Proposition 54K3162

Proposition de résolution relative à la résidence numérique et à l'évaluation de son potentiel socioéconomique pour la Belgique.

General information ¶

Authors

MR Emmanuel Burton, Gautier Calomne, Caroline Cassart-Mailleux, Olivier Chastel, David Clarinval, Jean-Jacques Flahaux, Gilles Foret, Benoît Friart, Kattrin Jadin, Benoît Piedboeuf

Submission date

June 19, 2018

Official page

Visit

Status

Adopted

Requirement

Simple

Subjects

digital technology economic policy Internet investment resolution of parliament

Voting ¶

Voted to adopt

Groen CD&V Ecolo ∉ Open Vld N-VA MR VB

Abstained from voting

Vooruit LE PS | SP DéFI PVDA | PTB PP

Party dissidents ¶

• Olivier Maingain (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 ¶

July 17, 2018 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)

Full source

By Mr Jef Van den Bergh, rapporteur, verwijst naar zijn schriftelijk verslag.

I assure you, I will not be too long. I would like, at the beginning of my speech, to briefly return to one of the recommendations of the European Digital Summit in Tallinn in 2017: “We must make the European Union the ideal place of residence for ⁇ and innovators of the digital age. Europe should not be afraid to welcome revolutionary innovations and technologies, or to make the most of the free flow of data.”

Obviously, we cannot miss the train of what some call the “Fourth Industrial Revolution” and miss the many positive impacts it has for our economic fabric, but also for the creation of jobs, which we so need.

The proposal, which is now under vote, is directly in line with this priority for mobilizing foreign investment at the heart of our country’s economy.

As you have learned in the report, it is proposed to the federal government to assess the relevance of a possible reappropriation of the Estonian so-called "digital residence" system, and therefore, the extent of its possible profits on the scale of our country.

Behind this concept of digital residence lies the possibility for any citizen (in this case non-Estonian), regardless of his nationality and his place of residence abroad, to apply, and if necessary to obtain, subject to a number of conditions, a form of digital residence permit in the heart of the Baltic.

Very specifically, this is not a mechanism related to immigration, which would allow anyone to apply to settle physically and legally in Estonia. It is also not a temporary sesame that would serve as a right of entry within the European Union. In reality, digital residence does not confer any rights in matters of immigration, obtaining a residence permit or even citizenship.

Rather, it is an economic device that allows, on the basis of this digital residence, accompanied by the issuance of a physical identity card delivered within a consular post, to establish and manage a business in Estonia from abroad through the Internet network. In doing so, the entire entrepreneurial ecosystem involving the creation of one or more bank accounts, the issuance, signature and sending of official documents or the payment of various taxes and taxes is directly settled via the Internet.

Clearly targeted, but not exclusively, entrepreneurial projects related to different sectors of technological or digital type. This does not specifically require significant physical infrastructure in the host country and is primarily aimed at selling service products on the web. Over the course of four years, this arrangement has enabled the creation of more than 5,000 companies in Estonia that contribute directly to the economic growth of the country as well as the Estonian public finances. Obviously, the Belgian and Estonian realities are not similar and, at this stage, it would be reckless to advocate for a pure and simple adaptation of this lever of economic development.

Therefore, the request aims to ensure that this model of digital residence can be evaluated by the various federal public services, in synergy with regional authorities competent in the field of economy, foreign trade and foreign investment, in order to determine the potential interests of this arrangement and a national transposition.

Despite the expected consequences in terms of economic growth, technological innovation and indirect job creation or even revenue for the Public Treasury, this exercise would also allow to take into account possible sources of difficulties that we have not yet considered at this stage.

It is clear that, in the logic of good governance as we conceive it, a measure can be supported in the long run if and only if it meets a set of conditions in terms of efficiency, performance, cost control and, above all, overall and sustainable results.

I am delighted that this proposal that we bring with my colleague Gilles Forêt and the support of other liberal colleagues (you have all mentioned them all) with an essentially prospective dimension has triggered a broad adherence during our committee work and that it has a similar fate this week.

Mr. Speaker, ladies and gentlemen, dear colleagues, I welcome the mobilization for a Belgium anchored in the Fourth Industrial Revolution – which I indicated in the preamble of my intervention – for a comprehensive strategy that does not exclude any development path and this, with the prisme of pragmatism and prudence.

I would like to reassure you that I will be a little longer.

All this to tell Mr. Calomne that we will abstain from this project, which is inspired by a model of deregulation and social dumping. The model to be followed in Europe must be that of greater harmonisation in the States, in particular with a fair taxation of GAFA, which would allow for healthier competition for European digital actors. More fundamentally, the philosophy of this model is to promote the free movement of goods while restricting that of persons, which is not an acceptable model.

Bravo to! Well answered !