[T]actless Peer Steinbrueck has a reason for his rhetoric. Luxembourg's Juncker is one of the 27 E.U. finance ministers who are expected to vote on changes to the E.U. Savings Tax Directive next month, a law which could help Germany claw back the 100 billion euros ($135.9 billion) that it claims to lose each year as tax evaders put their income in countries like Luxembourg and Switzerland.
A spokesman for ECOFIN, the council of 27 E.U. finance ministers that will ultimately decide on the directive, told Forbes that he expected it would come up for a vote at its next meeting on June 9 in Luxembourg. "I haven't seen an agenda, but I personally expect it to come up for discussion," Francois Head said. The proposals need unanimous consent to become law, and such legislation would affect Luxembourg the most, said Richard Murphy, founder of consultancy Tax Research.
I admit I don't recall saying 'most' but it sure as heck will hit it hard.
But what is it's counter argument to these necessary reforms? That it wants to harbour tax evaders? What else can it say?