Projet de loi modifiant la loi du 12 mai 2014 relative aux sociétés immobilières réglementées.
General information ¶
- Submitted by
- MR Swedish coalition
- Submission date
- June 27, 2017
- Official page
- Visit
- Status
- Adopted
- Requirement
- Simple
- Subjects
- investment company real estate business real property social facilities
Voting ¶
- Voted to adopt
- CD&V LE DéFI Open Vld N-VA MR PP
- Voted to reject
- PS | SP PVDA | PTB
- Abstained from voting
- Groen Vooruit Ecolo ∉ VB
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 ¶
Oct. 5, 2017 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)
Full source
President Siegfried Bracke ⚙
Mr Calomne and Mr Van Biesen, rapporteurs, refer to the written report.
Georges Gilkinet Ecolo ⚙
The aim is to expand the possibilities of using regulated real estate companies. I would like to confirm two elements of debate in this speech in the plenary session.
The first concerns the budgetary impact of the measure. The government presents it to us as positive in budgetary terms, but it is a ⁇ advantageous tax form for the companies concerned. Mr. the Minister of Finance, as too often, was not able to demonstrate to us that additional revenues would be sustainably generated by this system but that, on the contrary, it risked to be ⁇ costly for public finances.
Secondly, this text expands the areas of activity in which these regulated real estate companies can operate. This can be positive in terms of financing infrastructure works. This might have been more coherent in the government’s investment project. But we regret – my colleague Calvo and myself had submitted an amendment in this sense – that investments in infrastructure related to oil products and gas are also eligible and benefit from a favourable tax regime while our country, like everyone else in Europe and around the world, has committed, in the Paris Agreements, toward a de-investment of the carbon sectors. I think it would have been better to be more selective. Since our amendment has not been supported in the Finance Committee, we will not be able to support the text under consideration today.