The real problem with the EU is whose in control.

[Himaginn]

In 2012, the European Commission commenced infraction proceedings against the UK claiming that its application of the reduced rate for the installation of energy saving materials was not in accordance with EU law.

Thank you. Exactly the point: The claim that member countries are free to set their own VAT rates is simply false. They have leeway - for the present - to set rates only within the bounds set by the EU directives.

That's about as much freedom as telling a person that he has the freedom to go anywhere he likes in the United Kingdom - Just so long as he doesn't go north of Watford or south of Surbiton.

See my explanation of available VAT settings and anti-competitive practices.
AJS's example may be a prima facie case of settings VAT rates outside of the allowable margins to gain a competitive advantage.
I say 'may' because I haven't examined the motivation behind the case.

 

[PBC_1966]

IT PLAYS A GENUINE ROLE IN CREATING NEW LAWS!

I'm not sure if you're missing the point completely or deliberately trying to avoid answering the question. Can the European Parliament pass, repeal, and amend any legislation it likes without reference to the European Commission?

 

[Himaginn]

IT PLAYS A GENUINE ROLE IN CREATING NEW LAWS!

I'm not sure if you're missing the point completely or deliberately trying to avoid answering the question. Can the European Parliament pass, repeal, and amend any legislation it likes without reference to the European Commission?

You think UK Parliament sits in Houses of Parliament and writes out their own legislation? Of course not! They have committees, legal secretaries, legal researchers, etc, etc to do it for them. Only when the committees etc have written the laws, reports, etc to be passed, is it debated.
The EU Commission is subservient and acts on the guidance and instructions of the EU Parliament, (and EU Council)

just like UK Parliament, normally reports/laws/suggestions etc are written outside of Parliament and then they are debated, passed back for amendment, etc and the process goes on.

 

[PBC_1966]

You think UK Parliament sits in Houses of Parliament and writes out their own legislation?.

No, of course others actually draft the legislation (and make a complete hash of it sometimes as well). But the point is that the legal secretaries, committees and so on are bound to follow instructions. Is the European Commission bound in the same way?

 

[Himaginn]

You think UK Parliament sits in Houses of Parliament and writes out their own legislation?.

No, of course others actually draft the legislation (and make a complete hash of it sometimes as well). But the point is that the legal secretaries, committees and so on are bound to follow instructions. Is the European Commission bound in the same way?

How many more times are you going to ask the same question?
Read the links before spreading urban mythology.

 

[PBC_1966]

The VAT settings, i.e. minimum and maximums are sensible anti-competitive tools.
Suppose UK wanted to give Scotch Whisky a competitive advantage over Irish or Breton whisky by reducing the VAT on Scotch Whisky?
Suppose UK wanted to give VAT relief on kilts, bagpipes, Welsh slate, etc, etc?

Suppose it did. Why shouldn't it? The U.K. government is supposed to be acting in the interests of the United Kingdom and its people.

It becomes obvious that the allowable margins for VAT is an important anti-competitive mechanism.
Each country can set their tax rates within margins.

So you admit that the claim that each country can determine its own rates is false, because it may do so only within certain margins.

Again, the EU makes a huge noise about "free trade" and a "free market." The reality is that the EU wants a highly regulated, tightly controlled market. If it were really about free trade, then why shouldn't the U.K. decide to apply reduced tax to some item and then let the market decide how things turn out as people weigh up the prices with what they're getting and decide whether to buy a British widget or a French widget?

Just why does the tax have to be - within those margins which exist for the present - the same in the U.K., France, Germany, Spain, and all the others?

 

[PBC_1966]

How many more times are you going to ask the same question?.

How about until you answer it?

 

[Himaginn]

The VAT settings, i.e. minimum and maximums are sensible anti-competitive tools.
Suppose UK wanted to give Scotch Whisky a competitive advantage over Irish or Breton whisky by reducing the VAT on Scotch Whisky?
Suppose UK wanted to give VAT relief on kilts, bagpipes, Welsh slate, etc, etc?

Suppose it did. Why shouldn't it? The U.K. government is supposed to be acting in the interests of the United Kingdom and its people.

In a Common Market, there is an agreement that no country can apply quotas, tariffs, taxes, whatever to gain a competitive advantage over the other countries. You're in or you're out. you can't have the benefits and pretend the disadvantages don't apply. There are so many analogies I don't need to consider any.

It becomes obvious that the allowable margins for VAT is an important anti-competitive mechanism.
Each country can set their tax rates within margins.

So you admit that the claim that each country can determine its own rates is false, because it may do so only within certain margins.

That's what I've been saying. It's a bit like you can drive on our roads but you must observe the speed limits or there'll be trouble.

Again, the EU makes a huge noise about "free trade" and a "free market." The reality is that the EU wants a highly regulated, tightly controlled market. If it were really about free trade, then why shouldn't the U.K. decide to apply reduced tax to some item and then let the market decide how things turn out as people weigh up the prices with what they're getting and decide whether to buy a British widget or a French widget?

Just why does the tax have to be - within those margins which exist for the present - the same in the U.K., France, Germany, Spain, and all the others?

Because that is the mechanism used.
If you know of a better one I'm sure they'll be pleased to hear from you.

BTW, It does ensure freedom for consumers to choose which products they prefer, rather than then ones proscribed by individual governments or dumped on us.

 

[ajstoneservices]

The reduced rate of vat in the UK was for goods supplied and fitted in the UK. Where they come from does not matter. As the reduced rate was applied across the UK no supplier/installer could gain an advantage over another outside of buying power.

Buying power was managed via the use of mips.

 

[Himaginn]

The reduced rate of vat in the UK was for goods supplied and fitted in the UK. Where they come from does not matter. As the reduced rate was applied across the UK no supplier/installer could gain an advantage over another outside of buying power.

Buying power was managed via the use of mips.

As I said i haven't looked into it in that much depth. But I suspect that if the EU became involved it was for a very good reason.
Law makers, regulation monitors etc of any sort do not normally bother getting involved unless there is good reason.

 

[ajstoneservices]

I gave you the links you chose to ignore them

 

[PBC_1966]

That's what I've been saying. It's a bit like you can drive on our roads but you must observe the speed limits or there'll be trouble.

What you actually said was:

Pure fiction. Tax rates are decided by individual members. Look it up before making silly statements. Oops silly me, that's not how the Out-ers present their case.

But now you admit that individual members are not free to decide their own tax rates, because they are bound by the limits the EU imposes.

 

[Himaginn]

I gave you the links you chose to ignore them

Not at all. But the links are bland links showing EU VAT rates and the UK governments announcement about the infraction. I've had to do much further digging to get to the bottom of the rationale behind it and I'm not finished yet.
Incidentally the ruling hasn't been applied yet.
The only additional information I've found so far is that the VAT reduction was aimed at social housing but UK applied it to all housing. How or why that should matter I don't know yet.
At the moment I can only suspect that the VAT reduction was aimed at disadvantaged people, and the UK applied it to anyone, thus perhaps giving the average UK person some advantage over the rest of EU citizens by making these energy saving products so much cheaper in UK than in EU. Why that should matter I don't know yet. Perhaps it would make the UK citizens having subsidised energy bills or something? But that's as far as I've got so far.
Perhaps you could offer your interpretation?

 

[ajstoneservices]

Incidentally the ruling hasn't been applied yet.

I told you that as well. April's finance bill. August it comes into force.

 

[PBC_1966]

Because that is the mechanism used. If you know of a better one I'm sure they'll be pleased to hear from you.

What's wrong with permitting free trade of goods with each country deciding on the tax for itself?

Are you aware of how sales tax works over here, in broad terms? There is no national system, each state operates its own entirely distinct system, and while the rules within each state are consistent for what's taxable, what isn't and so on, the actual rate applied can vary even within a state.

Here in California, for example, the basic rate is 7.5%, the bulk going to state funds and a little to the county where the sale takes place. Some counties and cities apply their own small additional tax, e.g. where I'm located in Shasta County the sales tax is just the basic 7.5% across the whole county, except in the City of Anderson a few miles from here where it's 8%. Down in southern California there are places where the rate goes up to 9 or 10%. And in this state, goods are taxable but services are not (there are exemptions for some goods as well, notably food).

Go to other states and you'll find compltely different state and local rates and completely different rules about what's taxable and what isn't. Drive about 120 miles from where I am across into Oregon and there is no sales tax at all.

This is all within the "common market" of a single country, and it works just fine.

Yet the EU seems to think that the exact same rules - and, eventually, the exact same rates - should apply not just across a single nation but across an entire group of nations.

BTW, It does ensure freedom for consumers to choose which products they prefer, rather than then ones proscribed by individual governments or dumped on us.

People are still free to choose. It's just a matter of weighing up the costs, as they already do when selecting between two different items from two different manufacturers, exclusive of any tax issues.