Proposition 50K2155

Projet de loi portant assentiment à la Convention entre le Royaume de Belgique et le Royaume des Pays-Bas tendant à éviter la double imposition et à prévenir l'évasion fiscale en matière d'impôts sur le revenu et sur la fortune, aux Protocoles I et II et à l'échange de lettres, faits à Luxembourg le 5 juin 2001.

General information ¶

Submitted by

The Senate

Submission date

Oct. 7, 2002

Official page

Visit

Status

Adopted

Requirement

Simple

Subjects

Netherlands direct tax double taxation international agreement

Voting ¶

Voted to adopt

CD&V LE PS | SP Open Vld MR

Voted to reject

Groen N-VA FN VB

Party dissidents ¶

• Annemie Van de Casteele (N-VA) voted to adopt.
• Georges Clerfayt (MR) abstained from voting.

Contact form ¶

Do you have a question or request regarding this proposition? Select the most appropriate option for your request and I will get back to you shortly.

Discussion ¶

Dec. 5, 2002 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)

Full source

Mr. Speaker, I think that this issue has been discussed in the Committee on Foreign Relations and that two speakers mainly spoke there. They spoke in the name of the whole Parliament when they said that this double taxation treaty is of course a good thing, especially for two matters. On the one hand, it is of course good for the border workers who from 1 January 2003 will have a better wage situation under this new double taxation treaty and, on the other hand, it is good for the municipalities where many Dutch residents reside because in the future they can also collect municipal taxes from those Dutch residents. I think that in the committee, after a number of questions, it has also been made clear that it is the absolute intention of the Ministry to make the necessary formalities in terms of exchange, notification and so on take place in the following days so that the Convention can enter into force from 1 January 2003. The bill was unanimously adopted in the committee.

Mr. Speaker, after two weeks of meeting on border work to be able to debate with a solution in the prospect, we are only very happy. I would like to thank the rapporteur for his report, and especially for the fact that he wanted to do so very quickly so that we will get the final vote on the double taxation treaty today. We have always stated that the date of December 15 should be the final end date. If we vote today, we get that date.

In short, we note that after years of being the victim of what we call the jojo effect, between taxes and national insurance in the Netherlands, border workers from 1 January 2003 hopefully will finally get financial equality on the workplace. From that date on, they will pay both their social security and their taxes in the Netherlands.

For the vast majority of border workers, this will mean a financial advance. Nevertheless, I think we should also look for solutions for the group that does not make progress or even declines a bit. I am also pleased that the Review Committee on Border Work will be given the opportunity to present possible solutions through conclusions.

Mr. Minister, colleagues, I think it is important to point out once again — also colleague Vanvelthoven has done so — that with this revision of the tax treaty also fills a gap in the previous legislation, in particular the fact that now the Dutch can pay municipal taxes. But also the Belgians, who in the future will pay their taxes in the Netherlands, remain obliged to pay municipal taxes in the "habitant country".

This treaty has a whole history. This is the third treaty that we are approving today. There was a treaty in 1933. There was a treaty in 1970 and we will now have the treaty of 2002, with effect from 1 January 2003.

Why revising the 1970 Convention? Especially due to the fact that it became very clear through the OECD model conventions that one had to move from the "residential country principle" to the "working country principle", moreover since '94 we felt very strongly — by applying the Oort law in the Netherlands — that the gap between national insurance premiums and the tax levy coefficients was increasing. In the Netherlands, the increase of such a national insurance premium was always compensated by the reduction of the tax levy rates but there, of course, the Belgians had no message there as they had to pay their taxes in the country of residence. This is also the jojo effect, as the border workers called it. The jojo effect will disappear. They will receive equal pay for equal work in the workplace.

Mr. Minister, I had another question. I apologize for not putting them in the committee, but maybe we can put them to you for a moment. Article 5 of the new treaty. The period for construction works shall be 12 months before this activity is considered to be a permanent establishment.

In the old agreement, this is 9 months. Specifically, this means that according to the new treaty, for example, a Belgian construction company that carries out a construction project in the Netherlands with a duration of 11 months will remain taxable in Belgium. Under 12 months, the building is not a permanent facility. The question now is when the extension of the period from 9 to 12 months comes into effect. That is the first question. The date of entry into force of the treaty is, of course, very important here.

But even on the date of 1 January 2003 there are still problems. Does the 12-month period already apply to the ongoing workshops that will be closed in 2003? This question is of course important, because not only the company falls under the working state, but also the construction workers themselves. This means that retroactively all tax obligations with respect to the construction workers of land change. Per ⁇ it would be good for us to clarify this in the course of this discussion, so that there would be no misunderstandings about it.

Finally, Mr. Speaker, Colleagues, Mr. Minister, I think we should thank all those who helped with the amendment, which took eight years of preparation. I also address very specifically the officials, as well as the Minister of Finance, who has given his full support. The border workers will be very grateful for it, just like the border municipalities.

Mr. Brouns, I have to tell you that the processing of the bill has gone quickly. The report was distributed among the banks in the committee and discussed on 2 December. How is that, Mr. Leterme? Fast and efficient, right?

Mr. Speaker, I would like to have an answer to my question.

A response to Mr. and brown?

Mr. Speaker, as I did for the bill that we have already dealt with on this subject, I would like to thank the members of the House and in particular of the committee concerned for the speed with which the bill was able to be dealt with, since this is what will probably allow us to reach an entry into force on 1 January 2003. Aan de heer Brouns geef ik hetzelfde antwoord: we must dat toepassen from 2003. by

As regards the different deadlines, I have asked my administration to provide more explanations before 1 January 2003. So I will not give an exact answer now, but I have requested that on the website of our department a clear and clear answer be given about the different deadlines. I think this is the most useful solution. I will do so before 1 January 2003.

I would like to thank the Minister for his response. I understand it, this is a very technical matter. I also think that a written response or a response through the website really makes it clear to those who are dealing with it what they should stick to.

Mr. President, I want to

We have to talk about another topic, but not about the agenda point that concerns us but not about the aspect that colleague Brouns has rightly raised. As regards those construction works, I would like to call on the Minister — as I also did following the discussion of the draft law relating to the revision of Article 244a — to continue the effort he has made in the framework of the negotiations with the Netherlands towards the double tax regime between Belgium and France. I know that he wrote his colleague about it. I sincerely hope he can ⁇ the same result. I am already grateful to him, even because colleague Brouns, who has always been very strongly committed to border workers in his region, is thus more successful. I would be even more grateful to him if we could ⁇ the same results for France.

Mr Leterme, I asked the same question verbally to my French colleague during the Ecofin Council this week. I will repeat that next week when the Ecofin meets again. I hope it will be possible to start the negotiations.