13 Resolutions & reports ·decision 13 of 20 on Tuesday, 7 July 2026

A coherent tax framework for the EU’s financial sector

Committee report by Matthias Ecke · voted 13:49–13:51

Non-binding texts in which Parliament states its position on a topic. They carry political weight but do not create law.

Adopted by a large majority 418 for · 152 against · 85 abstained (64 % in favour) Economy & single market Taxation Banks & financial services

The vote ✦ In short Full text Procedure

What Parliament decided

Adopted Adopted by a large majority

Parliament adopted the text as its official position.

For 418 Against 152 Abstained 85

Final vote — text as a whole at 13:51 · 64% of votes cast in favour · every MEP’s position →

Who backed it

The Left –
Verts/ALE ✓
S&D ✓
Renew ✓
PPE ✓
ECR ✗
PfE ✗
ESN ✗
NI –

Backed by Verts/ALE, S&D, Renew and PPE; opposed by ECR, PfE and ESN; The Left mostly abstained.

✦ What this vote decides · AI summary, based on the text voted on

Parliament adopted a resolution calling for a coherent tax framework for the EU's financial sector, addressing issues like VAT exemptions and fragmented national taxes. The adopted text is Parliament's official position, urging reforms to modernise VAT rules, coordinate EU-wide taxation, and set common standards for windfall taxes.

How the vote unfolded · 15 ballots

Before the final vote, MEPs decided on 4 amendments (4 rejected) and 10 parts of the text voted on separately (7 adopted, 3 rejected).

Roll call requested by S&D · split votes by Members (3) · separate votes by Members.

adopted rejected lapsed square = amendment circle = part of the text decisive vote Solid = roll call (click for every MEP’s vote); faded = no individual positions

All 15 ballots in voting order

1. Separate vote on paragraph 1

electronic vote (totals only) — no individual positions recorded

Adopted

2. Separate vote on paragraph 2 requested by Members

electronic vote (totals only) — no individual positions recorded

Rejected

3. Paragraph 7 — part 1 of 2 Part 1: ‘Observes moreover that existing tax rules have not fully kept pace with the emergence of new financial products and market infrastructures;’ requested by Members

— no individual positions recorded

Adopted

4. Paragraph 7 — part 2 of 2 Part 2: ‘underlines that fragmentation is rapidly becoming more worrying with the success of neobanks, for example, digital-only banks, challenger banks or fintech banks; points out the significant increase in the share of cross-border deposits held by these banks in the last six years; underlines that differences in tax rules between banks and non-bank entities can create distortions;’ requested by Members

electronic vote (totals only) — no individual positions recorded

Adopted

5. Separate vote on paragraph 8

electronic vote (totals only) — no individual positions recorded

Adopted

6. Amendment 3 to paragraph 27 13:49 A10-0169/2026 – Matthias Ecke – § 27 – Am 3 requested by S&D

Rejected

7. Paragraph 27 — part 1 of 3 Part 1: “Text as a whole without the words: ‘like more effective VAT grouping and options for reforming the VAT exemption, with a view to bringing forward a proposal to reform the VAT rules for the financial sector;’ and ‘emphasises that any such reform must also safeguard consumers and continue to ensure that the financial sector makes a fair contribution to public revenues;’” requested by Members

— no individual positions recorded

Adopted

8. Paragraph 27 — part 2 of 3 Part 2: ‘like more effective VAT grouping and options for reforming the VAT exemption, with a view to bringing forward a proposal to reform the VAT rules for the financial sector;’ requested by Members

electronic vote (totals only) — no individual positions recorded

Rejected

9. Paragraph 27 — part 3 of 3 Part 3: ‘emphasises that any such reform must also safeguard consumers and continue to ensure that the financial sector makes a fair contribution to public revenues;’ requested by Members

electronic vote (totals only) — no individual positions recorded

Adopted

10. Paragraph 31 — part 1 of 2 Part 1: “Text as a whole without the words: ‘that reflects both value creation and negative externalities;’” requested by Members

— no individual positions recorded

Adopted

11. Paragraph 31 — part 2 of 2 Part 2: “those words” requested by Members

electronic vote (totals only) — no individual positions recorded

Rejected

12. Amendment 4 to paragraph 33 13:50 A10-0169/2026 – Matthias Ecke – § 33 – Am 4 requested by S&D

Rejected

13. Amendment 5 to paragraph 34 13:51 A10-0169/2026 – Matthias Ecke – § 34 – Am 5 requested by S&D

Rejected

14. Amendment 6 to paragraph 35 13:51 A10-0169/2026 – Matthias Ecke – § 35 – Am 6 requested by S&D

Rejected

15. Final vote — text as a whole 13:51 A10-0169/2026 – Matthias Ecke – Motion for a resolution (as a whole)

Adopted

Part of the sitting of Tuesday, 7 July 2026. The vote was taken on Report A-10-2026-0169 in procedure 2024/2117.

New here? How plenary voting works

A sitting: One day of voting in plenary. Each subject is a report, resolution, agreement or objection; they are grouped by kind of decision, and each group says what “adopted” means there.
The ballots: Members vote on amendments and on parts of the text first, then on the text as a whole. That final, decisive vote is the result shown at the top of each subject.
Who voted how: Only roll-call votes record each Member’s vote — open one for every name and the breakdown by group. A show of hands records the outcome only.
Document & procedure: Each subject rests on a document (a committee report, a motion, a Council or Commission text) and belongs to a procedure, the whole file that can span years.
Group badges: How most of a group voted: ✓ For · ✗ Against · – Abstained · ~ Split (no majority).

Codes in ballot labels

Am 27 — amendment 27
§ 5 — paragraph 5
§ 5/2, part 2 — a , taken in parts
Am 3= 7= — identical amendments voted together
***I — ; *** — ; * —
Lapsed —
A10-… — committee report; B10-… — motion
RC-B10-… — joint motion of several groups

All the terms used on this site