(4)

In order to limit the risk of fraud shifting between Member States, all Member States that fulfil certain criteria as regards their fraud level, in particular in relation to carousel fraud, and who are able to establish that other control measures are not sufficient to combat that fraud, should be allowed to use a GRCM.

(4)

In order to limit the risk of fraud shifting between Member States, all Member States that fulfil certain criteria as regards their fraud level, in particular in relation to carousel fraud, and who are able to establish that other control measures are not sufficient to combat that fraud, should be allowed to use a GRCM. In addition, they should be required to establish that estimated gains in tax compliance and collection expected as a result of the introduction of the GRCM outweigh the estimated overall additional burdens on businesses and tax administrations and that businesses and tax administrations will not incur costs that are higher than those incurred as a result of the application of other control measures.

(5)

In addition, also bordering Member States that encounter a serious risk of shift of fraud to their territory, because of the authorisation of that mechanism in another Member State, should be allowed to use the GRCM, where other control measures would be insufficient to combat that risk of fraud.

(6)

If Member States choose to apply the GRCM, they should apply it to all supplies of goods and services above a defined threshold per invoice . The GRCM should not be restricted to any specific sector.

(6)

If Member States choose to apply the GRCM, they should apply it to all non-cross-border supplies of goods and services above a defined threshold per transaction . The GRCM should not be restricted to any specific sector.

(7a)

In order to be able to assess whether the introduction of the GRCM in one Member State results in fraud shifting towards other Member States and to be able to assess the degree of possible disturbances to the functioning of the internal market, it is appropriate to provide for a specific obligation to exchange information between Member States that apply the GRCM and other Member States. All such exchanges of information should be subject to applicable personal data protection and confidentiality provisions. Those provisions provide exemptions and restrictions for safeguarding the interests of Member States and of the Union in the area of taxation.

(a)

it has a VAT gap, expressed as a percentage of the VAT Total Tax Liability, of at least 5 percentage points above the Community median VAT gap;

(a)

it had in 2014, in accordance with the method and figures set out in the 2016 final report dated 23 August 2016 on the VAT gap published by the Commission , a VAT gap, expressed as a percentage of the VAT Total Tax Liability, of at least 15 percentage points above the Community median VAT gap;

(b)

it has a carousel fraud level within its total VAT gap of more than 25 %;

(b)

it has , based on the impact assessment that accompanied the legislative proposal for this Article, in the year covered by the report referred to in point (a) a carousel fraud level within its total VAT gap of more than 25 %; and

(c)

it establishes that other control measures are not sufficient to combat carousel fraud on its territory.

(c)

it establishes that other control measures are not sufficient to combat carousel fraud on its territory , in particular by specifying the control measures applied and the particular reasons for their lack of effectiveness, as well as the reasons why VAT administrative cooperation has proven insufficient; and

(ca)

it establishes that the estimated gains in tax compliance and collection expected as a result of the introduction of the GRCM outweigh the expected overall additional burdens on businesses and tax administrations by at least 25 %; and

(cb)

it establishes that businesses and tax administrations will not incur, as a result of the introduction of the GRCM, costs that are higher than those incurred as a result of the application of other control measures.

(a)

has a common border with a Member State that is authorised to apply the GRCM;

(b)

establishes that a serious risk of shift of fraud towards its territory exists because of the authorisation of the GRCM to that Member State;

(c)

establishes that other control measures are not sufficient to combat fraud on its territory.

(a)

a detailed justification that the conditions referred to in paragraph 1 or 2 are fulfilled;

(a)

a detailed justification that the conditions referred to in paragraph 1 are fulfilled; and

(b)

the starting date of the application of the GRCM and the period to be covered by it;

(b)

the starting date of the application of the GRCM and the period to be covered by it; and

(c)

actions to be taken to inform taxable persons of the introduction of the application of the GRCM;

(c)

actions to be taken to inform taxable persons of the introduction of the application of the GRCM; and

(d)

a detailed description of the accompanying measures referred to in paragraph 3 .

(d)

a detailed description of the accompanying measures referred to in paragraph 2 .

(a)

the names of those persons who, in the twelve months preceding the date of application of the GRCM, have been subject to proceedings, whether criminal or administrative, for VAT fraud;

(b)

the names of those persons, including in the case of legal persons the names of their directors, whose VAT registration in their Member State was terminated upon the introduction of the GRCM; and

(c)

the names of those persons, including in the case of legal persons the names of their directors, who have failed to submit a VAT return for two consecutive tax periods after the introduction of the GRCM.

(a)

the evolution of the VAT gap;