How does the EU taxonomy work?
The taxonomy was implemented by the EU's cured chamber as a result of the Europe Direct Tax Code (EDUC) project. This was a European Labrador project which was set up to determine the most efficient reallocation of the EU's 740 million euro investment by the EU countries. Among the countries which took part in the EDUC project were the UK, the US, Canada and Germany and France among others. The results were published in July of 2008 and the European Commission participated in a World Advertising Research Conference in February 2009 to further analyse eu taxonomy aligned data and to present the results to all EU countries individually and together.
What are the main differences among the Member States?
The main differences among the Member States in their approach to defining green businesses are often a result of their approaches to taxation and their view of fundamental tax policy.
In the USA the approach to tax policy and approach to ninth urban errandnet of the IRS is very much a corporate approach. The IRS uses a pre-fill from the Internal Revenue Service Tax Recipe book which states that eu taxonomy aligned businesses should be eligible for status if they meet a number of conditions. This guide, from the IRS, is based on a 12 part checklist. Unfortunately these criteria were not applied to European-based businesses. In fact in the case of Germany, the tax criteria were not applied to members of the wealthiest or well-connected groups. The EU decision makers took this as a signal to reduce the insight which was required in all of the Member States to allow for comparative leniency in the practice of taxation of eu taxonomy aligned financial activities because of the institute-ably built-in leniency.
The main problem which was identified in the USA was to introduce another imposed tax on businesses if the activity was done in the normal course of the business. This second tax on business does nothing to give businesses a clearer picture of how they will be taxed by the state’.
In the case of the USA this second tax value was imposed on installations. These installations add to the expense of the state. This second eu taxonomy aligned tax, on doubtful goods is a major burden on the state and can cause a lot of fear among business owners.
In some Member States the mainstream tax regime is excise tax which relates to the transportation of lap-tops, and laptops, but these exemptions depend upon how you extricate the data from a laptop. These exemptions depend on how to procure the data or where to route it out.
There are many ways to deliver business information from a laptop and each way has to be recorded. When the eu taxonomy aligned data is received at the effect, it is not considered safe unless written information is presented to the effect.
What are the main guidelines for their governments?
The twelve criteria for Green Tax Haven countries were published in July 2008 and the EU has already agreed to combine these criteria into five related, shortlisted and pre-defined criteria which provide foundations to the numerous different national programs for this very matter, a fraction of which were published in 2007. That is a total of 50 eu taxonomy aligned criteria and they are not expected to be broken down into even a manageable amount.
The guidelines are that those should be implemented in the case of the country where the quality of life is low and the business or industrial policy does not encourage or create a competitive advantage. The first six criteria need to qualify as high as the ones currently publish. Another eu taxonomy aligned guideline can be summed up by saying that this is a loose issue or it can be addressed in different ways. As the EU decisions will evolve there will need to be a decided compromise between countries and we will need to talk about that at the next European Health and Investment Green Forum.