Tax avoidance in Luxemburg and the Recovery and Resilience Facility
10.5.2021
Priority question for written answer P-002479/2021
to the Commission
Rule 138
Paul Tang (S&D)
On 4 May, the Guardian revealed that Amazon had paid no corporate income tax in Europe. This despite announcing record global profits of USD 8.1bn for Q1 in 2021 and European sales of EUR 44bn. Amazon avoided paying taxes due to an arrangement in Luxembourg and is not alone in benefiting from Luxembourg’s tax system. The Tax Justice Network has calculated that by enabling corporate tax abuse, Luxembourg is inflicting a tax loss on other countries of over USD 9bn a year.
On 30 April Luxembourg submitted its recovery and resilience plan, requesting EUR 93 million in grants. Commissioner Gentiloni has repeatedly outlined, including during a hearing with Parliament’s Subcommittee on Tax Matters (FISC) on 24 September and in plenary on 10 May, that aggressive tax planning should be addressed in the plans of countries that have received country-specific recommendations on this topic, including Luxembourg.
- 1.Can the Commission confirm that it remains committed to only approving the national plans of countries issued with country-specific recommendations on aggressive tax planning if those recommendations have been adequately addressed?
- 2.Does it still take the view that Luxembourg facilitates aggressive tax planning?
- 3.Does it believe it is fair that Luxembourg can request EU funding while denying other EU Member States of much-needed corporate income tax?