EUROPE - The European Federation for Retirement Provision (EFRP) in conjunction with PwC is preparing formal complaints with the European Commission against 13 member states including the UK, the Netherlands and Germany on discriminatory tax treatment of foreign pension funds.
The provisional report, which establishes how pension funds suffer discriminatory treatment when making cross border investments in bonds and shares, found that in 13 member states including Ireland, Spain, Austria, Italy and France, local pension funds are granted more favourable tax treatment than foreign pension funds receiving similar income.
Jaap Maassen EFRP chairman presented the PwC report and an EFRP report on the discriminatory tax treatment of pension institutions on respect of cross border transfers of pension capital to the European Commissioner for Taxation and Customs Union, László Kovács.
Marcel Jakobsen, senior tax manager at PwC, said: “This is a very important issue for our pension fund clients and we are trying to safeguard their rights. In some member states, foreign pension funds are charged withholding taxes as high as 15%-25%.
“We are trying to put pressure on these states through the European Union in a bid to make these states amend their discriminatory tax treatment and to try and claim a refund for our clients.”
The EFRP report on discriminatory tax treatment of cross border transfers of pension capital, some member states practice a straightforward ban on cross border transfers of pension capital whereas they allow tax free domestic transfers.
Maassen (pictured) said that some member states – directly or indirectly – tax cross border transfers of pension capital severely.
Moreover, the EFRP found that some member states even tax cross border transfers in.
Most people think it is right that savers take responsibility to protect from pension scams.
More than 100,000 savers face being landed with huge tax bills following tiny uplifts to their pension, a Freedom of Information (FOI) reply has revealed.
Alan Pickering says politicians should have the freedom to redefine what is meant by 'absolute'