OpenLobby.EU
Explore

Bundesverband Deutscher Leasing-Unternehmen e. V.

BDL

Der Bundesverband Deutscher Leasing-Unternehmen e.

Lobbying Activity

Response to EU taxonomy - Review of the environmental delegated act

5 Dec 2025

Please find attached the Position of the Federal Association of German Leasing Companies on the European Commission's initiative to review the delegated acts on climate and environmental taxonomy.
Read full response

Response to Clean corporate vehicles

8 Sept 2025

Based on the statement submitted by the Federal Association of German Leasing Companies (BDL) on 5 July 2024 in response to the consultation on the "Greening of corporate fleets", we would like to provide you with further arguments regarding the current Clean Corporate Vehicles initiative.
Read full response

Response to Burden reduction and simplification for competitiveness of small mid-cap enterprises - Omnibus Regulation

21 Aug 2025

On the occasion of the consultation launched on 23 May 2025 on 'Burden reduction and simplification for competitiveness of small mid-cap enterprises - Omnibus Regulation IV' the Bundesverband Deutscher Leasing-Unternehmen e. V. (BDL) is submitting some comments. With its recently published "Compass for Competitiveness", the European Commission is pursuing the goal of boosting the growth of the European economy and strengthening the competitiveness of the European economy. Therefore, the BDL welcomes in general the EU-Commission's initiative, the so-called Omnibus IV Simplification Package, which includes proposals to cut red tape, reduce costs, and modernize EU- rules as part of the ongoing Single Market simplification effort. We expressly support the European Commission's intention to deliver at least a 25% reduction in administrative burdens - and at least 35% for SMEs - by the end of this mandate. Reducing administrative burdens, adapting reporting obligations and targeting regulatory requirements more specifically are important steps towards offering small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in particular better framework conditions. This should be achieved at first. Regarding the introduction of a new category, the so-called Small Mid-Cap (SMC), we doubt its effectiveness for the following reasons: Consistency with other EU-legislation: The risk of regulatory requirements becoming even more complex should be avoided. For example, the proposal to amend the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) stipulates that in future only companies with more than 1,000 employees and either a turnover of more than 50 million euros or a balance sheet total of 25 million euros will be re-quired to prepare a sustainability report. The introduction of another threshold that is not based on the proposed 1,000 employees leads to inconsistency in the regulatory framework and makes the implementation of different thresh-olds unnecessarily complicated. Scope: Following the argument of consistency the creation of the SMC category with an upper limit of up to 749 employees and 150 million is not entirely clear. The proposal on Omnibus Regulation IV is a constructive step toward a more proportionate regulatory environment for SMCs. Concerning the current economic situation in the European Union it is crystal clear, that all companies benefit from regulatory relief, but very small companies require special consideration. There are doubts that the introduction of a new SMC category will dilute or even undermine existing SME support, as support structures and regulatory relief will now be segmented between several company sizes. Unintended consequences/effects could lead to further complications for SMEs. Without additional safeguards in horizontal legislation, the goal of simplification and reduction of burden could be undermined. In addition, practicability should be better implemented and controlled. To fulfil their role as a partner to SMEs and an investment driver for the economy, leasing companies need reliable framework conditions.
Read full response

Meeting with Andrea Wechsler (Member of the European Parliament)

1 Jul 2025 · EU Automotive policy

Meeting with Axel Voss (Member of the European Parliament, Rapporteur) and Google and

6 May 2025 · Copyright and generative AI

Response to Taxonomy Delegated Acts – amendments to make reporting simpler and more cost-effective for companies

25 Mar 2025

We welcome the European Commission's efforts to reduce the bureaucratic hurdles of taxonomy for both financial and non-financial institutions and to strive for simplification of implementation. Please find our comments on individual aspects below.
Read full response

Response to EU Start-up and Scale-up Strategy

17 Mar 2025

Please find attached the position paper.
Read full response

Meeting with Jens Gieseke (Member of the European Parliament) and Air France-KLM and Deutscher Raiffeisenverband e.V.

19 Feb 2025 · Austausch zu EU Politik

Meeting with Markus Ferber (Member of the European Parliament)

18 Feb 2025 · Competitiveness Agenda

Meeting with Jan-Christoph Oetjen (Member of the European Parliament)

9 Dec 2024 · General exchange on the current challenges in the leasing industry

Meeting with Jens Gieseke (Member of the European Parliament)

5 Dec 2024 · Austausch zu EU Politik

Meeting with Marion Walsmann (Member of the European Parliament)

21 Nov 2024 · Reform des Vergaberechts

Meeting with Andreas Glück (Member of the European Parliament)

21 Nov 2024 · Climate and Transport Policy

Meeting with Oliver Schenk (Member of the European Parliament)

21 Nov 2024 · Leasing-Wirtschaft in der EU

Meeting with Alexandra Mehnert (Member of the European Parliament)

22 Oct 2024 · Role of leasing in EU funding and transport policies

Meeting with Andrea Wechsler (Member of the European Parliament) and BDEW Bundesverband der Energie- und Wasserwirtschaft e. V.

16 Oct 2024 · EU Energy and Industry Policy

Response to Business in Europe: Framework for Income Taxation (BEFIT)

23 Jan 2024

As Bundesverband Deutscher Leasing-Unternehmen we represent the interests of the German leasing industry. Leasing companies invest more than 70 billion annually in vehicles, machinery, IT equipment, real estate and other durable real assets, thus contributing significantly to the supply of investment goods for their mostly small and medium-sized customers in Germany. We generally acknowledge that a harmonised corporate tax system could bring certain advantages for large groups of companies with wide-ranging international activities. However, we have reservations as to whether the advantages of the present draft outweigh its disadvantages in an overall assessment. In particular, we doubt whether the substantial infringement of the rights of the Member States entailed by stipulating a harmonised tax base can be justified. In general, we would raise the question of how the parallel existence of two completely different concepts for the determination of the tax base is to be assessed in terms of administrability by the tax authorities and under the aspect of equal tax treatment. In our opinion, the proposed directive gives rise to considerable doubts also in this respect. Notwithstanding our general concerns about the project, we are generally supportive of renouncing the introduction of a comprehensive system of detailed rules for determining the tax base, which was originally envisaged in the CCCTB proposal. This is because detailed regulations prescribed at European level would further increase the overall complexity of taxation instead of helping to reduce it. Please find our arguments in detail in the attached comment letter.
Read full response

Meeting with Marion Walsmann (Member of the European Parliament, Rapporteur) and Volkswagen Aktiengesellschaft and

29 Nov 2023 · Standard Essential Patents

Meeting with Matthias Ecke (Member of the European Parliament)

10 Oct 2023 · Kennenlernen / Finanzpolitik

Response to Enhancing the convergence of insolvency laws

15 Mar 2023

Dear Madam/ Sir, Please find attached the position of the Federal Association of German Leasing Companies. Kind regards, A. Gruhn
Read full response

Response to Debt equity bias reduction allowance (DEBRA)

12 Jul 2022

As Bundesverband Deutscher Leasing-Unternehmen we represent the interests of the German leasing industry. We are convinced that a broad diversity of financing instruments leads to considerable benefits for the economy as a whole. It facilitates companies’ access to financing and puts it on a broader basis. It also increases the resilience of the financial system and lowers the cost of capital. Against this background, we believe that debt, equity and other forms of financing must not be played off against each other. Rather, it should be possible to adapt the composition of the financing mix individually to the needs and business activities of each company, in particular with regard to their risk content. The way in which tax incentives affect the choice of financing structure is extremely complex and depends on numerous factors. In Germany the different tax treatment of corporations versus partnerships and sole proprietorships, the trade tax and the flat-rate withholding tax on interest income all play a role. In other Member States, other factors are likely to be decisive. Therefore, we are of the opinion that financing neutrality of taxation should, if necessary, be ensured by national measures rather than by a harmonising intervention in the tax bases at European level. The proposed regulatory approach of combining an allowance on incremental equity with a limitation to interest deduction was not subject to the Commission’s public consultation. In fact, it is diametrically opposed to the results of this consultation: Respondents preferred precisely those options that involved maintaining the existing interest deductibility unreduced. The fact that the present proposal now provides for a limitation of interest deduction to 85% cannot be reconciled with this clear result. The catalogue of exempt financial undertakings in Article 2 is incomplete because it does not cover certain leasing companies depending on their regulatory status. The latter face similar conditions with regard to their financing situation as credit institutions, so that the same standards would have to apply regarding the applicability of the proposed regulation. From an economic point of view, the effective equity base of leasing companies would be systematically underestimated by the equity definition of the proposed directive. This would lead to a structural disadvantage, because the negative effects of a limitation of interest deduction on debt would not be compensated by adequate advantages from equity allowance. While the participants in the consultation had favoured equity relief based on total equity, the Commission is now proposing an incremental regime, whereby only additional equity is recognised and benefited for a limited period of 10 years. Equity reductions have to be deducted accordingly. At the same time, the deductibility of the allowance on equity is limited to a maximum of 30% of EBITDA. This mechanism of incremental calculation with limitations in terms of duration and amounts leads to an overly complicated and highly administration-intensive regulation. The most critical point of the proposed regulation is the general limitation on interest deduction to 85%. It violates elementary principles of income taxation such as the net principle and the ability-to-pay principle. As a result, companies could be required to pay tax even though they do not make any profit. The consequence would be an erosion of the companies' substance and a weakening of the equity base – the exact opposite of what the Commission is aiming for. In summary, we believe that the directive proposal in this form does not contribute to an improvement of the tax framework conditions for financing in Europe and should therefore be reconsidered fundamentally. The potential benefits of equity relief are clearly predominated by the complicated calculation of the allowance amounts and, first and foremost, by the general limitation of debt interest deductions.
Read full response

Response to Enhancing the convergence of insolvency laws

9 Dec 2020

Bezugnehmend auf die Konsultation der Europäischen Kommission zum „Insolvenzrecht: Die zunehmende Konvergenz der nationalen Gesetze zur Förderung grenzüberschreitender Investitionen“ möchten wir hervorheben, wie wichtig es ist, weitere Maßnahmen zur Harmonisierung des Insolvenzrechts mit Bedacht und ausgewogen zu gestalten. Der Bundesverband Deutscher Leasing-Unternehmen e.V. (BDL) vertritt die Interessen der Leasing-Branche, die mit einem Neugeschäftsvolumen von rund 75 Mrd. EUR in 2019 mehr als die Hälfte aller außenfinanzierten Ausrüstungsinvestitionen in Deutschland realisiert. Damit leistet die Leasing-Branche einen substanziellen Beitrag für die Investitionsversorgung, insbesondere des Mittelstands. Bei den Bestrebungen nach einer weiteren Harmonisierung von Kernaspekten des materiellen Insolvenzrechts möchten wir um dringende Beachtung aller weitergehenden rechtlichen Folgewirkungen im Zusammenspiel der Wirtschaftsakteure bitten. Leasing-Gesellschaften sind im Wirtschaftsverkehr auf Gläubigerseite an Insolvenzverfahren beteiligt. Als Eigentümer der Leasing-Objekte haben Leasing-Gesellschaften einen in der deutschen Insolvenzordnung gesetzlich verankerten Aussonderungsanspruch und damit Zugriff auf ihr Objekt während eines Insolvenzverfahrens. Das deutsche Insolvenzrecht trägt damit sowohl den Schuldnerinteressen als auch den Gläubigerinteressen der Leasing-Gesellschaften als Eigentümer der Leasing-Objekte angemessen Rechnung. Die Tendenz, das Insolvenzrecht maßgeblich an den Schuldnerinteressen auszurichten und die Interessen verschiedener Gläubigergruppen nicht hinreichend zu berücksichtigen, lässt insbesondere befürchten, dass eine weitere Harmonisierung des Insolvenzrechts die aus der Eigentümerstellung der Leasing-Gesellschaften resultierenden Rechte gefährdet. Um das Ziel einer Vermeidung nicht bedienter Kredite effektiv zu erreichen, dürfen jedoch sowohl das von der europäischen Rechtsordnung geschützte Eigentum als auch die daraus resultierenden Rechte wie das Aussonderungsrecht, nicht verletzt werden. Denn sollte das Eigentum am Leasing-Objekt keine hinreichende Sicherheit mehr für die Leasing-Gesellschaften bieten, wären in der Folge viele Leasing-Finanzierungen (insbesondere für schwächere Bonitäten) nicht mehr darstellbar. Davon betroffen wären überwiegend kleine und mittelständische Unternehmen. Das Ziel der Kapitalmarktunion, den Zugang zu Finanzierungen für Betriebsmittel, IT-Equipment, Produktionsmaschinen speziell für KMU zu erleichtern, würde somit konterkariert werden. Zudem ist das Insolvenzrecht untrennbar mit anderen Rechtsgebieten, wie bspw. dem Zivil-, Arbeits-, und Gesellschaftsrecht verwoben. Solange sich die rechtlichen und wirtschaftlichen Rahmenbedingungen in den Mitgliedsstaaten nicht hinreichend angeglichen haben, würde die Harmonisierung des Insolvenzrechts die in sich schlüssigen Rechtsordnungen der Mitgliedstaaten gefährden. Schließlich möchten wir auf die Richtlinie über präventive Restrukturierung und Insolvenz verweisen, die aktuell noch nicht vollständig in den Mitgliedstaaten umgesetzt ist. Eine Analyse zur Umsetzung dieser Richtlinie und den sich daraus ergebenden Effekten sollte weiteren Harmonisierungsbestrebungen zunächst vorausgehen. Andernfalls könnten Investitionshindernisse noch zusätzlich verstärkt werden.
Read full response

Meeting with Jan Ceyssens (Cabinet of Vice-President Valdis Dombrovskis)

26 Jun 2017 · CMU