Proposition 51K0923

Projet de loi transposant en droit belge la directive 2003/48/CE du 3 juin 2003 du Conseil de l'Union européenne en matière de fiscalité des revenus de l'épargne sous forme de paiement d'intérêts et modifiant le Code des impôts sur les revenus 1992 en matière de précompte mobilier.

General information ¶

Submitted by

PS | SP MR Open Vld Vooruit Purple Ⅰ

Submission date

March 17, 2004

Official page

Visit

Status

Adopted

Requirement

Simple

Subjects

EC Directive bank deposit tax on investment income direct tax tax on income interest savings

Voting ¶

Voted to adopt

CD&V Vooruit Ecolo LE PS | SP Open Vld N-VA MR

Party dissidents ¶

• Luc Goutry (CD&V) 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 ¶

April 22, 2004 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)

Full source

This bill regulates the transposition of the Directive on taxation of savings income in the form of interest payments.

This Directive aims to ensure that all income from savings in the form of interest payments held by European residents are subject to a common minimum levy, regardless of where the savings are located. Two mechanisms are planned, namely a system of exchange of information or a retention at the source.

The Directive does not alter the collection of interest tax perceived by Belgian taxpayers who have retained their savings in Belgium. It will apply to the 25 member states of the European Union. In addition, similar rules should apply in a number of partner third countries, such as the Swiss Confederation, the Principality of Lichtenstein, the Republic of Saint-Marin, the Principality of Monaco and the Principality of Andorra.

In the explanation of the reasons, the Minister also emphasized the importance of the proposed measures, which will have a positive effect on the budgetary level since they should enable the taxation of income from savings that were so far only partially or not subject to the movements tax. Various members of the committee participated in the debate. The articles of the bill and the entire bill were adopted unanimously.

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Minister, dear colleagues, I will start with the positive. The Savings Directive is a first step towards a European taxation and has the praised goal of making the taxation on interest-giving products more effective.

I think that 15% on mobile income is not an insurmountable tax burden. However, I cannot get rid of the impression that the Savings Directive is intended to scare or disinformation the small saver. The way in which the ordinary man in the street creates the impression that there will be a source tax with certainty or that there will be an automatic exchange of interest information, which would take place from 1 January 2005, is actually quite misleading and a form of unwanted propaganda.

Since 2001, this trend has been ⁇ ined. We saw a first effect in February 2002, when many new emissions were issued with an exceptionally long term. These emissions, issued before 1 March 2002, are not covered by the Directive and have therefore been very successful.

Subsequently, a number of banks have worked well to meet the savings needs of many investors who are in a chronic state of distrust towards the State, from fiscal fear, uncertainty and above all ignorance. They no longer sell profitable products, but insurance under the motto: it does not benefit, it does not harm.

Meanwhile, the savings directive was sold by the government to justify the tax amnesty. We know better in the meantime. Fiscal amnesty has a purely budgetary objective and has little or nothing to do with the Savings Directive. If that had been the case, then the fiscal amnesty would be limited to the undeclared interest, which obviously is not the case, Mr. Minister.

In the meantime, the tax amnesty continues. The preliminary success of this measure is known to us. Verhofstadt makes us believe in The Last News of 25 January 2004 that the European Savings Directive would apply as early as 1 January 2005. Nothing is less true.

It all depends on the conclusion of agreements with a number of states. These states are not big powers, but small states, dwarf states like Andorra or Switzerland or some idyllic islands.

This is not a single agreement, but according to Professor Van Istendael of seventy-five bilateral agreements between these tax havens, on the one hand, and the fifteen old and ten new Member States, on the other. The entire operation must be completed before 1 January 2005. Mr. Minister, can you tell me when the agreements should be concluded? When must the agreements, which are bilateral and therefore still subject to an agreement between Belgium and a number of other Member States, be concluded so that the Directive can effectively enter into force on 1 January 2005?

Since it is a transposition of a directive issued by the Council of the European Union, without the cooperation of the European Parliament, which has not yet led to any political and public debate on the directive at European level, can you explain, Mr. Minister, what role Britain plays in this? What is the role of Britain in the case? Why should Belgium negotiate for the first time in its history with the British Channel Islands, and also with the island of Man, while so far this has always happened with Britain itself? Is it because Britain wants to escape its responsibility? Does the responsibility for the implementation of the agreement therefore no longer belong to the UK Inland Revenue Service, but rather to the local tax administrations of these tax havens, which, as we hear, are entirely unprepared, informed and organized to effectively implement the exchange of information? Is it therefore that the United Kingdom is a fervent advocate of data exchange and is against a generalized source tax, as you stated during the discussion in the committee?

What should we actually think of your explanation in the committee in terms of monitoring the implementation of the Savings Directive, about which you say that there are still several more detailed rules to be discussed in the Ecofin Council? Why is it then possible that your own Prime Minister says that this will apply by 1 January 2005 in this country? This seems to me very unlikely. Why is it that until now it has not been specified at all how this exchange of information will take place very concretely? Can you give a word of explanation on this?

We believe that this savings guideline has so far been mainly in a kind of embryonic phase. The date of birth has been calculated, but it is not yet defined. Although the King has authority to determine the entry into force of this law, we think that she is still pushing her shadow forward. This will not last longer than until the ignorant saver has become aware of the correct application of this Directive and of its faulty control mechanism in practice.

Nevertheless, Mr. Minister, I want to finish as I started. I think it is a good thing that there is a European harmonisation, a convergence of a number of tax rates. I don’t think it can be in tomorrow’s Europe...

Mr. Speaker, I would like to say, first of all, that this bill transposing, in Belgian law, this Savings Directive is obviously an important decision of principle. This text has been expected for many years. Several attempts have been made during previous legislatures to reach an agreement on savings. We now find consensus, both in Europe on the text submitted to us today and at the level of third countries, such as Switzerland, which no longer makes any comments on the text itself, and including associated and dependent territories of the British Crown or the Netherlands with which, for example for the British Crown, we have already signed a number of protocols to make the directive applicable from 1 January. I must u bij voorbaat zeggen mijnheer Bogaert, dat ik hiervoor mijn best doe in ik denk dat of inwerkingtreding from 1 January 2005 possible is in wel om two redenen.

First, there is already an agreement with Switzerland on a text. There are still negotiations on other matters with Switzerland, but I think the agreement will be reached.

Second, there is already a specific clause in the various agreements to apply even without ratification in the various parliaments from 1 January 2005. For Switzerland, there is a specific problem, in particular a referendum such as in Britain for the constitution, so it is difficult to be sure about it. However, we have all the elements in hand so that from 1 January 2005 the application will be possible.

I reiterate that in all agreements with third countries and other partners we seek a specific clause that sets out the implementation from 1 January 2005, even before ratification by the various parliaments. We are on time with the bill, and so it is normal to say, like Prime Minister Verhofstadt, that the entry into force must be possible from 1 January 2005.