Sentences with phrase «free capital movements»

Countries, Mundell observed, can not simultaneously enjoy the advantages of free capital movements, a stable exchange rate and an independent monetary policy.

The idea of a single financial regulator... central bank independence... inflation targeting... free capital movement

[5] Similarly, the CJEU held that Greece infringed both Art. 56 EC, now Art. 63 TFEU and the Art. 40 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area, the free capital movement equivalent of Art. 63 TFEU in Case C - 406 / 07 Commission / Greece by taxing foreign shareholders when receiving dividends of Greek companies whilst not taxing domestic shareholders.

Not exact matches

On the contrary, having an enormous part of the world where free movement of goods, services, capital and customers is assured should only be assumed as an extraordinary benefit to create and expand one's business.»

The members also work to achieve free movement of workers and financial capital from one member nation to another.

The three great «fundamental» liberties of capital which are total freedom of capital movement, the freedom to invest which the MAI cast aside for a short time, and the freedom of free trade, on these main principles - which are the great principles which are destroying our planet - there is total agreement.

Of course, this victory would not have occurred had there not also been business and financial interests that stood to gain greatly from reducing barriers to trade and to the free movement of capital around the world.

The free market ideology recognizes freedom of movement for goods and capital, but not for labour.

Freedom defined as the free movement of capital and free trade has rewarded elites while leaving the poor free to be hungry, landless, sick and persecuted.

I spent my five years in government negotiating with European governments trying to persuade them to buy into the four freedoms... The Germans don't have a commitment to free trade in services, the French have serious restrictions on the free movement of capital.

The five written complaints made by the CIOT to the EU Commission are as follows: · Attribution of gains — that the capital gains tax provisions dealing with assets held through non UK - resident closely controlled companies remain contrary to EU fundamental principles of freedom of establishment and free movement of capital.

The free movement of capital is just as unpopular - many people are worried their jobs will be shipped off to a lower - wage economy.

The tensions are also constructed around three fundamental freedoms: free movement of goods, capital and services.

He called for the construction of a bridge over River Oti to facilitate the free movement of goods and services to neighbouring towns, adding that since 1988 when Saboba was made a district capital alongside others, its hospital facilities had not been upgraded.

It is surely extraordinary that for the writer of this piece the «four freedoms» i.e. the freedoms of unrestricted markets (free movement of labour, capital, goods and services) are all «important».

As John has clearly explained in his rebuttal of Don's previous article, this so - called «free movement» is nothing but `... the working classes of the world having to constantly uproot themselves from their communities to pursue ever more mobile capital's job markets all over the globe!

«It is a fundamental principle and it's not up for negotiation any more than renegotiating the principle of the free movement of goods, services or capital.»

This guarantees the free movement of people, capital, goods and services.

Europe has completed its common Internal Market for the free movement of persons, goods, services, and capital.

Included in the PowerPoint: Macroeconomic Objectives (AS Level) a) Aggregate Demand (AD) and Aggregate Supply (AS) analysis - the shape and determinants of AD and AS curves; AD = C+I+G + (X-M)- the distinction between a movement along and a shift in AD and AS - the interaction of AD and AS and the determination of the level of output, prices and employment b) Inflation - the definition of inflation; degrees of inflation and the measurement of inflation; deflation and disinflation - the distinction between money values and real data - the cause of inflation (cost - push and demand - pull inflation)- the consequences of inflation c) Balance of payments - the components of the balance of payments accounts (using the IMF / OECD definition): current account; capital and financial account; balancing item - meaning of balance of payments equilibrium and disequilibrium - causes of balance of payments disequilibrium in each component of the accounts - consequences of balance of payments disequilibrium on domestic and external economy d) Exchange rates - definitions and measurement of exchange rates - nominal, real, trade - weighted exchange rates - the determination of exchange rates - floating, fixed, managed float - the factors underlying changes in exchange rates - the effects of changing exchange rates on the domestic and external economy using AD, Marshall - Lerner and J curve analysis - depreciation / appreciation - devaluation / revaluation e) The Terms of Trade - the measurement of the terms of trade - causes of the changes in the terms of trade - the impact of changes in the terms of trade f) Principles of Absolute and comparative advantage - the distinction between absolute and comparative advantage - free trade area, customs union, monetary union, full economic union - trade creation and trade diversion - the benefits of free trade, including the trading possibility curve g) Protectionism - the meaning of protectionism in the context of international trade - different methods of protection and their impact, for example, tariffs, import duties and quotas, export subsidies, embargoes, voluntary export restraints (VERs) and excessive administrative burdens («red tape»)- the arguments in favor of protectionism This PowerPoint is best used when using worksheets and activities to help reinforce the ideas talked about.

Free movement of capital is one of the four pillars of the European Union, so it would in fact be illegal for there to be any restrictions on you moving money between EU countries (and currencies).

The more free the movement of capital in Chinese industries, state ownership tends to fall.

When the first one is soon to be facing restrictions to free movement of people and goods and is always pushing further away its artists from London (insane cost of living for anyone starting an artist career in the city with no wealthy parents or trust found to back up their ambitions), the second one seems to be growing always stronger with its impressive amount of art collectors, and a cost of living relatively affordable for anyone seeking an art studio in the capital.

The concept of the Single Market entails the EU being one territory without any internal borders or other regulatory obstacles to the free movement of people, services, goods and capital.

The Court found the Dutch measures to constitute restrictions of the free movement of capital, which raised the question of their justifiability.

Be this as it may, this case does not stand on its own, since the free movement of capital in relation to OCT was also at issue in case C - 384 / 09 Prunus.

First, if you're pro-investor and pro-market, the tribunal's decision could be seen as directly supporting the principle of free movement of capital within the internal market — as increasing its «effectiveness», to use the Court's own word.

They came up against this dividend withholding tax, arguing that it unduly restricted the free movement of capital of Art. 63 TFEU.

Or perhaps almost worldwide, since the question arises whether the free movement of capital also applies to the British, Danish, Dutch and French Overseas Countries and Territories (OCTs), which are not part of the internal market but associated with the EU?

Leaving the single market in a hard Brexit would involve giving up the four «freedoms» at the centre of the EEA; the free movement of goods, capital, services and people.

As EU law is the «law of the land» of Member States, the Court had no trouble determining that an arbitral tribunal set up according to the BIT's ISDS provisions «may be called on to interpret or indeed to apply EU law, particularly the provisions concerning the fundamental freedoms, including freedom of establishment and free movement of capital» (para. 42).

Indeed, there seem to be valid reasons in support of negative answer: one may argue that neither the EC Treaty nor the TFEU could have encouraged Member States to abandon the «Community» method to promote cross-border investments on a bilateral basis, since this would have been intrinsically incompatible with the idea of a genuine internal market, comprising «an area without internal frontiers in which the free movement of goods, persons, services and capital is ensured in accordance with the provisions of the Treaties».

It also strengthened the decision - making mechanisms for the internal market by introducing qualified majority voting for common customs tariffs, free provision of services, free movement of capital, and approximation of national legislation.

The ECJ rightly dispatched with the rather outlandish argument that since Treaty provisions on free movement of capital would be affected by the EUSFTA, the EU enjoyed exclusive competence pursuant article 3 (2) TFEU (see paras. 229 - 238).

The take - home message would be that the Commission had better use the freedom of establishment or free movement of capital to open up this market.

Lastly, however, the Advocate General accepted the existence of implied shared powers between the EU and the Member States in the field of portfolio investment on the basis of the free movement of capital provisions (paras. 363 - 370, again siding with the Commission).

However, in Commission v. Germany, the Commission's case proved to be too weak: While the Court accepted in principle that a less favourable treatment of dividends could constitute an obstacle to the free movement of capital (para 15), it was not convinced by the Commission's arguments.

A short note on a case of yesterday: In Commission v. Germany (judgment only available in German and French so far), the Commission had argued that the free movement of capital was hindered by provisions of German tax law according to which non-resident pensions funds could not deduct directly connected operating costs from dividends and interests generated in Germany.

Despite contrary arguments by several Member States, the Court had found that this constituted an obstacle to the free movement of capital, which even the conclusion of double taxation conventions with most EU and EEA Member States could not remove, as the effective tax rate remained higher than that for resident pension funds under all but three of those conventions (para 33 - 34).

It is commonly understood that the reference to «common rules» refers to EU secondary legislation, but in the absence of any common rules in the area of portfolio investment, the Commission argued that the Treaty rules on the free movement of capital themselves could also be considered «common rules» in the sense of Article 3 (2) TFEU.

Indeed, one may wonder why the Treaty drafters would have not explicitly granted the EU exclusive treaty - making powers in the field of free movement of capital if the Commission's reasoning would be followed.

The aim of the DSM Strategy was to create a Digital Single Market, where the free movement of goods, persons, services and capital is ensured — and where citizens and businesses can seamlessly and fairly access online goods and services: whatever their nationality, and wherever they live.

The questions raised by the present case essentially ask, first, whether the French tax on the market value of immovable property owned in France by a company established in a Member State is also applicable where the company is established in an overseas country or territory (OCT), being in the present case the British Virgin Islands, and, second, whether the joint and several liability for payment of that tax on the part of any legal person interposed between the party or parties liable to the tax and the immovable properties located in France constitutes a restriction of free movement of capital.

21 Accordingly, it is necessary to examine whether national legislation such as that at issue in the main proceedings is liable to impede free movement of capital.

6 As regards capital movements, Article 47 (1)(b) of the Seventh OCT Decision provides that, without prejudice to paragraph 2 of that provision, «with regard to transactions on the capital account of balance of payments, the Member States and the OCT authorities shall impose no restrictions on the free movement of capital for direct investments in companies formed in accordance with the laws of the host Member State, country or territory and [to] ensure that the assets formed by such investment and any profit stemming therefrom can be realised and repatriated».

28 It is necessary to determine, first, whether, for the purposes of the application of the Treaty provisions on free movement of capital, OCTs are to be treated as Member States or non-Member States.

There will be on - going negotiations regarding the free movement of goods, services, labour and capital.

«The European Commission has placed this measure under investigation [and] is considering the compatibility of this measure with the principles of free movement of goods and capital.»

Flexibility is needed in order to assure the free movement of property and capital.