in the absence of a single consolidated corporate tax base, losses incurred in one Member State must be recognised throughout the regime and should be permitted to be carried forward or offset against profits generated elsewhere within the system, and that automatic cross-border loss relief should be considered essential for innovative and high-growth firms; acknowledges that in the absence of a harmonised definition of losses, tax deferral represents an option;

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 193

Luděk Niedermayer

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 13

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 194

Roberts Zīle

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 13

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 195

Jussi Saramo, Manon Aubry, Anthony Smith, Pasquale Tridico

on behalf of The Left Group

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 13

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 196

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 13

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

13. Invites the Commission to propose a harmonised definition of losses, in order to enable the recognition of losses incurred in another Member State than the 28th regime company head-office jurisdiction;

Or. en

Amendment 197

Bruno Gonçalves, Niels Fuglsang, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 13

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

13. Proposes that, in the absence of a single consolidated corporate tax base, losses incurred in one Member State could be recognised throughout the regime and should be permitted to be carried forward within strict limits or offset against profits generated elsewhere within the system, and that automatic cross-border loss relief should be considered essential for innovative and high-growth firms, provided that transparency and anti-abuse mechanisms are duly in place;

Or. en

Amendment 198

Billy Kelleher

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 13

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

13. Proposes that losses incurred in one Member State must be recognised throughout the regime and should be permitted to be carried forward or offset against profits generated elsewhere within the system, and that automatic cross-border loss relief should be considered essential for innovative and high-growth firms; acknowledges that in the absence of a harmonised definition of losses, tax deferral represents an option;

Or. en

Amendment 199

Ľudovít Ódor

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 13

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

_________________

8e European Parliament, Policy Department for Economy and Growth; Filip Debelva, Joris Luts, Anne Mieke Vandekerkhove, Niels Bammens study ‘Feasibility of a 28th Tax Regime and Its Potential to Support EU Competitiveness’, 2026

Or. en

Amendment 200

Luděk Niedermayer

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 13 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

13 a. Is of the opinion that, for innovative firms, start-ups and scale-ups, certain tax principles in the area of corporate income law are essential: losses incurred in one Member State must be recognised throughout the regime and should be permitted to be carried forward or offset against profits generated elsewhere within the system, and that automatic cross-border loss relief should be considered important for innovative and high-growth firms;

Or. en

Amendment 201

Fernando Navarrete Rojas, Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 14

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

14. Proposes that the consolidated tax base be appropriated among the Member States using a pre-agreed formula reflecting real economic activity, such as sales, labour and tangible assets, replacing complex intra-group transfer pricing disputes within the regime with a transparent allocation method;

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 202

Pierre Pimpie, Enikő Győri, Auke Zijlstra, Tomáš Kubín

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 14

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 203

Billy Kelleher

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 14

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 204

Roberts Zīle

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 14

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 205

Jussi Saramo, Manon Aubry, Anthony Smith

on behalf of The Left Group

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 14

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

14. Proposes that the consolidated tax base be allocated among the Member States using a pre-agreed formula reflecting real economic activity, such as sales, labour and tangible assets, replacing complex intra-group transfer pricing disputes within the regime with a transparent allocation method; stresses that this would be both a simplification tool and an instrument to fight tax avoidance;

Or. en

Amendment 206

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 14

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 207

Bruno Gonçalves, Niels Fuglsang, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 14

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

14. Proposes that the consolidated tax base be appropriated among the Member States using a pre-agreed formula reflecting real economic activity, such as sales, labour, tangible assets and digital presence, replacing complex intra-group transfer pricing disputes within the regime with a transparent allocation method;

Or. en

Amendment 208

Ľudovít Ódor

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 14 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

14 a. Reminds that tax rates must remain within Member States’ competence and must be applied by the head-office tax authority through a single filling interface; recalls that an optional, internationally competitive rate for innovative growth companies could be applied to further strengthen global attractiveness;

Or. en

Amendment 209

Pierre Pimpie, Enikő Győri, Auke Zijlstra, Tomáš Kubín

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 15

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

15. Stresses that double taxation risks should be reduced through clearer rules, better coordination and existing dispute resolution tools, without creating a new binding EU-level tax arbitration mechanism;

Or. en

Amendment 210

Bruno Gonçalves, Niels Fuglsang, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 15

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

15. Stresses that double taxation must be prevented through, for instance, the uniform classification of capital gains and intra-regime payments, and the automatic mutual recognition of tax status;

Or. en

Amendment 211

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 15

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

15. Stresses that double taxation must be prevented through, for instance, the uniform classification of capital gains and intra-regime payments, and the automatic mutual recognition of tax status;

Or. en

Amendment 212

Jussi Saramo, Manon Aubry, Anthony Smith

on behalf of The Left Group

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 15

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

15. Stresses that double taxation must be prevented through, for instance, the uniform classification of capital gains and intra-regime payments, the automatic mutual recognition of tax status and a binding EU-level fast-track arbitration mechanism for dispute resolution; stresses, however, that such measures must under no circumstances lead to double non-taxation and that safeguards against tax avoidance and profit shifting must be built into the regime from the outset;

Or. en

Amendment 213

Damian Boeselager

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 15

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

15. Stresses that double taxation must be effectively prevented and eliminated through the uniform classification of capital gains and intra-regime payments, the automatic mutual recognition of tax status and a binding EU-level fast-track arbitration mechanism for dispute resolution with clear deadlines and an obligation to deliver a final outcome ;

Or. en

Amendment 214

Marco Falcone, Fulvio Martusciello

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 15

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

15. Stresses that double taxation must be prevented through, for instance, the uniform classification of capital gains and intra-regime payments, the automatic mutual recognition of tax status and a binding EU-level fast-track arbitration mechanism for dispute resolution, based on defined and legally binding terms for Member States;

Or. it

Amendment 215

Luděk Niedermayer

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 15

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 216

Jussi Saramo, Manon Aubry, Anthony Smith, Pasquale Tridico

on behalf of The Left Group

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 15 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

15 a. Warns that the 28th regime is being actively promoted by lobbying organisations such as France Digitale and the EU Inc campaign, as well as by the US-based tech industry coalition Chamber of Progress and by BusinessEurope, all of which have called for a broad optional EU-wide framework for companies and further simplification of corporate and regulatory rules; notes that some of the proposals advanced in this context, including ultra-fast incorporation procedures, would make proper due diligence more difficult and could, as trade union and academic experts have warned, heighten the risk of letterbox companies, forum shopping and social dumping; stresses that these lobbying efforts must be assessed against the broader reality that large multinational enterprises have repeatedly relied on aggressive tax planning strategies to exploit mismatches between tax systems and artificially lower their tax burden; insists, therefore, that the absolute priority must be to ensure that the 28th regime does not grant any new tax privileges, exemptions, reduced liabilities or avoidance opportunities, and that no company engaging in aggressive tax planning or lacking real economic substance should be allowed to benefit from this regime;

Or. en

Amendment 217

Ľudovít Ódor

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 15 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

15 a. Highlights that cross-border scaling up may entail frequent corporate mobility events and reorganisations, and with the intention of benefitting from the existing framework for tax-neutral operations, the tax framework accompanying the 28th regime should involve the extension of existing Union law, and should address mobility-related tax frictions through enhanced administrative coordination and greater substantive certainty while ensuring that any simplification measures remain subject to appropriate safeguards against abuse8f;

_________________

8f European Parliament, Policy Department for Economy and Growth; Filip Debelva, Joris Luts, Anne Mieke Vandekerkhove, Niels Bammens study ‘Feasibility of a 28th Tax Regime and Its Potential to Support EU Competitiveness’, 2026

Or. en

Amendment 218

Marco Falcone, Fulvio Martusciello, Herbert Dorfmann

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 15 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

15a. Calls for the introduction of EU minimum standards of investor protection, in order to boost trust in the markets and encourage cross-border investments;

Or. it

Amendment 219

Pierre Pimpie, Enikő Győri, Tomáš Kubín

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 16

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

16. Emphasises that to reduce compliance burdens, regime participants must operate under a centralised VAT framework, where a single EU VAT number and digital One-Stop Shop8 portal must cover declarations and refunds across the Member States; recalls that the objective should be procedural simplification rather than the harmonisation of VAT rates, enabling companies to expand without multiplying administrative interfaces;

16. Emphasises that procedural simplification in VAT compliance should build on existing One-Stop Shop8 tools and digitalisation efforts, without creating a centralised EU VAT framework or undermining Member States’ competence in tax administration;

_________________

8 The VAT in the Digital Age package (ViDA).

Or. en

Amendment 220

Luděk Niedermayer

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 16

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

16. Emphasises that to reduce compliance burdens, regime participants must operate under a centralised VAT framework, where a single EU VAT number and digital One-Stop Shop8 portal must cover declarations and refunds across the Member States; recalls that the objective should be procedural simplification rather than the harmonisation of VAT rates, enabling companies to expand without multiplying administrative interfaces;

16. Emphasises that to reduce compliance burdens, regime participants must operate under a centralised VAT framework, where a single EU VAT number and digital One-Stop Shop8 portal must cover declarations and refunds across the Member States, including through timely and efficient refund procedures and a reduced need for multiple registrations; highlights the importance of promoting the use of interoperable digital solutions, including e-invoicing, to simplify compliance, enhance transparency and reduce administrative costs; recalls that the objective should be procedural simplification rather than the harmonisation of VAT rates, enabling companies to expand without multiplying administrative interfaces;

_________________

8 The VAT in the Digital Age package (ViDA).

Or. en

Amendment 221

Jussi Saramo, Manon Aubry, Anthony Smith

on behalf of The Left Group

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 16

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

16. Emphasises that to reduce compliance burdens, regime participants must operate under a centralised VAT framework, where a single EU VAT number and digital One-Stop Shop8 portal must cover declarations and refunds across the Member States; recalls that the objective should be procedural simplification rather than the harmonisation of VAT rates, enabling companies to expand without multiplying administrative interfaces;

16. Emphasises that to reduce compliance burdens, regime participants must operate under a centralised VAT framework, where a single EU VAT number and digital One-Stop Shop8 portal must cover declarations and refunds across the Member States; recalls that the objective should be procedural simplification and fight against VAT fraud rather than the harmonisation of VAT rates, enabling companies to expand without multiplying administrative interfaces;

_________________

8 The VAT in the Digital Age package (ViDA).

Or. en

Amendment 222

Bruno Gonçalves, Niels Fuglsang

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 16

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

16. Emphasises that to reduce compliance burdens, regime participants must operate under a centralised VAT framework, where a single EU VAT number and digital One-Stop Shop8 portal must cover declarations and refunds across the Member States; recalls that the objective should be procedural simplification rather than the harmonisation of VAT rates, enabling companies to expand without multiplying administrative interfaces;

_________________

8 The VAT in the Digital Age package (ViDA).

Or. en

Amendment 223

Marco Falcone, Fulvio Martusciello

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 16 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

16a. Emphasises that the centralised VAT framework should ensure full interoperability with national systems for digital reporting and electronic invoicing, as well as robust fraud prevention mechanisms, efficient access to data for tax authorities and the correct allocation of revenues to the Member State of consumption, in accordance with national competences in rates;

Or. it

Amendment 224

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17. Highlights that cross-border capital flows must benefit from harmonised treatment, whereby dividends, interest and royalties between participating entities and their associated investment vehicles should be exempt from withholding tax; proposes that immediate recognition of tax residence must be achieved through a centralised EU digital registry, enabling streamlined digital clearance and eliminating manual refund delays9 ;

17. Proposes that immediate recognition of tax residence must be achieved through a centralised EU digital registry, enabling streamlined digital clearance and eliminating manual refund delays9 ;

_________________

9 Council Directive (EU) 2025/50 of 10 December 2024 on faster and safer relief of excess withholding taxes (OJ L, 2025/50, 10.1.2025, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2025/50/oj).

Or. en

Amendment 225

Roberts Zīle

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17. Highlights that cross-border capital flows must benefit from streamlined administrative procedures; proposes that immediate recognition of tax residence must be achieved through a centralised EU digital registry

_________________

9 Council Directive (EU) 2025/50 of 10 December 2024 on faster and safer relief of excess withholding taxes (OJ L, 2025/50, 10.1.2025, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2025/50/oj).

Or. en

Amendment 226

Pierre Pimpie, Enikő Győri, Auke Zijlstra, Tomáš Kubín

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17. Highlights that cross-border capital flows should benefit from faster, safer and more predictable withholding tax relief procedures, in particular through digitalisation and improved recognition of tax residence; stresses, however, that any simplification should preserve robust anti-abuse safeguards and should not result in broad exemptions that could facilitate aggressive tax planning or contribute to the erosion of national tax bases.

_________________

9 Council Directive (EU) 2025/50 of 10 December 2024 on faster and safer relief of excess withholding taxes (OJ L, 2025/50, 10.1.2025, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2025/50/oj).

Or. en

Amendment 227

Luděk Niedermayer

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17. Highlights that cross-border capital flows must benefit from a more coordinated and efficient treatment, whereby dividends, interest and royalties between participating entities and their associated investment vehicles should benefit from simplified and streamlined withholding tax procedures; proposes that immediate recognition of tax residence must be achieved through a centralised EU digital registry, enabling streamlined digital clearance and eliminating manual refund delays9 ;

_________________

9 Council Directive (EU) 2025/50 of 10 December 2024 on faster and safer relief of excess withholding taxes (OJ L, 2025/50, 10.1.2025, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2025/50/oj).

Or. en

Amendment 228

Jussi Saramo, Manon Aubry, Anthony Smith, Pasquale Tridico

on behalf of The Left Group

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17. Highlights that cross-border capital flows must benefit from harmonised treatment; proposes that immediate recognition of tax residence must be achieved through a centralised EU digital registry, enabling streamlined digital clearance and eliminating manual refund delays9 ;

_________________

9 Council Directive (EU) 2025/50 of 10 December 2024 on faster and safer relief of excess withholding taxes (OJ L, 2025/50, 10.1.2025, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2025/50/oj).

Or. en

Amendment 229

Jussi Saramo, Manon Aubry, Anthony Smith

on behalf of The Left Group

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17. Highlights that cross-border capital flows must benefit from harmonised treatment, whereby dividends, interest and royalties should be subject to effective withholding taxation in order to prevent profit shifting and double non-taxation; stresses that simplification should rely on coordinated procedures, improved relief-at-source and faster refund mechanisms, not on blanket exemptions from effective taxation ; proposes that immediate recognition of tax residence must be achieved through a centralised EU digital registry, enabling streamlined digital clearance and eliminating manual refund delays9 ;

_________________

9 Council Directive (EU) 2025/50 of 10 December 2024 on faster and safer relief of excess withholding taxes (OJ L, 2025/50, 10.1.2025, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2025/50/oj).

Or. en

Amendment 230

Ľudovít Ódor

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17. Highlights that cross-border capital flows within the regime shall benefit from harmonised treatment, whereby dividends, interest and royalties between participating entities and their associated investment vehicles should be exempt from withholding tax; proposes that immediate recognition of tax residence must be achieved through a centralised EU digital registry, enabling streamlined digital clearance procedures and eliminating manual refund delays identified as a key barrier to scaling in the EU9 ;

_________________

9 Council Directive (EU) 2025/50 of 10 December 2024 on faster and safer relief of excess withholding taxes (OJ L, 2025/50, 10.1.2025, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2025/50/oj).

Or. en

Amendment 231

Bruno Gonçalves, Niels Fuglsang, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17. Highlights that cross-border capital flows within the Union must benefit from harmonised treatment, whereby dividends, interest and royalties between participating entities and their associated investment vehicles should be subject to a common simplified withholding tax framework and minimum effective taxation; proposes that immediate recognition of tax residence must be achieved through a centralised EU digital registry, enabling streamlined digital clearance and eliminating manual refund delays9 ;

_________________

9 Council Directive (EU) 2025/50 of 10 December 2024 on faster and safer relief of excess withholding taxes (OJ L, 2025/50, 10.1.2025, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2025/50/oj).

Or. en

Amendment 232

Fernando Navarrete Rojas, Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17 a. Calls on the Commission to amend the annexes to Directive 2011/96/EU and Directive 2003/49/EC, where necessary, in order to ensure that companies operating under the 28th regime can fall within their personal scope, and to simplify and further harmonise the procedures for accessing the benefits of those directives;

Or. en

Amendment 233

Luděk Niedermayer

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 18

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

18. Calls for the development of a clear and effective definition of beneficial ownership;

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 234

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 18

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

18. Calls for the development of a clear and effective definition of beneficial ownership;

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 235

Ľudovít Ódor

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 18

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

18. Calls for the development of a clear and effective definition of beneficial ownership;

18. Calls for the development of a clear and effective definition of beneficial ownership, or at least a comprehensible and broadly accepted set of criteria upon which withholding tax relief shall be offered at source, and lengthy refund procedures shall be avoided, yet kept in situations when none of the criteria are met;

Or. en

Amendment 236

Jussi Saramo, Manon Aubry, Anthony Smith

on behalf of The Left Group

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 18

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

18. Calls for the development of a clear and effective definition of beneficial ownership;

18. Calls for the development of a clear and effective definition of beneficial ownership, with the fight against tax evasion, tax avoidance, money laundering and the misuse of shell and letterbox companies as the overriding priority;

Or. en

Amendment 237

Pierre Pimpie, Enikő Győri, Auke Zijlstra, Tomáš Kubín

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 19

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

19. Encourages Member States to promote simpler, more growth-friendly and legally certain tax treatment of employee stock options for innovative companies, in order to support talent attraction and long-term company growth, while fully preserving national competence over the timing of taxation, the qualification of income and the applicable tax rate.

Or. en

Amendment 238

Roberts Zīle

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 19

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

19. Recalls that the taxation of employee stock options remains a core competence of the Member States; stresses that any measures under the 28th regime must fully respect national competences and Member States' discretion in shaping their own tax models, avoiding any EU-level harmonisation of the timing of taxation or the classification of income

Or. en

Amendment 239

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 19

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

19. Takes note of the EU commission proposal on employee stock options, in particular that these should be taxed at disposal and benefit from the same tax treatment as applicable to other employee stock options; considers that employee stock options should be limited to SMEs, start-up and scale-ups and should not lead to unjustified different treatment of workers in larger companies;

Or. en

Amendment 240

Jussi Saramo, Manon Aubry, Anthony Smith

on behalf of The Left Group

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 19

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 241

Herbert Dorfmann, Marco Falcone

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 19

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

19. Proposes that, for companies participating in the 28th regime, employee and founder equity compensation - including stock options, warrants and restricted stock units - must be governed by a harmonised EU-level framework under which, first, taxation occurs exclusively at the moment of disposal of the underlying shares and not at grant, vesting or exercise and, second, that qualifying gains are treated as capital income subject to capital gains tax rather than employment income, therefore aligning employee incentives with long-term company growth, removing the deeply distorting effect of upfront taxation, and enabling innovative companies to attract and retain talent on terms comparable to those available in other competing jurisdictions; stresses that this harmonised treatment must apply uniformly across all participating Member States without possibility of national opt-out, given that any carve-out would reintroduce the cross-border complexity the regime is designed to eliminate;

Or. en

Amendment 242

Bruno Gonçalves, Niels Fuglsang, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 19

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

19. Proposes that EU employee stock options, in specific, should follow two conditions, firstly its taxation should occur at disposal, and secondly that gains should be treated as capital income rather than employment income, therefore aligning employee incentives with long-term company growth and removing the distorting effect of upfront taxation; is mindful of the need to rebalance the statutory tax rates of labour and capital across the Union, in order to ensure taxes on employment do not compare unfavourably to taxes on income from capital investments;

Or. en

Amendment 243

Damian Boeselager

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 19

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

19. Proposes that EU employee stock options respect two principles, firstly that taxation should occur at disposal and secondly that gains should be treated as capital income rather than employment income, therefore aligning employee incentives with long-term company growth and removing the distorting effect of upfront taxation; calls, in addition, for those principles to apply uniformly in cross-border situations and for no taxation to arise at grant, vesting or exercise for qualifying plans under the 28th regime

Or. en

Amendment 244

Luděk Niedermayer

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 19

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

19. Emphasises that uniform rules, or similar instruments, on EU employee stock options should be included as part of the 28+ regime and be a recommended standard within the 28th regime; the treatment shall respect two principles, firstly that taxation should occur at disposal and secondly that gains should be treated as capital income rather than employment income, therefore aligning employee incentives with long-term company growth and removing the distorting effect of upfront taxation;

Or. en

Amendment 245

Luděk Niedermayer

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 19 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

19 a. Stresses the role of employee share schemes and similar mechanisms in creating incentives for key personnel within such companies; key personnel, including founders and other essential employees whose skills and expertise are critical to the company’s development; emphasises that a transparent, economically sound and predictable tax regime for such instruments is essential to retain these companies within the Union.

Or. en

Amendment 246

Marco Falcone, Fulvio Martusciello

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 19 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

19a. Calls for strengthening the link between the 28th regime and EU policies on attracting skilled workers and on their mobility, in order to support the competitiveness and the integration of the EU labour market;

Or. it

Amendment 247

Damian Boeselager

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 20

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

20. Calls for a standardised EU valuation method providing safe harbour rules to determine share value in non-listed companies, preventing retroactive reassessments and reducing legal uncertainty;

20. Calls for a standardised EU valuation method providing safe harbour rules to determine share and stock option value in non-listed companies, preventing retroactive reassessments and reducing legal uncertainty, including to set the strike price to be determined on a clear and predictable basis across Member States; considers that such valuation should be recognised by participating tax administrations unless abuse, fraud or manifest error is demonstrated;

Or. en

Amendment 248

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 20

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

20. Calls for a standardised EU valuation method providing safe harbour rules to determine share value in non-listed companies, preventing retroactive reassessments and reducing legal uncertainty;

Or. en

Amendment 249

Bruno Gonçalves, Niels Fuglsang, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 21

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 250

Pierre Pimpie, Enikő Győri, Auke Zijlstra, Tomáš Kubín

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 21

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 251

Pascal Canfin, Billy Kelleher

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 21

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 252

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 21

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

21. Calls on the Commission to assess the need for guidelines or harmonisation within the field of labour law in a 28th regime, in particular with regards to taxation applicable for social security contributions, pension income, and cross-border and remote work situations, while clearly safeguarding workers’ and social rights and ensuring upward convergence;

Or. en

Amendment 253

Jussi Saramo, Manon Aubry, Anthony Smith

on behalf of The Left Group

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 21

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

21. Recalls that social security contributions and related employee taxation should be determined in accordance with the rules applicable in the place where the work is actually carried out; stresses that linking such contributions or taxes to the company’s head-office jurisdiction would create strong incentives for forum shopping and a race to the bottom in social contributions and workers’ rights;

Or. en

Amendment 254

Ľudovít Ódor

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 21

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

21. Emphasises that social security coordination, and the taxation within, should remain national, but simplified cross-border rules and teleworking safeguards shall be designed to prevent disproportionate administrative burdens for mobile or remote employees; recalls the option that social security contributions applicable to employees of the company participating in the 28th regime be determined according to the rules of the company’s head-office jurisdiction, thereby enhancing legal certainty and reducing cross-border administrative burdens;

Or. en

Amendment 255

Luděk Niedermayer

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 21

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

21. Recalls the option that social security contributions and pension income taxes applicable to employees of the company participating in the 28th regime be determined according to the rules of the company’s head-office jurisdiction for employees spending the majority of their working time in the respective country, thereby enhancing legal certainty and reducing cross-border administrative burdens; Calls for a greater clarity regarding the income status of employees not fulfilling this condition, in order to create a predictable environment for firms and employees, reduce administrative costs and the risk of double taxation, while limiting the risks of tax avoidance;

Or. en

Amendment 256

Paolo Borchia

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 21 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

21 a. Considers that ongoing and future initiatives in the field of labour mobility and cross-border teleworking should be carefully calibrated in order to avoid risks of social dumping and regulatory arbitrage, particularly in relation to differences in labour costs and employment conditions across Member States; in this regard, notes that the Communication COM(2026)320 accompanying the proposal establishing the 28th regime foresees the adoption of a future Fair Labour Mobility Package aimed, inter alia, at facilitating cross-border telework and the portability of skills; while such initiatives are, in principle, welcome as they seek to improve labour market matching and support mobility within the Single Market, their implementation should be carefully calibrated;

Or. en

Amendment 257

Paolo Borchia

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 21 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

21 b. Highlights the risk that excessive simplification may lead to social dumping, enabling undertakings to benefit from regulatory differentials between Member States in terms of labour costs, contractual conditions and levels of protection; underlines that extensive recourse to cross-border teleworking, in the absence of clear criteria on the applicable law, may give rise to regulatory arbitrage and distort competition between undertakings established in different jurisdictions; in this context, recalls that, as set out in recitals 14 and 83 of the proposal on the 28th regime, matters relating to labour law remain governed by the applicable national law; this principle is essential to ensure compliance with existing social legislation in the Member States; call therefore calls for greater clarity and coherence in the determination of the applicable law, in order to avoid legal uncertainty and the risk of opportunistic use of the regulatory framework;

Or. en

Amendment 258

Damian Boeselager

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 21 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

21 a. Calls for a simple and predictable allocation rule for labour taxation, payroll withholding, social security reporting and related employer compliance obligations for employees of companies participating in the 28th regime, with particular safeguards for cross-border and remote work situations; considers that, where appropriate, the head-office jurisdiction should serve as the primary point of administration in order to enhance legal certainty and reduce administrative burdens;

Or. en

Amendment 259

Georgios Aftias

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 21 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

21a. Stresses that companies under the 28th regime should benefit from targeted tax breaks for the creation of new jobs, including tax credits on wage costs and reduced employer contributions for net new recruitments;

Or. el

Amendment 260

Damian Boeselager

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 21 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

21 b. Calls for targeted rules ensuring tax certainty for employees who move between Member States between the granting of employee equity and the sale of the underlying shares, including streamlined one-stop digital employer reporting as well as the avoidance of double or multiple taxation at the point of sale of employee equity; stresses that any allocation of taxing rights should remain proportionate, simple and predictable;

Or. en

Amendment 261

Pascal Canfin, Billy Kelleher

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 21 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

21 a. Stresses that EU employee stock options under Regulation 2026/0074(COD) must address the question of convertability with stock options schemes across Europe to ease the conversion of existing companies to the 28th Regime;

Or. en

Amendment 262

Georgios Aftias

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 21 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

21b. Calls for the introduction of specific tax incentives for the recruitment of young and highly skilled workers, in particular through enhanced discounts for companies investing in skills, training and lifelong learning;

Or. el

Amendment 263

Jussi Saramo, Manon Aubry, Anthony Smith

on behalf of The Left Group

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 22

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

22. Stresses that transfer pricing complexity, in the absence of formulary apportionment, must be substantially reduced – safe harbours should apply to routine intra-group services and low-risk transactions, harmonised approaches should apply to intellectual property licensing and cost allocation should limit disputes;

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 264

Luděk Niedermayer

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 22

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

22. Stresses the importance of drawing on elements of the Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base (CCCTB) concept to reduce transfer pricing complexity, in the absence of formulary apportionment, must be substantially reduced;

Or. en

Amendment 265

Marco Falcone, Fulvio Martusciello

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 22

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

22. Stresses that transfer pricing complexity, in the absence of formulary apportionment, must be substantially reduced – safe harbours should apply on the basis of harmonised criteria at EU level, with the aim of ensuring predictability, reduction of litigation and uniformity of application among Member States;

Or. it

Amendment 266

Ľudovít Ódor

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 22

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

22. Stresses that preventing compliance costs from becoming a structural barrier to expansion, transfer pricing complexity, even in the absence of formulary apportionment, shall be substantially reduced: safe harbours should apply to routine intra-group services and low-risk transactions, harmonised approaches should apply to intellectual property licensing and cost allocation should limit disputes, while documentation requirements should be proportionate to company size and growth stage;

Or. en

Amendment 267

Bruno Gonçalves, Niels Fuglsang, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 22

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

22. Stresses that transfer pricing complexity, in the absence of formulary apportionment, must be substantially reduced – coordinated safe harbours should apply to routine intra-group services and low-risk transactions, harmonised approaches should apply to intellectual property licensing and cost allocation should limit disputes;

Or. en

Amendment 268

Fernando Navarrete Rojas, Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 22

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

22. Stresses that transfer pricing complexity must be substantially reduced – safe harbours should apply to routine intra-group services and low-risk transactions, harmonised approaches should apply to intellectual property licensing and cost allocation should limit disputes;

Or. en

Amendment 269

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 22 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

22 a. Regrets that although all Member States have national legislation in line with OECD Transfer Pricing guidelines, divergent application of those guidelines remain in the absence of an EU transfer pricing Directive; calls on the Commission to clearly specify the transfer pricing rules applicable to companies opting in to the 28th regime including a common definition of associated enterprises and of the notion of control;

Or. en

Amendment 270

Marco Falcone, Fulvio Martusciello

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 22 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

22a. Highlights the need to ensure the 28th regime is fully consistent with the EU's State aid framework, making sure that the tax measures envisaged do not create distortions of competition in the internal market; recognises, at the same time, the tool's role in reducing economic disparities;

Or. it

Amendment 271

Pierre Pimpie, Enikő Győri, Auke Zijlstra, Tomáš Kubín

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 23

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

23. Calls for uniform capital gains treatment and automatic double taxation relief to reduce cross-border uncertainty; calls for the establishment of a genuine EU-wide investor passport to eliminate the duplication of national supervisory requirements; stresses that this passport must serve as a single, digitally verified status that ensures an investor’s eligibility is automatically recognised across all Member States; is of the opinion that standardised investment instruments, including harmonised, convertible financing templates and model shareholder agreements, must be introduced to reduce transaction costs;

23. Calls for the reduction of unnecessary duplication in cross-border investment procedures, while avoiding the creation of new overly centralised supervisory or tax structures.

Or. en

Amendment 272

Bruno Gonçalves, Niels Fuglsang

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 23

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

23. Calls for harmonisation of capital gains definitions and treatment, as well as simplified double taxation relief to reduce cross-border uncertainty; suggests an assessment of an EU-wide investor passport serving as a single, digitally verified status that ensures an investor’s eligibility is automatically recognised across all Member States;

Or. en

Amendment 273

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 23

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

23. Calls for uniform capital gains treatment and automatic double taxation relief to reduce cross-border uncertainty; is of the opinion that standardised investment instruments, including harmonised, convertible financing templates and model shareholder agreements, must be introduced to reduce transaction costs;

Or. en

Amendment 274

Luděk Niedermayer

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 23

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

23. Calls for more coordinated capital gains treatment and efficient mechanisms for double taxation relief to reduce cross-border uncertainty; calls for the establishment of a genuine EU-wide investor passport to eliminate the duplication of national supervisory requirements; stresses that this passport must serve as a single, digitally verified status that ensures an investor’s eligibility is automatically recognised across all Member States; is of the opinion that standardised investment instruments, including harmonised, convertible financing templates and model shareholder agreements, must be introduced to reduce transaction costs;

Or. en

Amendment 275

Herbert Dorfmann, Marco Falcone

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 23

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

23. Calls for uniform capital gains treatment and automatic double taxation relief to reduce cross-border uncertainty and encourage long-term investment in innovative European ventures; calls for the establishment of a genuine EU-wide investor passport to eliminate the duplication of national supervisory requirements; stresses that this passport must serve as a single, digitally verified status - issued and maintained via the One-Stop Shop platform - that ensures an investor’s eligibility is automatically and immediately recognised across all participating Member States without additional national approval procedures; is of the opinion that standardised investment instruments, including harmonised, convertible financing templates and model shareholder agreements, must be introduced to reduce transaction costs and legal uncertainty, while strengthening investor protection and market transparency;

Or. en

Amendment 276

Damian Boeselager

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 23

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 277

Ľudovít Ódor

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 23

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 278

Jussi Saramo, Manon Aubry, Anthony Smith

on behalf of The Left Group

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 23

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

23. Calls for uniform capital gains treatment and automatic double taxation relief to reduce cross-border uncertainty, while reinforcing controls to prevent double non-taxation, tax avoidance and regulatory arbitrage; calls for the establishment of a genuine EU-wide investor passport to eliminate the duplication of national supervisory requirements; stresses that this passport must serve as a single, digitally verified status that ensures an investor’s eligibility is automatically recognised across all Member States; is of the opinion that standardised investment instruments, including harmonised, convertible financing templates and model shareholder agreements, must be introduced to reduce transaction costs;

Or. en

Amendment 279

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea, Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 23

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

23. Calls for more coherent capital gains treatment and automatic double taxation relief to reduce cross-border uncertainty; calls for the establishment of a genuine EU-wide investor passport to eliminate the duplication of national supervisory requirements; stresses that this passport must serve as a single, digitally verified status that ensures an investor’s eligibility is automatically recognised across all Member States; is of the opinion that standardised investment instruments, including harmonised, convertible financing templates and model shareholder agreements, must be introduced to reduce transaction costs;

Or. es

Amendment 280

Ľudovít Ódor

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 23 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

23 a. Emphasises that the 28th regime shall directly address structural obstacles that limit capital mobilisation in Europe; recalls that from an investor perspective, regulatory and prudential alignment must be ensured; is of the opinion that certified long-term equity investments under the regime could benefit from adjusted risk treatments, reducing artificial disincentives for pension funds and insurers and harmonisation should limit national gold-plating practices that restrict alternative asset allocation and contribute to persistent home bias; considers that the legislative proposal should contain harmonised rules on equity-like debt instruments, including insolvency rules linked to those instruments, enabling investors to invest in a company without acquiring rights of control over that company;

Or. en

Amendment 281

Ľudovít Ódor

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 23 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

23 b. Proposes that a stronger exit environment shall be established so as to improve expected returns: streamlined IPO access, harmonised listing requirements for growth companies, and simplified cross-border M&A procedures should be implemented to increase liquidity and strengthen Europe’s scale-up capacity;

Or. en

Amendment 282

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea, Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 23 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

23a. Stresses the need to mobilise the high volume of savings in the EU towards investments, in particular by developing attractive and accessible investment products for retail investors; stresses that the 28th regime must facilitate the channelling of such savings towards innovative and growing companies, thereby helping to close the existing funding gap in the EU;

Or. es

Amendment 283

Luděk Niedermayer

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 23 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

23 a. Stresses that one of the goals of the new regime is to contribute to the development of a genuine EU capital market, enabling innovative firms and scale-ups to obtain the necessary funding while maintaining their presence in the Union; considers that, even if the new regime were to be adopted only through enhanced cooperation, it would represent a substantial improvement compared to the current situation;

Or. en

Amendment 284

Lídia Pereira

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 23 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

23 a. Calls for targeted tax measures to unlock more European risk capital for innovative scale-ups, including rollover relief for founders, employees and business angels who reinvest capital gains in eligible Union start-ups and scale-ups and proportionate incentives for long-term institutional investors allocating capital to European venture and growth funds;

Or. en

Amendment 285

Georgios Aftias

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 23 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

23a. Calls for the introduction of a dedicated tax framework for investments through certified European digital finance platforms, including crowdfunding platforms, with the aim of facilitating businesses’ access to alternative sources of capital;

Or. el

Amendment 286

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea, Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 23 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

23b. Calls for strengthening the European venture capital ecosystem by removing regulatory and tax barriers that limit cross-border investment; underlines the importance of facilitating larger funding rounds within the EU to prevent scale-ups from resorting to third jurisdictions;

Or. es

Amendment 287

Marco Falcone, Fulvio Martusciello, Herbert Dorfmann

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 23 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

23b. Highlights the need to boost the European Union's attractiveness as a global destination for investment and business activities, including by reducing regulatory and tax burdens and by consolidating the predictability and stability of the legal and institutional framework;

Or. it

Amendment 288

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea, Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 23 c (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

23c. Underlines the need to simplify access to capital markets for companies, in particular SMEs and scale-ups, by reducing administrative burdens, streamlining listing procedures and harmonising reporting requirements;

Or. es

Amendment 289

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea, Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 23 d (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

23d. Proposes the creation of an EU-wide digital one-stop shop, linked to the 28th Regime, that would allow businesses to easily and transparently access information, financing instruments and potential investors in all Member States;

Or. es

Amendment 290

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea, Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 23 e (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

23e. Stresses that regulatory and fiscal fragmentation contributes to a higher cost of capital for European companies, and that the 28th Regime should contribute to its reduction through simpler, more predictable and harmonised rules that build confidence among investors;

Or. es

Amendment 291

Marco Falcone, Fulvio Martusciello

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 23 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

23a. Calls for the strengthening of the principle of automatic mutual recognition of administrative decisions and legal qualifications under the 28th regime, in order to eliminate procedural duplication and reduce the administrative burden on businesses;

Or. it

Amendment 292

Pierre Pimpie, Enikő Győri, Auke Zijlstra, Tomáš Kubín

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 24

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

24. Recalls that tax incentives for R&D, innovation and reinvestment remain primarily a matter for Member States, and that the exchange of best practices should be preferred to new EU-level harmonised tax incentive schemes.

Or. en

Amendment 293

Roberts Zīle

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 24

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

24. Stresses that the 28th regime must preserve Member States’ absolute discretion in shaping their own tax systems and incentives focused on research, development and reinvestment, thereby allowing them to compete through the frameworks they consider most appropriate for their specific economic needs

Or. en

Amendment 294

Jussi Saramo, Manon Aubry, Anthony Smith, Pasquale Tridico

on behalf of The Left Group

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 24

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

24. Stresses that the 28th regime must introduce coordinated tax incentives focused on research, development and reinvestment; notes that a harmonised baseline for R&;D incentives should establish common eligibility definitions and minimum standards across Member States;

24. Stresses that the 28th regime should not create new corporate tax giveaways under the guise of competitiveness; calls, instead, for a review of existing tax incentives in order to remove those that mainly function as windfall tax breaks rather than genuine incentives for productive investment; stresses that any remaining support measures must be strictly conditional on real economic activity, tax compliance, respect for workers’ rights, the absence of aggressive tax planning, no unjustified layoffs and measurable contributions to research, development, digitalisation or the green transition;

Or. en

Amendment 295

Bruno Gonçalves, Niels Fuglsang, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 24

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

24. Highlights that national tax incentives differ widely in eligibility criteria, calculation methods, refundability, and administrative requirements; stresses that the 28th tax regime can benefit from establishing coordinated tax incentives focused on research, development and reinvestment; notes that a harmonised baseline for R&D incentives should establish common eligibility definitions and minimum standards across Member States, including social conditionality and regular monitoring and evaluation tools of tax expenditure to ensure that they: (i) are fit for purpose; (ii) are a cost-effective way of fostering innovation and (iii) have no unexpected or negative implications;

Or. en

Amendment 296

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 24

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

24. Stresses that the 28th regime should introduce coordinated and strictly conditioned tax incentives focused on research, development and reinvestment; notes that a harmonised baseline for R&D incentives should establish common eligibility definitions and criteria and minimum standards across Member States; insists that these incentives be systematically subject to social and environmental conditionalities; emphasises that, if implemented, their impact should be closely monitored by the Commission and Member States;

Or. en

Amendment 297

Marco Falcone, Fulvio Martusciello, Herbert Dorfmann

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 24

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

24. Stresses that the 28th regime must introduce coordinated tax incentives focused on research, development and reinvestment; notes that a harmonised baseline for R&D incentives should establish common eligibility definitions and minimum standards across Member States, while taking account of the specific characteristics of less-developed regions and promoting effective and equitable access to incentives;

Or. it

Amendment 298

Luděk Niedermayer

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 24

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

24. Stresses that the 28+ tax regime shall include appropriate, coordinated tax incentives focused on research, development and reinvestment with clear eligibility definitions and minimum standards across Member States;

Or. en

Amendment 299

Ľudovít Ódor

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 24 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

24 a. Is of the opinion that qualifying expenditures should include personnel costs, prototyping, software development, testing, and experimental design, and companies should benefit from either enhanced deductions or refundable tax credits, ensuring that early-stage companies without taxable profits can still access support;

Or. en

Amendment 300

Luděk Niedermayer

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 24 – subparagraph 1 (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Emphasises that firms opting for the new regimes should not be disadvantaged in accessing Member State programmes or incentives on the basis of their legal form;

Or. en

Amendment 301

Herbert Dorfmann, Marco Falcone

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 24 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

24 a. Stresses furthermore that the design of R&D incentives under the 28th regime must be explicitly calibrated to be compatible with the OECD Pillar Two global minimum tax framework, and in particular that the interaction with the Qualified Refundable Tax Credit rules must be addressed to ensure that innovative early-stage companies - which may have no current profits - can nonetheless fully benefit from the incentives without disproportionate administrative burden;

Or. en

Amendment 302

Fernando Navarrete Rojas, Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 24 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

24 a. Calls on the Commission to introduce harmonised R&D tax incentive schemes at EU level under the 28th regime, in order to reduce compliance costs and facilitate cross-border access to such incentives, and to assess the feasibility of introducing transferable tax credits in this field, particularly for innovative companies with limited tax liability;

Or. en

Amendment 303

Marco Falcone, Fulvio Martusciello

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 24 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

24a. Proposes the introduction of strengthened tax credits for digitalisation, innovation and the technological transition in peripheral and island regions and regions characterised by structural disadvantages, in accordance with EU State aid rules;

Or. it

Amendment 304

Pierre Pimpie, Enikő Győri, Auke Zijlstra, Tomáš Kubín

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 25

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

25. Recalls that in addition to input-based incentives, the regime must incorporate output-based mechanisms, such as an innovation income regime aligned with OECD standards;

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 305

Roberts Zīle

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 25

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

25. Recalls that in addition to input-based incentives, the regime must incorporate output-based mechanisms, such as an innovation income regime aligned with OECD standards;

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 306

Jussi Saramo, Manon Aubry, Anthony Smith

on behalf of The Left Group

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 25

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

25. Recalls that in addition to input-based incentives, the regime must incorporate output-based mechanisms, such as an innovation income regime aligned with OECD standards;

25. Recalls that tax policy should prioritise direct support for research, innovation and public investment over preferential tax treatment for income derived from intellectual property; rejects harmful patent-box-type regimes that reward the booking of profits rather than real innovation and may create significant tax avoidance risks; stresses that no preferential treatment should be granted to income from intangible assets without strict substance requirements and a demonstrated social and economic benefit;

Or. en

Amendment 307

Bruno Gonçalves, Niels Fuglsang, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 25

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

25. Recalls that in addition to input-based incentives, the regime must incorporate output-based mechanisms, such as an innovation income regime aligned with OECD standards;

25. Recalls that input-based incentives, aligned with real economic substance should be prioritised for their demonstrated capacity to encourage additional R&D, while an innovation income regime aligned with OECD standards, particularly the "modified nexus approach", which ensures tax benefits are only granted if linked to substantive R&;D activities, should also be considered;

Or. en

Amendment 308

Ľudovít Ódor

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 25

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

25. Recalls that in addition to input-based incentives, the regime must incorporate output-based mechanisms, such as an innovation income regime aligned with OECD standards;

25. Recalls that in addition to input-based incentives, the regime shall incorporate output-based mechanisms such as an innovation income regime (a coordinated patent or intellectual property box model) aligned with OECD standards, which would allow income derived from qualifying intellectual property to benefit from a reduced effective rate, encouraging commercialisation within the Union;

Or. en

Amendment 309

Bruno Gonçalves, Niels Fuglsang, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 25 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

25 a. Highlights that well designed tax incentives can be a useful tool to foster investment in innovation, while remaining consistent with the state aid framework, and include safeguards against potential distortions in the single market, the sustainability of public finances and potential distributional consequences;

Or. en

Amendment 310

Roberts Zīle

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 26

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

26. Calls for a strong stimulation of scale-up activities, where reinvested profits used for R&D, digitalisation or green innovation receive temporary additional deductions or tax deferrals;

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 311

Pierre Pimpie, Enikő Győri, Auke Zijlstra, Tomáš Kubín

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 26

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

26. Calls for a strong stimulation of scale-up activities, where reinvested profits used for R&D, digitalisation or green innovation receive temporary additional deductions or tax deferrals;

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 312

Jussi Saramo, Manon Aubry, Anthony Smith

on behalf of The Left Group

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 26

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

26. Calls for a strong stimulation of scale-up activities, where reinvested profits used for R&D, digitalisation or green innovation receive temporary additional deductions or tax deferrals;

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 313

Jussi Saramo, Manon Aubry, Anthony Smith

on behalf of The Left Group

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 26

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

26. Calls for a strong stimulation of scale-up activities, where reinvested profits used for R&D, digitalisation or green innovation receive temporary additional deductions or tax deferrals;

26. Calls for a strong stimulation of scale-up activities, where support for scale-up activities should primarily take the form of direct public investment, easier access to public financing and simplified access to existing Union programmes, rather than new corporate tax breaks; stresses that any targeted support measures must be temporary, proportionate and conditional on real investment, job creation and compliance with tax and social obligations;

Or. en

Amendment 314

Bruno Gonçalves, Niels Fuglsang, Jonás Fernández

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 26

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

26. Calls for a strong stimulation of scale-up activities, where reinvested profits used for R&D, digitalisation or green innovation receive temporary additional deductions or tax deferrals;

26. Considers that tax incentives should focus on supporting R&D, digitalisation or green innovation, in order to boost technological capacity and competitiveness;

Or. en

Amendment 315

Ľudovít Ódor

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 26

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

26. Calls for a strong stimulation of scale-up activities, where reinvested profits used for R&D, digitalisation or green innovation receive temporary additional deductions or tax deferrals;

26. Calls for a strong stimulation of scale-up activities, where reinvested profits used for R&D, digitalisation, or green innovation shall receive temporary additional deductions or tax deferrals, and thus incentivising retained earnings to be directed towards productivity-enhancing investment rather than short-term distribution; highlights that all incentives must be designed to remain transparent, simple, and compliant with state aid rules;

Or. en

Amendment 316

Marco Falcone, Fulvio Martusciello

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 26

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

26. Calls for a strong stimulation of scale-up activities, where reinvested profits used for R&D, digitalisation or green innovation receive temporary additional deductions or tax deferrals;

26. Calls for a strong stimulation of scale-up activities, where reinvested profits used for R&D, digitalisation or green innovation receive temporary additional deductions or tax deferrals, particularly for investments intended for the strategic relocation of business activities within the EU;

Or. it

Amendment 317

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 26

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

26. Calls for a strong stimulation of scale-up activities, where reinvested profits used for R&D, digitalisation or green innovation receive temporary additional deductions or tax deferrals;

Or. en

Amendment 318

Lídia Pereira

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 26 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

26 a. Stresses that tax incentives should support not only research input but also market deployment and scale-up in Europe; calls for reinvested profits used for first industrial deployment, regulatory certification, digitalisation, clean-tech manufacturing scale-up, IP commercialisation or cross-border market expansion within the Union to qualify for temporary deductions or deferrals;

Or. en

Amendment 319

Marco Falcone, Fulvio Martusciello

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 26 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

26a. Calls for experimental regulatory and tax tools, including regulatory sandboxes, also in specific territorial areas, in full compliance with EU law, with particular regard to the State aid framework;

Or. it

Amendment 320

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea, Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 26 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

26a. Calls for the development of incentives that encourage long-term investment in European companies, in particular through stable and predictable regulatory frameworks that favour the participation of institutional investors, such as pension funds and insurers;

Or. es

Amendment 321

Georgios Aftias

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 26 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

26a. Proposes the introduction of differentiated tax rates or tax credits for investments made in less developed regions, and island regions, with the aim of strengthening economic, social and territorial cohesion;

Or. el

Amendment 322

Georgios Aftias

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 26 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

26b. Stresses that the 28th regime should provide for special preferential tax treatment for companies established or carrying out a substantial economic activity in island regions, including reduced tax rates, enhanced tax credits for investments and additional deductions for transport and energy costs, with the aim of mitigating the costs of isolation and fostering sustainable local development.

Or. el

Amendment 323

Georgios Aftias

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 26 c (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

26c. Stresses that companies under the 28th regime should enjoy preferential tax treatment with regard to European funding, including tax exemptions or deferrals for Union grants that are reinvested in the real economy;

Or. el

Amendment 324

Ľudovít Ódor

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 27

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

27. Calls on the Commission to ensure a comprehensive review and, where necessary, revisions of tax aspects of the 28th regime at regular intervals;

27. Calls on the Commission to ensure a comprehensive review and, where necessary, revisions of tax aspects of the 28th regime at regular intervals, including the potential to add new modules to the regime, an assessment of its adoption rates among companies, particularly SMEs, start-ups, and scale-ups, its alignment with evolving business and societal needs, its overall fitness for purpose and its effect on the Union’s competitiveness (international benchmarking); calls on the Commission to evaluate and report to the European Parliament, the Council and the European Economic and Social Committee on the potential effects of the new legislative act on the development and economic growth of SMEs; considers that the review cycle should occur every 4 years to ensure adaptability to new challenges;

Or. en

Amendment 325

Marco Falcone, Fulvio Martusciello, Herbert Dorfmann

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 27

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

27. Calls on the Commission to ensure a comprehensive review and, where necessary, revisions of tax aspects of the 28th regime at regular intervals;

27. Calls on the Commission to ensure a comprehensive review, a regular evaluation and, where necessary, revisions and adjustments of tax aspects of the 28th regime at regular intervals, on the basis of measurable indicators relating to, inter alia, job creation, attracting investment, reducing administrative burdens and boosting territorial cohesion;

Or. it

Amendment 326

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 27

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

27. Calls on the Commission to ensure a comprehensive review and, where necessary, revisions of tax aspects of the 28th regime at regular intervals;

27. Calls on the Commission to ensure a comprehensive review including an assessment of how often startups and scaleups make use of the 28th regime, whether it is fit for purpose and if it is adapted to companies and societal needs, and, where necessary, revisions of tax aspects of the 28th regime at regular intervals;

Or. en

Amendment 327

Paolo Borchia

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 27 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

27 a. stresses that the effectiveness of the 28th regime will depend on its ability to ensure legal certainty, a balanced interaction with national systems, proportionality for smaller businesses and the prevention of distortive effects in both fiscal and social domains;

Or. en