Pan European Personal Pension Products Will The Proposed European Tax Recommendation Work

This article discusses the effectiveness of the pan-European Personal Pension Product (PEPP) Tax Recommendation and the accompanying PEPP "portability service''. It provides an overview of certain anticipated problems in relation to the future taxation of PEPPs in Europe that led to this initiative, followed by an analysis of the effectiveness of the Recommendation and PEPP ''portability service'' in eradicating such problems. Finally, it reviews options for an alternative EU-wide PEPP tax regime.

In June 2017, the European Commission proposed a framework for a pan-European pension product (PEPP) designed to give EU citizens a new option for good value and safe voluntary supplementary pension saving. This could support pension adequacy and at the same time provide another source of long-term investment funds and so help to meet the objectives of the capital markets union (CMU). Together with a proposal for a regulation for a pan-European personal pension product, the Commission also presented a recommendation to encourage Member States to grant the same tax treatment to PEPPs as they grant to similar existing national personal pension products. On 11 January 2018, the Conference of Presidents of the European Parliament authorised its Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (ECON) to draft a legislative own-initiative report on the 'Tax treatment of pension products, including the pan-European personal pension product 2018/2002(INL)', to be prepared by the rapporteur Sophia in 't Veld (ALDE, the Netherlands) – see the proposal for a motion for a resolution in Annex 1. All legislative own-initiative reports are automatically accompanied by a European added value assessment (EAVA). The purpose of an EAVA is to support a European Parliament legislative initiative by providing an assessment of the potential added value of taking action at EU level. Two European Parliament draft reports have been prepared as part of the process leading to a decision regarding the European Commission PEPP proposal and PEPP recommendation. The first draft report covers the PEPP proposal and the second the PEPP recommendation. This EAVA analyses both the PEPP proposal and the recommendation and provides information in support of the committee’s draft report on the Commission's PEPP recommendation. There exists clear evidence for the European added value to be achieved through the PEPP. As the PEPP facilitates cross-border mobility by providing a simpler pension product for people who have worked or who plan to work in several Member States, it would contribute to the free movement of people. An economic dimension derives from the fact that supranational operations deliver greater benefits to Members States (increased voluntary pension savings), savers (better and cheaper products, larger variety of products) and service providers (larger customer base, simplified legislation, fewer cross-border transaction costs).

Regulation 2019/1238 concerning a pan-European personal pension product has entered into force on 14 August 2019. As a result, it becomes much easier for EU citizens to contribute to a personal pension product on a voluntary basis. It is expected that as from 2021, financial institutions are able to offer a pan-European personal pension product (PEPP) to EU citizens. The tax treatment of the PEPP is not included in the Regulation. However, ECJ case law on tax treatment of private pension products is applicable. In this article, the tax treatment of the PEPP is analysed. The focus of this article is on tax related aspects in case of contributions to a PEPP in one Member State, while receiving PEPP retirement benefits in another Member State. The article among other discusses granting tax incentives to the PEPP by Member States, taxation of PEPP retirement benefits in case a tax treaty is applicable and taxation in case the accumulated capital of a PEPP or the saver moves to another Member State.

EIOPA has recently proposed to introduce standardized pan European personal pension products (PEPPs) that would be available in the accumulation phase, jointly with national personal pension plans. This paper analyzes the PEPPs from the perspective of the academic literature and proposes to use the PPR concept of Bovenberg and Nijman (2015) to categorize product characteristics, both in the accumulation phase as in the decumulation phase. The PPR concept can also be used to incorporate design features of the decumulation phase in the PEPP itself. A first important lesson to be learned from the academic literature is that the aim of stable income provision requires a framework where future asset returns are hedged rather than the asset only approach underlying the PEPPs. Whereas EIOPA proposes to allow switching between PEPPs only infrequently, the literature suggests that liquidity concerns are not a very convincing reason to restrict switching. Switching costs could be linked to the degree of liquidity of the portfolio. A better motivation for restriction on switching seems to be that investors might well put too much focus on recent investment performance as a predictor of future performance. As far as information disclosure is concerned more attention is recommended to the impact of biometric risks. More attention is also recommended for tax issues, because current tax provisions for national PPPs seem to be rooted in characteristics of the decumulation phase that can be avoided in the second regime. The paper concludes with a discussion of the potential impact of the PEPP proposal on PPP provision in four European countries.

This edited volume takes a closer look at various European pension-plan models and the recent challenges, trends and predictions related to the design of such schemes. The contributors analyse new ideas, both from national governments and European institutions, and consider current debates on topics such as the Capital Markets Union (CMU) and the so-called ‘European Pillar of Social Rights’ – calling for a new approach to social policy at the European level in response to common challenges, such as ageing and the digital revolution.This interdisciplinary work embraces economic, financial and legal perspectives, while focusing on previously selected coherence aspects in order to ensure that the analyses are comprehensive and globally consistent.

This timely book provides a comprehensive overview of European pension law with a dual purpose: both to introduce the legal aspects of different forms of pension at the European level, as well as to explore the main legal policy issues.

EU pension law is a relatively new and rapidly growing field. The call for a broader practical understanding of EU pension law is growing, as pension markets are increasingly internationalized. The handbook EU Pension Law discusses the most important financial EU legislation (IORP and PEPP) and non-financial legislation (such as the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union) and its consequences for pensions. The book contains a collection of relevant articles and offers necessary basic knowledge. More importantly, it contains interesting practical cases, creating a unique bridge between theory and practice. Whether you are a student, a committed policymaker, an experienced market practitioner, or someone interested in European pension developments, EU Pension Law is designed for you.

This book describes the history of European integration and the Eurozone, before presenting ways in which the European Union can move forward. Charting integration from before the Second World War, the foundations of the Eurozone are examined to provide insight into the challenges faced by the European Union, including the Global Financial Crisis, over recent decades. The impact of TARGET2 and the European Monetary System are also discussed. This book aims to highlight ways that current challenges to European integration, such as the COVID-19 crisis, environmental degradation, and fiscal debt, can be overcome to promote economic growth and social advancement. It will be relevant to students, researchers, and policymakers interested in the political economy and European economic policy.

This note weighs the merits of a capital market union (CMU) for Europe, identifies major obstacles in its path, and recommends a set of carefully targeted policy actions. European capital markets are relatively small, resulting in strong bank-dependence, and are split sharply along national lines. Results include an uneven playing field in terms of corporate funding costs, the rationing out of collateral-constrained firms, and limited shock absorption. The benefits of integration center on expanding financial choice, ultimately to support capital formation and resilience. Capital market development and integration would support a healthy diversity in European finance. Proceeding methodically, the note identifies three key barriers to greater capital market integration in Europe: transparency, regulatory quality, and insolvency practices. Based on these findings, the note urges three policy priorities, focused on the three barriers. There is no roadblock—such steps should prove feasible without a new grand bargain.

"The Bible of Irish income tax ...", Irish Independent, 28 January 2018. This tax essential, formerly known as Judge, is the leading income tax book for tax practitioners, accountants and tax lawyers. Indispensable in practice, it will help you to apply the relevant legislation with ease and precision. It provides a complete analysis of the principles and practice of income tax in Ireland. It also provides an examination of recent key decisions by the courts both in Ireland and in the UK, as well as by the Tax Appeal Commissioners. This new edition is updated to Finance Act 2022. This title is included in Bloomsbury Professional's Irish Tax online service.