Slightly revised section of the CEEP for Finances

Preamble

We recognize that there can be no infinite economic growth. The earth’s resources are finite.

We must arrive at a democratically organized economic system that shrinks according to plan.

Taxes

EU is the richest economical area in the world. Yet the income from the burden of the taxation is not shared equally.

Tax evasion schemes, primarily but not exclusively those employed by large international corporations, are one of the most pressing problems today. There are three main areas we are focusing on: breakdown of the social contract, race to the bottom, and the digital economy.

Breakdown of the Social Contract

It is a common practice that companies are tasked by their shareholders to pay as little taxes as possible. However, it is national states that use the collected taxes to provide an environment in which the companies can thrive. The companies are granted safety, rule-of-law, enforceability of obligations, legal protection, infrastructure, education. It is thus in their best interest to support such environment by paying their taxes.

There are many tax evasion tools available and Pirates will strive to limit them as much as possible. Numbers from IMF suggest that tax evasion schemes cost us almost €500 billion a year, while in 1990 it was below €100 billion/year. This is an alarming trend. To illustrate the magnitude of the issue, €500 billion is almost half of the EU financial framework for 2014-2020, about 20 % more than the volume of charity worldwide, or 3-5 % of the worldwide tax collection.

We propose to fight this by the OECD Base erosion and profit shifting and EU Anti tax-avoidance directive to deter profit shifting to a low or no tax country and virtual transfer of non-existing goods and services.

Race to the Bottom

Many states tend to provide tax breaks or other fiscal incentives to attract branch offices of large international corporations. These often do not produce anything of tangible value and thus serve only to reduce the tax burden of their parent companies. In many cases, the effective tax rate for companies taking advantage of these opportunities was less than 1% of the tax base. The result of the inter-state competition to attract companies is a race to the bottom in terms of tax revenue.

The European Commission is struggling against the race to the bottom practices by enacting rules for the Anti-tax single internal market.
For example, in an investigation under Article 107, TFEU ruled that the Irish tax system constitutes an illegal state subsidy to Apple and that Apple is required to pay € 14 billion in tax debts.

Proposed solutions - CCCTB (Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base); greater oversight by the Commission over tax haven in the EU. The Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base calculates the taxation of a multinational entity in each country of the EU based on the sales, capital and labor in each of the respective country. This will eliminate mismatches between national systems, preferential regimes and hidden tax rulings, which tax avoiders exploit. It will remove the need for transfer pricing and fights the profit erosion, which is a primary route for profit shifting.

Digital Economy

The internet is a global medium transcending geographical boundary. Since the existing legal framework is more or less territorial, it often fails to grasp intricacies introduced by digital economy.

Our goal is to bring the finances of the digital economy under democratic control and align its objectives with those of society.

Proposed solution - to change the current rules of the so-called “permanent establishment” and tax certain digital services at the place where it was created at a rate of 3 % of the turnover. This will be applicable to the companies considered as to have taxable digital presence based on their annual revenues or number of contracts between digital and their customers in a taxable year. Ultimately, the new system secures a real link between where digital profits are made and where they are taxed.

Structural Funds

Structural funds are an important tool to strengthen the Europe’s cohesion and express solidarity in Europe still divided by the different performances of national and regional economies. We will support any effort to increase its flexibility so that it can respond promptly to the up-to-date developments of the economy or security situation. We will also support any effort to decrease the bureaucratic burden associated with the processing of the applications for subventions (for example, based on the differentiation among applicants according to the real results of their applications in the past.)

The funds should be managed in a transparent and efficient way, the EU Commission should maintain a substantial control role in the shared management of the funds. A more important role of the EU Parliament could be considered in the future.

It is fully legitimate to limit funding of the projects as a response to abuse of the funds and fraudulent use of the subsidies. However, we oppose, as a step contradictory to the original sense of the structural funds, any effort to use the limitation of the access to the funds as a means of pressure to the receiver countries in connection to unrelated political issues.

International Trade Policy

We reject multilateral international agreements that entrench dysfunctional monopolies and patents to the detriment of civil rights and human freedoms.

The Pirates require all trade agreements to respect the protection of personal data of consumers and firms.

Principles for Trade Agreements

Pirates stipulate that in all negotiations of the European Union on trade agreements the following conditions must be met:

  • The European Parliament must ratify the treaty and the treaty must be negotiated upholding the principles listed below;
  • There is comprehensive access to information and public hearings during the negotiating process;
  • The proposed treaty includes respect for freedom of the Internet, social and civil rights, and sustainable development;
  • The interests of small and medium-sized enterprises are taken into account.

Those conditions are expanded below:

Participation of the European Parliament

Trade agreements contain political decisions that are important to society and difficult to change after their adoption. Therefore, the European Parliament, the only body in the EU that has a direct democratic mandate, should have relevant position when dealing with trade policies.

The European Parliament should have access to all the negotiation material via its Committee on International Trade (INTA) and have the right to be an observer to negotiations, and the right to make binding remarks to the European Commission.

Comprehensive access to information and public hearings

The Pirates are against secret negotiations. Documents concerning the negotiations of trade agreements should be made available to the European Parliament as well as to the public. We demand that all results of consultations must be published promptly and in full.

Respect for freedom of the Internet, social and civil rights, and sustainable development

Pirates consider the people’s right to privacy and self-determination as self-evident. Therefore, they also need to be respected and promoted in the context of trade agreements.

As these principles apply to all people, the EU has to make sure that trade agreements will not allow their trading partners to breach them.

All future European trade agreements should be based on the principle of sustainable development. The agreement cannot be ratified if it has a negative impact on the environment.

The interests of small and medium-sized enterprises must be taken into account

At the moment trade agreements mainly take into account the interests of global enterprises, while small and medium-sized companies rarely benefit; SMEs are increasingly ousted from the market. We want to change that.

The responsibility of international corporations

The European Union must make it possible to engage the legal responsibility of companies in the event of infringement of European environmental law for their actions on the territory of the Union but also for their actions outside the territory of the EU if in the latter case the seat of their parent company is in the territory of the European Union.

1 Like

Hello, I think this chapter should be called “Economy”. And as such make room for a broader perspective. Which to some extent already is there.

A very very strong “NO GO” for the preamble.

Degrowth is nicely put a naive concept. It would cause the loss of technology that we need to survive. The “back to the roots” idea neglects that we are way too many people on this planet to go back to a low tech society.

There are better options, have a look at the space program.

Trade agreements: Add a general rejection of private arbitration courts. The EU should not close any agreements that include private arbitration courts and exit all existing agreements that include them (i.e. the energy charta).

1 Like

We are currently discussing the preamble at https://jitsi.pirati.cz/ceep

As agreed on call, this part should be transfered, incl. the ISDS, from Foreign Affairs to Finances Chapter

International Trade Policy

Pirates reject multilateral international agreements that entrench dysfunctional monopolies and patents to the detriment of civil rights and human freedoms.

The Pirates require all trade agreements to respect the protection of personal data of consumers and firms.

Principles for Trade Agreements

Pirates stipulate that in all negotiations of the European Union on trade agreements the following conditions must be met:

  • The European Parliament must ratify the treaty and the treaty must be negotiated upholding the principles listed below;
  • There is comprehensive access to information and public hearings during the negotiating process;
  • The proposed treaty includes respect for freedom of the Internet, social and civil rights, and sustainable development;
  • The interests of small and medium-sized enterprises are taken into account.

Investor-state arbitration

These treaties have been found to favor multinational corporations, while small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) have been left behind. The prime concern is Investor to State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) and unfair ‘intellectual property’ provisions. ISDS or its variants, such as the Investor Court System (ICS) are often used by multinationals to forestall regulations they disagree with, or as a business model at the expense of ordinary people. Pirates oppose ISDS in trade agreements.

1 Like

Degrowth has nothing to do with “back to the trees.” That there is infinite economic growth is naive. Resources are coming to an end. Capitalism needs the growth to pay the interest for the money creation. Therein lies the design flaw. Technological change has basically nothing to do with economic growth. Ideally, it even has the opposite effect.

Degrowth is a sure way to collapse the technology development and production chain.

We have seen the results of problems in the supply chain in the last few years, though most have only seen the final effects, not the causes that lead to the problems.

One of the problems with chip supplies was limited availability of special sheet metal for the lead frames (the contacts and base plate that are the mechanical structure of the case for the chips) caused by lockdowns and delays in the logistic chain.

It is naive to assume that the whole world economy could be controlled in a way to reduce production and not cause supply chains to fail. Basically degrowth is the same wrong idea as a communist economy.

The solution is a circular economy and accessing space. In any case if we continue to dwell oin just one planet it is only a question of time until some disaster gets us.

Ever heard of the logarithm function ?

The goal is to reduce gas emissions and materials consumption at sustainable levels. Nothing supports degrowth as an operational mean to achieve these and it is easily argued that it is politically impossible. That’s just modern washed-up malthusianism coming from the round-bellied petite bourgeoisie. It is even less theoretically grounded than malthusianism. To achieve welfare you should aim for efficiency, not shrink production (I mean, GDP per capita going down is self explanatory). Environnemental objectives have been side lined for a while and now that we know this is a matter of survival, these constraints must be integrated in costs, production, regulations and reportings. Do not do this the bigot way.

1 Like

Uh-huh… “Don’t do it the bigoted way.” I just learned that sensible shrinking or stagnation of supposedly necessary economic growth is pure “communism.” Well, the statement:
“We recognize that there can be no infinite economic growth. The earth’s resources are finite.”

and

“We must arrive at a democratically organized economic system that shrinks according to plan.” is absolutely intolerable and now also bigoted.

You can write it like that, but it is only ad hominem.

This is not very constructive

You seem active here, and it looks like our messages had trouble reaching you. Would you kindly provide the invoice the french pirate party requested as an ordinary member, please ?

Thanks !

I think the bigotry lies in the adoption an ideology which isn’t actionable nor proven or even theoritically established.

I don’t think the ad hominem is caracterized here : I am not attacking you but the basis of the ideology you are defending.

Have a good evening.

:blush:

If we could not spillover issues from somewhere else into this channel (plenty of space elsewhere, be my guest), that would be highly appreciated. Thank you :wink:

1 Like

Dear participants,

Please have a look at your posts in this thread and see if you could edit them in such a way as to remove unneccessary and aggressive parts from your text, so that I won’t have to remove the posts altogether.

The aim is to use Discourse to work together, and that requires us all to consider how we phrase our contributions.

/Mod.

1 Like

The degrowth was thouroughly as a concept discussed even in the framework of Greens/EFA group. The discussion clearly shown that even other movements (e.g. Greens) are not unified in the view on this matter. The perception varies quite strongly among the european countries (and local parties) as in some of them it is considered legitimate alternative for progressive movements, while for the others it is mostly unknown.

Knowing the reality especially in the Eastern countries, where this concept sounds absolutely new, I would rather stay careful when attempting to include it into CEEP. Without proper introduction and knowledge of context, couple of short sentences could look quite explosive and rather damage our chances for success in the election.

1 Like

Degrowth is meant in the sense of general economic growth, which is actually only needed to pay the interest on loans.
The use of artificial intelligence would be a good example of degrowth if, on the one hand, an increase in productivity is associated with it and less work is distributed. Economic growth has nothing to do with inflation. This is only a market function.
No one will seriously deny that the earth’s resources are finite and that a fairer distribution of wealth is needed. There is something here about “democratization” of the economy.
The current situation serves only the formation of oligopolies and monopolies, which are in the hands of very few people. Someone has to pay the interest. Only working people do that, because money does not work.

Please, consider how such a sentence

…economic system that shrinks according to plan…

sounds, but not in the context of Germany (where the GDP per capita is 51 000 $ per year) but Bulgaria (GDP per capita is 15 000 $). And the text could be and should be understandable also for people in Moldova (GDP per capita is 6 000 $).

Idea of “shrinking economic system” sounds extremely outrageous in such conditions. The people rather expect more equal distribution of profits from economy…

(I understand you do not promote suppressing of welfare for them but rather less focus on calculations of GDP as such, but take into account that such a concept can be pretty hard comprehensible for random person at the street which opens our programme and reads first 2 sentences).

1 Like

May we consider addition of following paragraph

One-stop shop for taxes

European citizens and companies still face enormous administrative burden due to taxes. While we respect specificity and needs of each of European countries, we recognize a space for simplification of the administration. Tax payers shall be able to fullfil their obligation by contacting single tax office and providing single tax statement for whole Europe. It is obligation of the public administration to distribute the tax income accordingly to respective European states or territories. The governance in the digital age shall be friendly also for commuters and companies operating in multiple European countries.

Artificial Intelligence isn’t degrowth but a technology producing productivity gains. Ceteris paribus this means more production and growth as a consequence.

Are you sure you are using degrowth in its correct definition ?

1 Like

Branko Milanovic calls a proposition for degrowth political suicide.

Technological progress, such as artificial Intelligence, affects the cost of production. In competitive markets this also raises wages, market power (monopsony) suppresses wages.

1 Like

The drivers of prices and wages are multiple but I agree with the points you made and your logic. I also agree with Milanovic.

We don’t need this ideology in our proposals, and even less in the Finances section.

1 Like

For your information and possible inspiration…
https://generalsemantics4all.wordpress.com/2013/11/07/aristotelian-and-non-aristotelian-economies/
This is non-contractual. :joy_cat: