within the Community(
) provides that ‘A worker who is a national of a Member State may not, in theterritory of another Member State, be treated differently from national workers by reason of his nationality in respect of any conditions of employment and work, in particular as regards remuneration, dismissal,and should he become unemployed, reinstatement or re-employment’.According to the information available to the Commission, the protection against individual dismissals inBelgium depends, in some cases, on the earnings of the individual employee. For employees above acertain earnings ceiling the protection against dismissal is agreed in the individual contract of employment.
) OJ L 257, 19.10.1968.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-0809/00by Harlem Désir (PSE) to the Commission
(10 March 2000)Subject:
Condemnation by the WTO’s body of appeal of the tax treatment of foreign sales corporations(FSCs) in the USAOn 24 February 2000 the WTO’s body of appeal published its report on the tax treatment of foreign salescorporations (FSCs) in the USA. This report upholds the condemnation of the tax arrangements underwhich some 50% of American exports benefit from a tax refund which is tantamount to an export subsidy totalling some $ US 4 billion annually. Although European companies are not the only ones affected, they are among those hardest hit.Will the Commission say why, having condemned these practices, the WTO has not fixed the amount of compensation due to the European Union and why the Commission itself which is responsible forprotecting the Union’s commercial interests has failed to take any action vis-à-vis the United States toobtain compensation, bearing in mind that the latter is continuing to take retaliatory measures against theEuropean Union over bananas and beef treated with hormones and the WTO itself has acknowledged thatthe commercial losses incurred by the EU are far higher?
Answer given by Mr Lamy on behalf of the Commission
(30 March 2000)
Under the World Trade Organisation (WTO) ruling on Foreign Sales Corporations (FSC), the United Stateshave until 1 October 2000 to bring their legislation into line with the conclusions of the panel and theappelate body. If, at that date, the United States have not abolished the FSC status or amended it so as tobring it into line with WTO regulations, the Community will be able to exercise its rights as laid down inarticle 22 of the memorandum on dispute settlement, and either obtain compensation from the UnitedStates, or suspend equivalent concessions, as the United States themselves have done in the cases of hormone-treated beef and bananas.(2000/C330E/251)
WRITTEN QUESTION P-0810/00by Pasqualina Napoletano (PSE) to the Commission
(10 March 2000)Subject:
Situation of dentists in Italy In 1985 Italy transposed the 1978 EU directive on dentistry by means of Law 409/85, which was to apply,inter alia, to graduates in medicine who had registered at university prior to 28/1/1980. This gab between1978 and 1985 meant that thousands of young people took up medical studies after 1980 with theintention of becoming dentists and were retroactively denied the right to do so by the 1985 law 21.11.2000 EN C330E/215Official Journal of the European Communities