Minutes - Results of votes - Thursday, 13 December 2018

Choisissez la langue de votre document :

Index

Minutes

Votes

Roll-call votes

Texts adopted

Verbatim reports

Minutes - Results of votes

148k

43k

Thursday, 13 December 2018 - Strasbourg

Abbreviations and symbols

1. Minimum loss coverage for non-performing exposures ***I

2. Expedited settlement of commercial disputes

3. Establishing the space programme of the Union and the European Union Agency for the Space Programme ***I

4. Establishing the Digital Europe programme for the period 2021-2027 ***I

5. US-EU Agreement on cooperation in the regulation of civil aviation safety ***

6. Common system of a digital services tax on revenues resulting from the provision of certain digital services *

Report: Paul Tang (A8-0428/2018)


Subject	Am No	Author	RCV etc.	Vote	RCV/EV – remarks
Amendments by the committee responsible – put to the vote collectively	1 3-5 7-8 10-13 15-19 23 26 29-34 36-40 45-49 52	committee		+
Amendment by the committee responsible: separate vote	2	committee	split
			1	+
			2/EV	-	264, 303, 15
	6	committee	split
			1	+
			2/RCV	+	439, 134, 7
	9	committee	RCV	+	312, 253, 15
	14	committee	sep	+
	20	committee	sep	+
	21	committee	sep	-
	22	committee	sep	+
	25	committee	RCV	-	244, 331, 8
	27	committee	RCV	+	490, 40, 52
	28	committee	sep	+
	35	committee	RCV	+	308, 250, 20
	42	committee	sep	+
	43	committee	sep	+
	44	committee	sep	+
	51	committee	sep	+
Taxable revenues	56-58	PPE	EV	-	234, 335, 12
Article 8, § 1	63	GUE/NGL	RCV	-	128, 444, 8
	54= 60=	38+ Members, GUE/NGL	RCV	-	254, 311, 15
	41	committee	RCV	+	304, 59, 216
After Article 24	55= 61=	38+ Members, GUE/NGL		-
After Article 24	50	committee	RCV	+	458, 59, 66
After recital 3	53= 59=	38+ Members, GUE/NGL		-
Recital 35	62	GUE/NGL	RCV	-	122, 451, 8
Recital 35	24	committee		+
Vote: Commission proposal			RCV	+	451, 69, 64


Requests for roll-call votes
EFDD:	amendments 25, 27, 41, 50
GUE/NGL:	amendments 62, 63
ENF:	amendments 6 (2nd part), 9, 25, 50
S&D:	amendments 35, 54/60


Requests for separate votes
PPE:	amendments 14, 20, 21, 22, 25, 28, 35, 42, 43, 44, 51
EFDD:	amendments 28, 51


Requests for split votes
ENF:
amendment 6
First part	‘Pending such action, which may take time to adopt and implement, Member States face pressure to act on this issue, given the risk that their corporate tax bases are being significantly eroded over time. Uncoordinated measures taken by Member States individually can fragment the Single Market and distort competition, hampering the development of new digital solutions and the Union's competitiveness as a whole. This is why it is necessary to adopt a harmonised approach on an interim solution that will tackle this issue in a targeted way until a comprehensive solution is in place. The interim solution should be temporarily restricted in order to avoid that it inadvertently becoming permanent. Therefore, a sunset clause should be introduced that would result in this Directive automatically expiring upon the establishment of a comprehensive solution, preferably on an international level.’
Second part	‘By 31 December 2020, if no comprehensive solution has been agreed, the Commission should consider a proposal based on Article 116 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, whereby the European Parliament and the Council act in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure. This is essential to come to an agreement without delay to avoid the multiplication of unilateral national digital taxes by Member States.’
PPE:
amendment 2
First part	Text as a whole excluding the words: ‘and intangible assets’
Second part	those words

7. Corporate taxation of a significant digital presence *

Report: Dariusz Rosati (A8-0426/2018)


Subject	Am No	Author	RCV etc.	Vote	RCV/EV – remarks
Amendments by the committee responsible – put to the vote collectively	1-5 10-15 19 21 25-29 34-39	committee		+
Amendments by the committee responsible - separate vote	6	committee	RCV	+	452, 54, 60
	7	committee	sep	-
	8	committee	sep	-
	9	committee	split
			1	+
			2/RCV	-	234, 329, 19
			3/RCV	-	178, 346, 46
	16	committee	sep	-
	17	committee	sep	-
	18	committee	sep	-
	20	committee	RCV	-	204, 364, 10
	22	committee	sep	-
	23	committee	sep	+
	24	committee	sep	-
	30	committee	sep	+
	31	committee	RCV	+	330, 212, 38
	32	committee	sep	+
	33	committee	RCV	+	300, 248, 33
After recital 8	40	Verts/ALE	RCV	+	429, 140, 10
Vote: Commission proposal			RCV	+	439, 58, 81


Requests for roll-call votes
Verts/ALE:	amendment 40
GUE/NGL:	amendments 6, 33
ECR	amendment 40
ENF:	amendments 9 (2nd and 3rd parts), 20, 31, 33


Requests for separate votes
PPE:	amendments 7, 8, 16, 17, 18, 20, 22, 23, 24, 30, 32, 33


Requests for split votes
ENF, PPE:
amendment 9
First part	‘A key objective of this Directive is to improve the resilience of the internal market as a whole in order to address the challenges of taxation of the digitalised economy, while respecting the principle of tax neutrality but also the free movement of services within the Single Market and without discriminating between Union and non-Union companies. This objective cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States acting individually because digital businesses are able to operate cross-border without having any or having only a small physical presence in a jurisdiction and rules are therefore needed to ensure that they pay taxes in the jurisdictions where they make profits. Given this cross-border dimension an initiative at Union level adds value in comparison with what a multitude of national measures could attain. A common initiative across the internal market is required to ensure a harmonised application of the rules on a significant digital presence within the Union. Unilateral and divergent approaches by each Member State could be ineffective and fragment the Single Market by creating national policy clashes, distortions and tax obstacles for businesses in the Union. Hence, specific attention should be paid to ensuring that the Union approach is fair and not discriminatory against any particular Member State. Since the objectives of this Directive can be better achieved at Union level, the Union may adopt measures, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union. In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Directive does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve those objectives.’
Second part	‘While taxation policy is a national competence, Article 115 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union clearly stipulates that the Council should, acting unanimously in accordance with a special legislative procedure and after consulting the European Parliament and the Economic and Social Committee, issue directives for the approximation of such taxation laws, regulations or administrative provisions of the Member States as directly affect the establishment or functioning of the internal market. This Directive does not imply a harmonisation of corporate tax rates in the Union’
Third part	‘and, therefore, it does not restrict Member States' capability to set fair corporate tax rates applicable to digital services' revenues on their own territory.’

8. Iran, notably the case of Nasrin Sotoudeh

9. Egypt, notably the situation of human rights defenders

10. Tanzania

11. Blockchain: a forward-looking trade policy

12. Adequacy of the protection of personal data afforded by Japan

13. Conflict of interest and the protection of the EU budget in the Czech Republic

14. Activities of the European Ombudsman in 2017

15. Deliberations of the Committee on Petitions 2017

Report: Cecilia Wikström (A8-0404/2018)


Subject	Am No	Author	RCV etc.	Vote	RCV/EV – remarks
§ 2	6	EFDD		+
§ 3	7	EFDD	EV	+	125, 308, 16
	§	original text	split
			1	+
			2	+
§ 4	§	original text	split
			1	+
			2	+
§ 9	§	original text	split
			1	+
			2	-
			3	+
After § 9	1	PPE	EV	+	308, 102, 42
§ 10	§	original text	split
			1	-
			2	+
			3	+
			4	+
§ 11	§	original text	split
			1	+
			2	+
§ 19	§	original text	split
			1	+
			2	+
§ 23	§	original text	split
			1	+
			2	+
§ 26	8	EFDD	EV	-	104, 326, 18
	§	original text	split
			1	+
			2/EV	+	227, 211, 13
§ 27	3D	PPE	RCV	-	200, 221, 30
§ 30	§	original text	split
			1	+
			2	+
			3	-
Recital J	4	EFDD		-
Recital S	§	original text	split
			1	+
			2	-
Recital U	5	EFDD	EV	-	200, 211, 36
Vote: resolution (text as a whole)			RCV	+	342, 34, 39


Requests for roll-call votes
Verts/ALE:	amendments 2, 3


Requests for split votes
ALDE:
§ 23
First part	Text as a whole excluding the words: ‘firmly believes that the Commission, the Council and the Member States should give a consistent and effective follow-up to the recommendations of the Working Group’s final report;’
Second part	those words
§ 26
First part	Text as a whole excluding the words: ‘regrets that this has not been the case in the past and that no tangible legislative outcome of previously successful initiatives has taken place;’
Second part	those words
Recital S
First part	Text as a whole excluding the words: ‘provided they would be handled, from the beginning, by the Secretariat of the Committee on Petitions;’
Second part	those words
PPE:
§ 3
First part	Text as a whole excluding the words: ‘used by some irresponsible Member States’
Second part	those words
§ 4
First part	‘Stresses the need for enhanced cooperation between the Commission and other EU institutions and Member States’ national, regional and local authorities in ensuring the adoption and implementation of EU provisions intended to achieve the highest standards of social justice and full and effective protection of the economic, social and cultural rights of all citizens; underlines the need for more active cooperation with Member States’ representatives at committee meetings and for swifter follow-up to requests sent from the committee; calls therefore for a strong commitment from all the authorities involved at national and European level in handling and resolving petitions as a matter of priority;’
Second part	‘notes once again that numerous petitions have received superficial replies from the Commission;’
§ 11
First part	‘Points out that consideration of petitions on precarious working conditions has revealed that, in certain Member States, many workers are the victims of inadmissible and discriminatory practices, reflecting a lack of effective preventive mechanisms and penalties in a number of cases;’
Second part	‘deplores the fact that the Commission has accumulated a substantial backlog of cases relating to breaches of EU labour law by certain Member States, thereby allowing infringements of workers’ rights to continue for years;’
§ 19
First part	Text as a whole excluding the words: ‘43 million diesel’
Second part	those words
ALDE, PPE:
§ 9
First part	‘Considers that, in order to ensure full consistency between the treatment of different petitions, the petitions received should be handled entirely by the Committee on Petitions, and that, to this effect, its Secretariat should be allocated more resources;’ without the words ‘the petitions received should be handled entirely by’ and ‘that, to this effect’
Second part	those words
Third part	‘underlines the fact that the committee’s guidelines, adopted in January 2016, make the treatment of petitions and the decision-making process transparent and clear;’
§ 10
First part	‘Strongly criticises the discretionary power arrogated by the Commission in individual cases when dealing with citizens’ complaints;’
Second part	‘notes that refusal to investigate citizens’ complaints, including individual cases, thoroughly and promptly in line with the Commission’s approach in its 2016 communication entitled ‘European Union Law: Better Results through Better Application’ may prevent a rapid understanding of possible serious systemic shortcomings,’
Third part	‘thereby perpetuating multiple rights infringements at the expense of numerous citizens, whereby it essentially leaves to the national courts the bulk of the responsibility to monitor possible breaches of EU legislation except in systemic breaches; finds too much ambiguity in the interpretation of this notion and considers particularly such an approach within the domain of environmental legislation to be harmful;’
Fourth part	‘considers it a regression from the previous approach to EU environmental legislation implementation and an overall inhibition from its duties of guardian of the Treaties;’
§ 30
First part	Text as a whole excluding the words: ‘the same feedback’ and ‘as the petitioner’ and ‘or other authorities’
Second part	‘the same feedback’ and ‘as the petitioner’
Third part	‘or other authorities’

Miscellaneous

The PPE Group had withdrawn its amendment 2.

Last updated: 25 February 2019

Legal notice - Privacy policy