National Country Event Finland

Transcription

1 National Country Event Finland 3 June 2008 Please note that this report expresses no views or opinions by the European Commission or the Consortium (Capgemini, Deloitte and Ramboll Management). The report strictly reflects the reduction ideas proposed by the participants at the event itself. These have not yet been analysed any further.

2 Agenda Reducing administrative burdens on businesses Tuesday, June 3 rd, 2008, in Scandic Simonkenttä, Simonkatu 9, Helsinki, the event is chaired by Mr Jens Loff from Ramboll Management Time Topic 8.30 Registration/Welcome Coffee 9.00 Welcome and introduction, Ms Katariina Poskiparta, State Secretary, Ministry of Employment and the Economy 9.0 Session EU initiatives on burdens reduction Ms Kari Bjørke DG Enterprise and Industry, European Commission 9.50 Session 2 EC project on Administrative burdens reduction State of play, outlook, stakeholder management Mr Jens Loff Consortium (Capgemini, Deloitte, Ramboll) 0.20 Session 3 Presentation of the national perspective Ms Liisa Lundelin-Nuortio, 0.40 Session 4 Administrative burdens as challenge for SMEs Mr Antti Neimala,.00 Coffee break.5 Session 5 Two parallel workshops Moderated discussion in two groups focused on one selected priority area per group to gather and discuss reduction proposals Company Law Moderator: Mr Erkki Ikäheimo, 2.45 Sum up in Plenum 3.00 Closing Public Procurement Moderator: Mr Peter Molin, 2008 Capgemini, Deloitte and Ramboll Management. All rights reserved.

3 Attendees Organisation European Commission Ramboll Management Ministries of Social Affairs and Health Ministry of Justice Ministry of Justice Prime Minister's Office The Confederation of Finnish Industries EK The Central Chamber of Commerce The Central Chamber of Commerce The Central Chamber of Commerce The Association of Finnish Local and Regional Authorities Storaenso Teliasonera Deloitte Deloitte Name Liisa Lundelin-Nuortio Kari Bjørke Jens Loff Erkki Ikäheimo Peter Molin Niina Kylliäinen Olga Bernitz Tom Strandström Hanna-Leena Iso-Ketola Jyrki Jauhiainen Maria Blässar Katariina Poskiparta Antti Riivari Rauno Vanhanen Marjaana Aarnikka Markku Jänkälä Elise Pekkala Mika Björklund Anu Mutanen Veijo Turunen Janne Makkula Antti Neimala Riikka Kovala Risto Suominen Leena Linnainmaa Tomi Rantasaari Sanna Suni Juha Myllymäki Jyrki Kurkinen Krister Kaipio Markku Harrinvirta Kim Jarner 2008 Capgemini, Deloitte and Ramboll Management. All rights reserved. 2

4 Results of the consultation with businesses Most important PAs The specific topics for the practical suggestions for the simplification and reduction possibilities were Company law and Public Procurement. Suggestions for Administrative Burdens Reduction Priority Area : Public Procurement Problematic Regulation 2004/8, art 48, 49, 5 And 2004/7, 48, 49, /8, art 47 And 2004/7, /8, art 45() 2004/8, art 50 Art 47 b Problem title Selection criteria Adequate financial resources Criminal activities Need for environmental management standards presentation of balance-sheets Problem description National problem: using the right level of detail and the right amount of criteria in the selection, depending on the object Providing the needed documentation If a multinational company is suspected of or involved in illegal activities in another MS The need to prove the existence of standards Information is supplied to the registry authority anyway 2004/8 The use of DPS Use of DPS is restricted by national data security law (connection to EU legislation?), publicity of information is a problem 2004/8, art 48 2a The time limit for list of works The time of 5 years is too long in several cases, e.g. construction industry Reduction suggestion Training of procuring entities, learning from best practices from EU Only the selected service provided needs to submit the documents The exclusion of large companies regardless of what country the offence has been made in (e.g. Siemens) To be implemented only when relevant national best practices needed The procuring unit can request the info when needed from the registry authority Change of national law to enable a registry for suppliers Flexibility of time Way to simplify Capgemini, Deloitte and Ramboll Management. All rights reserved. 3

5 Priority Area 2: Company Law Problematic Regulation 78/660, Directive Art. 2, 47 and 50. Prepare 8/660, Directive Art. 2, 47 and 50. Prepare Problem title Obligation for small companies to disclose Automation possibilities not utilised properly in and for publishing it Problem description Annual cause a lot of work for companies especially for small companies. The of small companies give too much information for competitors. It is possible to make the preparation of more automatic and to reduce the work load for the preparation of, but these possibilities cannot be utilised. Reduction suggestion Small companies should not be obliged to make and/or disclose them. The legislation should not require some companies to make too much information public, as this can be used by competitors. Automated generation of could be used by micro and small companies if the needed conditions for automation are created. this might include: cash based book keeping, more extensive use of electronic invoicing, simplification of VAT procedures and several other tax related procedures. Automated could be stored in a data base where authorities could retrieve the needed information. Way to simplify,2, 3,4 78/660, Directive, Art Prepare report 78/660, Directive 5 Obligation to carry out an audit Obligation for small companies to make report Auditing of report Obligation for small companies to carry out an audit Drafting report causes a lot of work for small companies. Auditing of report is unnecessary Carrying out an audit causes a lot work and costs for small companies. Companies should be able to choose the degree to which they want to make use of data technology Increase the size threshold for companies that do not need to prepare an report. Remove obligation to audit reports. Increase the size threshold of companies that do not need to carry out an audit Capgemini, Deloitte and Ramboll Management. All rights reserved. 4

6 83/349, Seventh Directive Art.., 6., 36., 36.3, 38. Need for audit standards that meet requirements of small companies Need to prepare consolidated. Audits are made based on same standards for small companies and for large companies even though the needs for audit are different. Small companies should have simpler standards. It is unnecessary to require preparation of consolidated. The consolidation could be made later. Formulate auditing standards which are appropriate with the needs of small companies. Investigate if it is possible to apply less strict rules regarding the obligation to prepare consolidated. 2 Obligation to prepare consolidated General remarks / reduction suggestions Topic Suggestion Feasibility Notification about VAT Rise the threshold for notification about VAT. Lower Easy the frequency of notification The Finnish daughter The EU Directive regulating daughter company Easy company merger articles also cover private limited liability companies. mergers concerns only public limited liability companies. The Finnish legislation also covers private limited liability companies. This should be changed. Enable more flexible requirements for companies In general the EU directives forbid the Member Countries to demand lower (less tight) requirements from companies. Difficult 2008 Capgemini, Deloitte and Ramboll Management. All rights reserved. 5

7 The workshop discussions to gather reduction ideas were structured according to the 5 routes of simplification as illustrated in the following figure. The numbers indicated in the last column of the tables with the reduction ideas refer to these Capgemini, Deloitte and Ramboll Management. All rights reserved. 6