Translation of "recipient company " (English → French) :

1. For the purposes of this Chapter, ‘division by the formation of new companies’ means the operation whereby, after being wound up without going into liquidation, a company transfers to more than one newly-formed company all its assets and liabilities in exchange for the allocation to the shareholders of the company being divided of shares in the recipient companies, and possibly a cash payment not exceeding 10 % of the nominal value of the shares allocated or, where they have no nominal value, of their accounting par value.

10. Believes that new ways towards better coordination of the fight against fiscal fraud at EU level should be explored; welcomes the Commission's initiatives in this respect, in particular its Communication of 31 May 2006 concerning the need to develop a coordinated strategy to improve the fight against fiscal fraud (COM(2006)0254 ); notes that the ECOFIN Council of 5 June 2007, on the basis of the Commission's proposals, asked the Commission not only to present legislative proposals on conventional anti-fraud measures, but also to further explore the more far-reaching anti-fraud measures such as taxation in the Member States of departure or the introduction of an optional reverse charge system; notes that under the reverse charge syste ...[+++]m, the liability for tax payments is shifted from the supplying to the recipient company;

10. Believes that new ways towards better coordination of the fight against fiscal fraud at EU level should be explored; welcomes the Commission's initiatives in this respect, in particular its Communication of 31 May 2006 concerning the need to develop a coordinated strategy to improve the fight against fiscal fraud (COM(2006)0254); notes that the ECOFIN Council of 5 June 2007, on the basis of the Commission's proposals, asked the Commission not only to present legislative proposals on conventional anti-fraud measures, but also to further explore the more far-reaching anti-fraud measures such as taxation in the Member States of departure or the introduction of an optional reverse charge system; notes that under the reverse charge system ...[+++], the liability for tax payments is shifted from the supplying to the recipient company;

10. Believes that new ways towards better coordination of the fight against fiscal fraud at EU level should be explored; welcomes the Commission's initiatives in this respect, in particular its Communication of 31 May 2006 concerning the need to develop a coordinated strategy to improve the fight against fiscal fraud (COM(2006)0254); notes that the ECOFIN Council of 5 June 2007, on the basis of the Commission's proposals, asked the Commission not only to present legislative proposals on conventional anti-fraud measures, but also to further explore the more far-reaching anti-fraud measures such as taxation in the Member States of departure or the introduction of an optional reverse charge system; notes that under the reverse charge system ...[+++], the liability for tax payments is shifted from the supplying to the recipient company;

The European Parliament takes the view that the company bodies should be jointly and severally liable for loss and/or damage incurred by the EPC on account of its assets having been depleted, for the benefit of a company body, a member or a person closely associated with one of these, through acts of the company; that the recipient of an unwarranted payment by the company should be responsible for refunding it; that liability should arise only if the act was not in the recognised interests of the EPC; that liability should not aris ...[+++]e, in particular, if the EPC is integrated within a group following a consistent policy and any disadvantages are offset by the advantages of its belonging to a group; and that the liability of the executive directors or members under other legal provisions should not be thereby affected.

– (DA) Mr President, what would happen if a small Danish limited company with 100 employees were to draw up annual accounts about which a chartered accountant made a declaration emphasising that most of the reservations were due to the fact that they recurred from year to year; and if it were confirmed that the weaknesses were to a large extent due to the failure of the company’s accounting system to provide adequate assurance that its balance sheet was complete and included all the elements of the company’s activities; and if, in addition, the declaration stated that there were problems with the monitoring and security systems, and th ...[+++]at the data in the system were not complete; and it continued by saying that it was a matter of concern that the company did not give a high enough priority to remedying these defects, and that it had not given sufficient consideration to the area or allocated enough resources to finding a solution to the problems within a reasonable time frame? What would happen if it was ultimately concluded that no declaration could be made as to whether the construction work, purchases or services forming the basis of the payments to the local recipients, actually took place? If all this happened, the board of directors would, firstly, refuse to give discharge to the management.