Suchergebnisse

Adapted from the source document.

Language is part of ethnic identity, and ethnic identity in many cases, especially in Eastern and Central Europe, where ethnic nationalism is the prevailing form of nationalism, constitutes an integral part of nationalism (its other part consists of national interests as perceived by dominant groups and/or the majority). However, in the context of regional integration, the relationship between these categories undergoes a major change alongside with shifts in the identity structure.

Language is part of ethnic identity, and ethnic identity in many cases, especially in Eastern and Central Europe, where ethnic nationalism is the prevailing form of nationalism, constitutes an integral part of nationalism (its other part consists of national interests as perceived by dominant groups and/or the majority). However, in the context of regional integration, the relationship between these categories undergoes a major change alongside with shifts in the identity structure.

Language is part of ethnic identity, and ethnic identity in many cases, especially in Eastern and Central Europe, where ethnic nationalism is the prevailing form of nationalism, constitutes an integral part of nationalism (its other part consists of national interests as perceived by dominant groups and/or the majority). However, in the context of regional integration, the relationship between these categories undergoes a major change alongside with shifts in the identity structure.

Mass migration, as it appears in the 21st century, is one of the greatest challenges of our globalized world. The unanswered questions of European Union (EU) immigration policy that emerged over the past few decades have become more pressing than ever. One of these urgent questions is: how can we provide for a developing European economy in an era of demographic decline in a way that it is based on the opportunities opened up by legally regulated forms of migration. A second question is: how can the EU ensure the safety of the newly arriving people in need and, at the same time, keep away illegal migrants and eliminate criminal activities related to migration. The European Union is destined to spread the principles of peace and unconditional respect for human rights not only within its own borders, but also on a global scale, when engaging in international affairs. In addition to observing human rights, however, the EU must also take into account all security considerations that are pertinent in guaranteeing the free movement of its citizens within the Member States.

The aim of this study is to give a detailed overview about the immigration into the European Union between 2015 and 2019. The paper also outlines some of the risks of immigration and the recent developments of the Schengen Information System and the European Border and Coast Guard Agency (Frontex). The first part of the paper describes the immigration that the European Union has dealt with between 2015 and 2019, underlining the refugee flow in 2015-2016. This part includes statistics on the number of asylum applications and illegal border-crossings. The data is provided by the European Commission (Eurostat) and the European Border and Coast Guard Agency. The second part of the paper gives an overview of the European Agenda on Migration, examines the four pillars to manage migration better, including reducing the incentives for irregular migration, border management, common asylum policy and a new policy on legal migration. The third part describes the developments of the Schengen Information System and the European Border and Coast Guard Agency such as new technologies and strengthening border management, expansion of databases, joint operation outside the European Union and return operations. These developments will be essential for a better immigration management and they will make the defense of the European Union more effective, transparent and coordinated in the future.

An overview of the tax regimes in the EU confirms that EU countries apply quite similar tax systems, while only the VAT and the excise duties have been harmonised at EU level (by fixing the minimal tax rate, the base, etc.). However, tax harmonisation itself is understood as a centrally applied tax base across the EU and a procedure of unifying tax rates and the rules of tax payment. The EU acknowledges that different rules of calculating the corporate tax has hold over the movement of capital. Capital movement, which is determined by tax rules, is not considered to be "free," and distribution of resources, conditioned by such capital movement, is not viewed as being effective. It is maintained that different tax rules inhibit an effective distribution of resources or the way they would distribute in line with differences in productivity when "other circumstances," i.e. taxes, were equal. Admittedly, in the case of the corporate tax, harmonisation has not been very wide, except the enacted harmonisation of mergers, the tax base of parent companies, and interest and royalty payments. (Directive 90/434/EEC on the common system of taxation applicable to mergers, divisions, transfers of assets and exchanges of shares concerning companies of different Member States, supplemented by Directive 90/435/EEB on the common system of taxation applicable in the case of parent companies and subsidiaries of different Member States, and Directive 2005/19/EK partially replacing Directive 90/434/EEC on the common system of taxation applicable to mergers, divisions, transfers of assets and exchanges of shares concerning companies of different Member States, as well as Directive 2003/49/EB on a common system of taxation applicable to interest and royalty payments). All these documents are expatiated in this paper. More over, the case-law of the Court of Justice is discussed to reveal the problems and the lack of regulation in direct taxes in European Union.

An overview of the tax regimes in the EU confirms that EU countries apply quite similar tax systems, while only the VAT and the excise duties have been harmonised at EU level (by fixing the minimal tax rate, the base, etc.). However, tax harmonisation itself is understood as a centrally applied tax base across the EU and a procedure of unifying tax rates and the rules of tax payment. The EU acknowledges that different rules of calculating the corporate tax has hold over the movement of capital. Capital movement, which is determined by tax rules, is not considered to be "free," and distribution of resources, conditioned by such capital movement, is not viewed as being effective. It is maintained that different tax rules inhibit an effective distribution of resources or the way they would distribute in line with differences in productivity when "other circumstances," i.e. taxes, were equal. Admittedly, in the case of the corporate tax, harmonisation has not been very wide, except the enacted harmonisation of mergers, the tax base of parent companies, and interest and royalty payments. (Directive 90/434/EEC on the common system of taxation applicable to mergers, divisions, transfers of assets and exchanges of shares concerning companies of different Member States, supplemented by Directive 90/435/EEB on the common system of taxation applicable in the case of parent companies and subsidiaries of different Member States, and Directive 2005/19/EK partially replacing Directive 90/434/EEC on the common system of taxation applicable to mergers, divisions, transfers of assets and exchanges of shares concerning companies of different Member States, as well as Directive 2003/49/EB on a common system of taxation applicable to interest and royalty payments). All these documents are expatiated in this paper. More over, the case-law of the Court of Justice is discussed to reveal the problems and the lack of regulation in direct taxes in European Union.

An overview of the tax regimes in the EU confirms that EU countries apply quite similar tax systems, while only the VAT and the excise duties have been harmonised at EU level (by fixing the minimal tax rate, the base, etc.). However, tax harmonisation itself is understood as a centrally applied tax base across the EU and a procedure of unifying tax rates and the rules of tax payment. The EU acknowledges that different rules of calculating the corporate tax has hold over the movement of capital. Capital movement, which is determined by tax rules, is not considered to be "free," and distribution of resources, conditioned by such capital movement, is not viewed as being effective. It is maintained that different tax rules inhibit an effective distribution of resources or the way they would distribute in line with differences in productivity when "other circumstances," i.e. taxes, were equal. Admittedly, in the case of the corporate tax, harmonisation has not been very wide, except the enacted harmonisation of mergers, the tax base of parent companies, and interest and royalty payments. (Directive 90/434/EEC on the common system of taxation applicable to mergers, divisions, transfers of assets and exchanges of shares concerning companies of different Member States, supplemented by Directive 90/435/EEB on the common system of taxation applicable in the case of parent companies and subsidiaries of different Member States, and Directive 2005/19/EK partially replacing Directive 90/434/EEC on the common system of taxation applicable to mergers, divisions, transfers of assets and exchanges of shares concerning companies of different Member States, as well as Directive 2003/49/EB on a common system of taxation applicable to interest and royalty payments). All these documents are expatiated in this paper. More over, the case-law of the Court of Justice is discussed to reveal the problems and the lack of regulation in direct taxes in European Union.

An overview of the tax regimes in the EU confirms that EU countries apply quite similar tax systems, while only the VAT and the excise duties have been harmonised at EU level (by fixing the minimal tax rate, the base, etc.). However, tax harmonisation itself is understood as a centrally applied tax base across the EU and a procedure of unifying tax rates and the rules of tax payment. The EU acknowledges that different rules of calculating the corporate tax has hold over the movement of capital. Capital movement, which is determined by tax rules, is not considered to be "free," and distribution of resources, conditioned by such capital movement, is not viewed as being effective. It is maintained that different tax rules inhibit an effective distribution of resources or the way they would distribute in line with differences in productivity when "other circumstances," i.e. taxes, were equal. Admittedly, in the case of the corporate tax, harmonisation has not been very wide, except the enacted harmonisation of mergers, the tax base of parent companies, and interest and royalty payments. (Directive 90/434/EEC on the common system of taxation applicable to mergers, divisions, transfers of assets and exchanges of shares concerning companies of different Member States, supplemented by Directive 90/435/EEB on the common system of taxation applicable in the case of parent companies and subsidiaries of different Member States, and Directive 2005/19/EK partially replacing Directive 90/434/EEC on the common system of taxation applicable to mergers, divisions, transfers of assets and exchanges of shares concerning companies of different Member States, as well as Directive 2003/49/EB on a common system of taxation applicable to interest and royalty payments). All these documents are expatiated in this paper. More over, the case-law of the Court of Justice is discussed to reveal the problems and the lack of regulation in direct taxes in European Union.

The EU enlargement in 2004 and 2007 affected old and new members of the union differently. The processes changed the scale, structure and directions of international migration. According to official statistics the EU has about 30.8 million migrants, representing about 6.2 percent of the total population. There are different types of migration in the union: from economic migrants to asylum seekers or refugees. More than half of them are the working- age population. That influences changes in population and labour supply of the countries – changes occur in the number and structure of labour force, number of taxpayers and social security contributors, etc. About 33% of migration is movement in­side the EU countries.[.]

The EU enlargement in 2004 and 2007 affected old and new members of the union differently. The processes changed the scale, structure and directions of international migration. According to official statistics the EU has about 30.8 million migrants, representing about 6.2 percent of the total population. There are different types of migration in the union: from economic migrants to asylum seekers or refugees. More than half of them are the working- age population. That influences changes in population and labour supply of the countries – changes occur in the number and structure of labour force, number of taxpayers and social security contributors, etc. About 33% of migration is movement in­side the EU countries.[.]

Object research: Fitness market trends. Problem of research: How the fitness market trends in the European Union? Aim of research - assess the health trends aspects. Goals: 1. Overview the problems;of the health sector in the EU 2. Provide practical direction for the development of health promotion in the EU market 3. To examine the various EU countries, fitness club memberships, indicators; 4. The assessment of the promotion of a healthier way of life IT measures efficiency. The development of health sector in the European Union last year, is one of the priority tasks of the Member States. An ageing Europe, increasing the number of people age steadily increasing mortality from chronic non-infectious diseases, obesity, this is a major challenge for the EU today. Addressing the obesity problem in the physical passivity and practical directions for the development of health promotion in the EU market is basically focused on three areas: sports and fitness clubs memberships increases, community sports and the development of a healthier work environment. The members of the European Union, the fitness club memberships, a proportion of the general population on an average of one-tenth of the total population. EU leaders by the number of fitness memberships are Sweden and Denmark. Worst resuslts is in Lithuanian and Bulgaria these countries have at least people visiting fitness clubs. Portable technologies are growing in popularity and there are mentions as next top thing. Portable technology in the European Union market growth research shows that one in five person planning to buy these technologies and is very interested in them.