Details

  • Service: Tax
  • Industry: Financial Services
  • Type: Press release
  • Date: 31/01/2012

KPMG reviews levels of government support in Member States for the European Commission’s proposal for a Financial Transactions Tax 

  • Only three of 27 EU Member States are clearly in favour

 

 

The European Commission’s proposal for an EU wide tax on financial transactions (FTT) has generated much public and political discussion since it was published on September 28, 2011. President Sarkozy this week announced proposals for a French FTT to be introduced in July 2012, and the issue has been high on the agenda of many EU Member States’ governments, leading to a British veto of recent proposals for fundamental EU reforms addressing the ongoing economic crisis.

Notwithstanding the potential economic benefits cited by the Commission, there has been significant criticism of the proposal, in particular as to whether it would in fact achieve its economic objectives and as regards its potential negative impact on EU Member States financial sectors and GDP as a whole.

KPMG’s EU Tax Centre, with the help of KPMG member firms and their EU Tax and Financial Services Tax networks, has prepared an informal ´FTT Thermometer´ which displays KPMG member firms’ understanding of the overall position of their respective governments on the FTT proposals. 

The review shows that of the 27 Member States, currently only  three Member States are  clearly in favour, with three clearly against. That leaves another 21 in varying degrees of support, opposition or indecision. 
Sarah Lane, financial services tax partner at KPMG, commented: “With only three countries clearly in favour, the Commission’s proposal obviously has a long way to go.  Some of the Member States which are nominally in favour of the proposal support this subject to an FTT being introduced globally, and the reality is that global introduction is not going to happen, at least not in the foreseeable future. So seen from this angle, the prospects of introduction by the EU seem very uncertain.

“There are lessons to learn from the Swedish experience of introducing an FTT back in the 1980s, which caused the bottom to fall out of the Swedish financial markets.  This is a vivid illustration of what many fear may happen if the FTT is introduced in the EU and may well be driving a lot of the current opposition to the proposal. In these difficult economic times governments are going to be looking very critically at anything that may drive business away or reduce GDP.

“Concerns about the proposal are being fuelled by reports such as that produced last December for the Italian Association of Financial Intermediaries and the Nordic Securities Association, that concluded that the proposed FTT is likely to have a significant and highly uncertain negative impact on the EU economy – not just for international financial centres such as London, but for all business and investors in the EU.

“So far little attention has been paid to the question who gets the revenue from an EU FTT, and this is clearly a crucial question. The Commission sees this as a kind of EU tax that would at least in part support the EU budget. However, even if the principle of an EU FTT was accepted, the question how the revenue is shared out – not only between the EU and Member States but also between the Member States themselves - is likely to be hotly debated.”

 

 Financial Transaction Tax Thermometer: Shows the position of the 27 Member States


LEVEL OF SUPPORT

 

EU MEMBER STATE

Supporting (Green)

France, Germany and Spain

Supporting subject to conditions such as global or EU introduction, and are overall more positive (Lime)

Austria, Belgium, Finland, Hungary, Italy, Lithuania and Romania

Neutral, divided or have not yet expressed an opinion (Light yellow)

Estonia, Greece, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia and Slovenia

Supporting if certain conditions are satisfied, such as global or EU introduction, but are overall less positive (Orange)

Cyprus, Denmark, Ireland, Latvia, Luxembourg, Malta the Netherlands and the UK

Against (Red)

Bulgaria, the Czech Republic and Sweden

 

 

Economic background to EU FTT proposal

 

A tax on financial sector transactions would be an answer to a number of problems largely associated with the financial sector crisis, according to the explanatory memorandum to the European Commission’s draft directive. In particular it would:

 

  • avoid fragmentation of the internal market by coordinating national FTTs

 

  • ensure a fair contribution by the financial sector to the costs of the recent crisis

 

  • ensure a level playing field between the financial sector and other sectors

 

  • remove certain distortions from the financial markets

 

  • provide a source of own revenue for the EU

 

The European Commission’s original indications were that the directive could generate revenues of around 57 billion euros annually at EU level. Notwithstanding these assumed benefits, the European Commission estimated a negative impact on GDP of between 0.53% and 1.76%. Since then, the European Commission is understood to have amended this estimate down to between 0.2% and 0.3%.  However, the assumptions underlying these estimates are complex and controversial.

Scope of the FTT proposal

 

The FTT would be imposed on transactions involving financial instruments carried out by at least one EU based financial institution. The FTT has been designed to cover a wide range of financial transactions, including the purchase and sale of financial instruments such as shares and bonds but also the conclusion of derivatives agreements such as options and futures relating to securities or commodities.

The draft directive provides for a minimum level of FTT of 0.1 percent for financial transactions other than those related to derivatives agreements and 0.01 percent in the case of derivative agreements.

It is only aimed at taxing transactions involving financial institutions and not transactions carried out by ordinary individuals or businesses, such as the conclusion of insurance contracts, nor should it affect most primary market operations. Financial institutions are broadly defined under the draft directive to include traditional financial institutions such as banks and investment entities, but could also cover holding companies, and special purpose vehicles, such as securitization vehicles. Financial institutions can be subject to the FTT even if they act in the name or for the account of another person.

 

In order for the directive to apply, at least one of the parties to the transaction would need to be established in a Member State. Non EU-based financial institutions may, in certain circumstances, also become subject to the FTT if the transaction involves an EU counter-party. The FTT is chargeable for each financial institution, i.e. the overall rates applicable to a transaction involving two EU counterparties would be 0.2 percent and 0.02 percent for non-derivative and derivative transactions respectively.

Reactions to the FTT proposal

 

There has been considerable public and political discussion since the proposal was issued. A clear concern that has been raised is the risk that financial sector business will relocate outside the EU to jurisdictions that do not impose such a tax. For this reason a number of governments are understood to only be willing to support the proposal if the FTT is introduced globally. Notwithstanding this concern, both Germany and France have indicated that, if agreement could not be reached across the whole EU (27 Member States), the tax could be introduced by a smaller group, such as the Eurozone members. Some Member States are understood to take the position that introduction in the EU would be sufficient to address this issue. Questions have also been raised as to whether the FTT is actually the most appropriate instrument to address the economic objectives put forward by the European Commission.

ENDS

Notes to editor:

 

The FTT thermometer is based on a snap-shot survey carried out between January 18, 2012 and January 20, 2012 within KPMG member firms of their understanding of their respective governments’ positions, for example as expressed in public reactions from relevant public figures or in informal discussions. The FTT thermometer contains an element of subjectivity and does not necessarily reflect positions expressed in official publications. Moreover taking into account the politically sensitive nature of the FTT initiative, positions within the EU could suffer significant changes in a relatively short timeframe.

For further information please contact

 

Monica Fiumara, Senior PR Manager, KPMG
Tel: +44 (0)20 7694 5674 / Mobile: +44 (0)7901 105180
Email: monica.fiumara@kpmg.co.uk


KPMG Press Office: 020 7694 8773


About KPMG


KPMG LLP, a UK limited liability partnership, is a subsidiary of KPMG Europe LLP and operates from 22 offices across the UK with over 11,000 partners and staff.  The UK firm recorded a turnover of £1.7 billion in the year ended September 2011. KPMG is a global network of professional firms providing Audit, Tax, and Advisory services. We operate in 150 countries and have 138,000 professionals working in member firms around the world. The independent member firms of the KPMG network are affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative ("KPMG International"), a Swiss entity.  KPMG International provides no client services.