Activities of Petr JEŽEK

(4) the following Article 3b is inserted: ‘Article 3b Transitional period During the transitional period between the entry into force of the regulatory technical standards referred to in the fourth subparagraph of Article 3a(2) and the date of application of Article 3a(1), the charges for currency conversion services shall not exceed the maximum amount set in the regulatory technical standards adopted in accordance with the fourth subparagraph of Article 3a(2);’deleted

2018/09/18
Committee: ECON

2018/0076(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5

Regulation (EC) No 924/2009
Article 15

By 31 ~~Octo~~December 20221, the Commission shall present to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the European Central Bank a report on the application and impact of this Regulation, ~~accompanied, if appropriate, by a proposal. That report~~which shall cover, in particular, the appropriateness of amending Article 1(2) ~~to ensure that this Regulation~~of this Regulation to ensure that it covers all currencies of Member States of the Union and the mechanisms that payment service providers have put in place to provide further transparency to payment service users. If necessary, the Commission may present a proposal to amend this Regulation in light of the findings of the report.

2018/09/18
Committee: ECON

2018/0073(CNS)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 29

(29) Where the users with respect of a given taxable service are located in different Member States or non-Union jurisdictions, the relevant taxable revenues obtained from that service should be allocated to each Member State in a proportional way on the basis of certain specific allocation keys. Such keys should be set out depending on the nature of each taxable service and the distinctive elements triggering the receipt of revenues for the provider of such a service. Where the allocation key results in an imbalanced apportionment that fails to reflect the real economic activity, a dispute resolution mechanism could remedy such a situation. In light of the foregoing, the Commission should assess the possible establishment of a dispute resolution mechanism in order to ensure the proper resolution of disputes when different Member States are involved.

2018/10/22
Committee: ECON

2018/0073(CNS)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 34

(34) Any processing of personal data carried out in the context of DST should be conducted in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council31 , including that which may be necessary in relation to Internet Protocol (IP) addresses or other means of geolocation, without allowing for identification of users. The Member States' tax authority shall be informed of the method used to determine the location of users . In particular, regard should be given to the need to provide appropriate technical and organisational measures to comply with the rules relating to the lawfulness and security of processing activities, the provision of information and the rights of data subjects. Whenever possible, personal data should be rendered anonymous. _________________ 31 Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation) (OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1).

2018/10/22
Committee: ECON

2018/0073(CNS)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 37

(37) Member States should be able to lay down accounting, record-keeping or other obligations aimed at ensuring that the DST due is effectively paid, as well as other measures, including penalties and sanctions, to prevent tax evasion, avoidance and abuse.

2018/10/22
Committee: ECON

2018/0073(CNS)

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. The Commission shall analyse whether the establishment of a dispute resolution mechanism would further increase the effectiveness and efficiency of the settlement of disagreements between Member States. The Commission shall submit a report thereon to the European Parliament and the Council, including, if appropriate, a legislative proposal.

2018/10/22
Committee: ECON

2018/0073(CNS)

Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 3

3. Member States may adopt measures, including penalties and sanctions, to prevent tax evasion, avoidance and abuse with respect to DST.

2018/10/22
Committee: ECON

2018/0073(CNS)

Proposal for a directive
Chapter 4 – title

ADMINISTRATIVE COOPERATION AND MANDATORY EXCHANGE OF INFORMATION

2018/10/22
Committee: ECON

2018/0073(CNS)

Proposal for a directive
Article -20 (new)

Article -20 Automatic and mandatory exchange of information In order for tax authorities to assess tax due properly and to ensure the proper and uniform implementation of this Directive, the exchange of information on tax matters shall be automatic and mandatory, as laid down by Council directive 2011/16/EU. Member States shall allocate adequate staff, expertise and budget resources to their national tax administrations as well as resources for the training of tax administration staff focusing on cross-border tax cooperation and on the automatic exchange of information in order to ensure full implementation of this Directive.

2018/10/22
Committee: ECON

2018/0073(CNS)

Proposal for a directive
Article 24 a (new)

Article 24a Review clause (Three years after...[the date of entry into force of this Directive], the Commission shall make an assessment of the application of this Directive and present a report to the European Parliament and the Council, accompanied, where appropriate, by proposals for its review in accordance with the principles of fair taxation of the digital sector. In its report the Commission should assess, notably, - the impact of DST on Member States’ revenues; - the impact on the internal market as a whole, with particular regard to possible distortion of competition between companies subject to the new rules laid down in this Directive; - the need to increase the scope to cover more digital activities and the rate of the DST; - the potential tax planning practices that were applied by entities to avoid paying the DST.

2018/10/22
Committee: ECON

2018/0072(CNS)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 8

(8) A key objective of this Directive is to improve the resilience of the internal market as a whole in order to address the challenges of taxation of the digitalised economy, while respecting the principle of tax neutrality but also the free movement of services in the European Single Market. This objective cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States acting individually because digital businesses are able to operate cross-border without having any physical presence in a jurisdiction and rules are therefore needed to ensure that they pay taxes in the jurisdictions where they make profits. Given this cross-border dimension an initiative at Union level adds value in comparison with what a multitude of national measures could attain. A common initiative across the internal market is required to ensure a harmonised application of the rules on a significant digital presence within the Union. Unilateral and divergent approaches by each Member State could be ineffective and fragment the Single Market by creating national policy clashes, distortions and tax obstacles for businesses in the Union. Since the objectives of this Directive can be better achieved at Union level, the Union may adopt measures, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union. In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Directive does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve those objectives. This directive does not imply a harmonisation of corporate tax rates in the EU and, therefore, it does not restrict Member States' capability set the corporate tax rates applicable to digital services' revenues on their own territory.

2018/10/17
Committee: ECON

2018/0072(CNS)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 9

(9) It is necessary that any processing of personal data carried out in the context of this Directive, should be conducted in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council17 , including obligations to provide appropriate technical and organisational measures to comply with the obligations imposed by that Regulation, in particular those relating to the lawfulness of the processing, the security of the processing activities, the provision of information and the rights of data subjects, data protection by design and by default. Whenever possible, personal data should be rendered anonymous. The data that may be collected from the users for the purposes of applying this Directive should be strictly limited to data indicating the Member State in which the users are located, without allowing for identification of the user. _________________ 17 Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation) (OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p.1).

2018/10/17
Committee: ECON

2018/0072(CNS)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 10

(10) The Commission should evaluate the implementation of this Directive ~~fiv~~three years after its entry into force and report to the Council ~~thereon. Member~~and the European Parliament thereon. That implementation report should include at least the following points: the impact of the system of taxation provided for in this Directive on Member States’ revenues, the impact of this Directive on companies and in particular, on small and medium-sized enterprises, the impact on users' personal data and the impact on the internal market as a whole, with particular regard to possible distortion of competition between companies subject to the new rules laid down in this Directive. States should communicate to the Commission all information necessary for this evaluation. An advisory DigiTax Committee should be established to examine questions on the application of the Directive.

2018/10/17
Committee: ECON

2018/0072(CNS)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 6

6. The Member State where a user's device is used shall be determined by reference to the Internet Protocol (IP) address of the device or, if more accurately, any other method of geolocation. , without allowing for identification of the user, in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 2016/679 on data protection. The Member States' tax authority shall be informed of the method used to determine the location of users.

2018/10/17
Committee: ECON

2018/0072(CNS)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. A taxpayer shall be required to disclose to the tax authorities all information relevant to the determination of the significant digital presence in accordance with this Article.

2018/10/17
Committee: ECON

2018/0072(CNS)

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Member States shall allocate adequate staff, expertise and budget resources to their national tax administrations as well as resources for the training of staff to be able to attribute profits to the permanent establishment and to reflect the digital activities in that Member State.

2018/10/17
Committee: ECON

2018/0072(CNS)

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 a (new)

Article 5a Administrative cooperation In order to guarantee a uniform application of the Directive in the European Union, the exchange of information on tax matters shall be automatic and mandatory, as laid down by Council Directive 2011/16/EU.

2018/10/17
Committee: ECON

2018/0072(CNS)

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – title

6 Implementation Report and Review

2018/10/17
Committee: ECON

2018/0072(CNS)

Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL, Petr JEŽEK, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1

1. The Commission shall evaluate the implementation of this Directive ~~fiv~~three years after its entry into force and report to the Council ~~thereon~~and the European Parliament thereon. That implementation report should include at least the following points: the impact of the system of taxation provided for in this Directive on Member States’ revenues, the impact of this Directive on companies and in particular, on small and medium-sized enterprises, the impact on a fair tax collection between Member States, the impact on the internal market as a whole, with particular regard to possible distortion of competition between companies subject to the new rules laid down in this Directive.

2018/10/17
Committee: ECON

2017/2256(INI)

Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL, Petr JEŽEK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. ~~Not~~Welcomes the effectiveness of the measures taken at the external borders and the creation of the European Border and Coast Guard Agency; notes the efforts of the Agency in implementing the new regulation, especially through joint operations in the field of border surveillance and return, and by supporting the Member States particularly affected by migratory pressure; sees the importance of the newly introduced vulnerability assessment mechanism in uncovering weaknesses at the common external borders and preventing crises; emphasises the concerted efforts and cooperation between agencies and other stakeholders in organising the ‘Hotspot’ approach;

2018/03/14
Committee: LIBE

2017/2256(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. ~~Not~~Welcomes the steps taken through the amendment of the Schengen Borders Code and introduction of mandatory systematic register checks at entry and exit points for third-country nationals and for EU nationals, while remaining vigilant about the effects these requirements have on the border crossings of EU nationals;

2018/03/14
Committee: LIBE

2017/2256(INI)

Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL, Petr JEŽEK, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Welcomes the ongoing reform of the SIS and the establishment of other large-scale information systems, such as SEA, ECRIS-TCN and ETIAS, as well as the objective of improving their interoperability while preserving the necessary safeguards, namely with regard to data protection and privacy;

2018/03/14
Committee: LIBE

2017/2256(INI)

Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL, Petr JEŽEK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Considers that the work on proposals for interoperablity of information systems should be taken as an opportunity to improve and partially harmonise national IT systems and national infrastructure at border crossing points;

2018/03/14
Committee: LIBE

2017/2256(INI)

Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL, Petr JEŽEK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. ~~Not~~Welcomes the work done in the field of cross-border police and judicial cooperation and cooperation between law enforcement ~~cooperation~~agencies, and the work of Eurojust and EUROPOL, in particular the European Counter Terrorism Centre (ECTC) and the European Migrant Smuggling Centre, to counter organised crime, trafficking in human beings and terrorism through intelligence, information exchange and joint investigations;

2018/03/14
Committee: LIBE

2017/2256(INI)

Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL, Petr JEŽEK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Welcomes the Commission’s efforts to elaborate the European Integrated Border Management (IBM) concept and strategy on the basis of the provisions in the European Border and Coast Guard Regulation;

2018/03/14
Committee: LIBE

2017/2256(INI)

Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL, Petr JEŽEK, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Expresses concern about the lack of implementation in some areas of the regulation governing certain fields of external border control, such as the systematic consultation of databases during border checks and the thorough checking of the required entry conditions; is also concerned about the occasional unavailability of certain databases such as the SIS and the VIS at certain border crossing points; notes that clear non- compliance in establishing National Coordination Centres in accordance with the European Border Surveillance System Regulation (EUROSUR) is prevalent in many Member States;

2018/03/14
Committee: LIBE

2017/2256(INI)

Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL, Petr JEŽEK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)

23a. Stresses the need to improve the security of identity cards provided by the Member States to EU citizens; calls on the Commission to propose standards for the security and biometric features incorporated in identity cards, as is already the case with passports;

2018/03/14
Committee: LIBE

2017/2256(INI)

Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL, Petr JEŽEK, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25

25. Calls on the Member States to ensure swift return procedures, under humane and dignified conditions, once a return decision has been issued; calls on the Member States to use the opportunity offered by Directive 2001/40/EC to acknowledge and implement a return decision taken by another Member State rather than making a new return decision or sending an irregular migrant back to the first issuing Member State; calls on the Member States to take specific steps to ensure adequate infrastructure, accommodation and living conditions for arriving asylum seekers, especially taking into consideration the needs of unaccompanied minors and families with minors; calls on the Member States to bring their detention facilities into line with the requirements so as to meet capacity demand, and to increase the use of alternative measures to detention;

2018/03/14
Committee: LIBE

2017/2256(INI)

Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL, Petr JEŽEK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31 a (new)

31a. Calls on the Commission to adopt a legislative proposal to include, in a common European repository, documents for long-stay visas, residence permits and permits allowing passage to a border in order to facilitate controls at external borders and improve the authentication of documents;

2018/03/14
Committee: LIBE

2017/2256(INI)

Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL, Petr JEŽEK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Nathalie GRIESBECK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31 b (new)

31b. Welcomes the implementation of the ADEP pilot project, which aims to establish a system with an index enabling the user to know if an individual appears in the police register in one or more Member States, and calls on the Commission to adopt a legislative proposal to set up a European Police Record Index System;

2018/03/14
Committee: LIBE

2017/2256(INI)

Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL, Petr JEŽEK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32

32. Stresses the importance of reforming and adapting the SIS to face new challenges swiftly, namely regarding the protection of ~~missing~~ children who are at risk or missing, the immediate, obligatory exchange of information on terrorism and the mandatory exchange of information on return decisions; highlights the anticipated substantial increase in the activity of the Supplementary Information Request at the National Entry (SIRENE) Bureau and calls on Member States to reinforce the means at its disposal by ensuring that it has adequate financial and human resources to carry out its new functions;

2018/03/14
Committee: LIBE

2017/2253(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas equivalence, and passporting rights ~~and mutual recognition~~ are distinctly different concepts, providing different rights to and obligations for financial institutions and market participants;

2018/05/04
Committee: ECON

2017/2253(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)

G a. whereas it is necessary for the purposes of the Union's financial stability to fully consider the interconnectedness between third country markets and the EU's single market;

2018/05/04
Committee: ECON

2017/2253(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. ~~Note~~Recalls that the ~~Member States may not always entirely support international cooper~~key objective of EU legislation owing t~~o concerns about the protection of national interests an~~he area of financial services is to safeguard the fin~~herent incentive to shift risks to other jurisdict~~ancial stability of the Unions;

2018/05/04
Committee: ECON

2017/2253(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Stresses that, in many cases, the granting of equivalence is a unilateral and discretionary decision taken by the EU and is not applied in a reciprocal manner by third countries; considers that international cooperation could be better advanced by dint of international agreements negotiated between the EU and third countries; notes that, unlike equivalence, international agreements can provide mutual access between the EU and third countries for financial institutions and for the mutual recognition of rules;

2018/05/04
Committee: ECON

2017/2253(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5 a. emphasises that the EU should encourage other jurisdictions to grant access to their financial markets to EU market participants;

2018/05/04
Committee: ECON

2017/2253(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Emphasises that one of the key objectives for equivalence is to promote regulatory convergence on the basis of international standards, while maintaining the ability to safeguard the stability of EU financial markets;

2018/05/04
Committee: ECON

2017/2253(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Considers that, as it stands, the EU’s process for granting equivalence lacks ~~certainty and~~ sufficient transparency, and ~~requires a structured and practical framework outlining clear procedur~~in some cases clarity, with regards to procedures underlying the recognition of third countries supervisory frameworks; takes the view that guiding principles should underline the EU's equivalence regimes, whereby the process would be more transparent and provide greater clarity for third countries;

2018/05/04
Committee: ECON

2017/2253(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Believes that equivalence decisions ~~and international agreements~~ should be objective, proportionate, risk- sensitive and be taken in the best interests of the Union and its citizens;

2018/05/04
Committee: ECON

2017/2253(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Notes that the Commission’s decision of 21 December 2017 to grant equivalence to Swiss share trading venues – limited to a 12-month period with the possibility of an extension provided sufficient progress is made on a common institutional framework – was primarily political, and used to gain leverage in a separate policy matter; deplores the fact that Parliament had no input into this decision;deleted

2018/05/04
Committee: ECON

2017/2253(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Notes that the Commission has the right to withdraw equivalence decisions, and believes that ~~Parliament should be consulted in a timely manner be~~the Commission should explain in detail to Parliament the reasons fore such a withdrawal decision isbeing taken; calls for the introduction of clear procedures and timelines governing the adoption, withdrawal or suspension of equivalence decisions;

2018/05/04
Committee: ECON

2017/2253(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Is concerned that there is no consistent framework for ongoing supervision of an equivalent third country’s regime; considers that the European Supervisory Authorities (ESAs) should be equipped with the power to monitor regulatory developments in third countries assess the effect such developments may have based on, inter alia, the interconnectedness of the third countries' financial system with that of the Union, and demands that Parliament should be kept informed of ongoing regulatory developments and monitoring thereof in third countries;

2018/05/04
Committee: ECON

2017/2253(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Calls on the Commission to adopt at least a set of guiding principles, and if appropriate, a legislative act establishing a clear ~~framework~~approach for a transparent, coherent and consistent application of equivalence procedures ~~which introduces a standardised process for the determination of equivalence~~;

2018/05/04
Committee: ECON

2017/2253(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Calls for equivalence decisions to be reviewed at least once every three years by the relevant ESA and for such reviews to be made public; highlights that such reviews should be based on, at least, the relevant legislation and its implementation, as well as the relevant supervisory practices in the third country concerned;

2018/05/04
Committee: ECON

2017/2253(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)

16 a. Calls furthermore on the Commission to make ad hoc assessments of equivalence provisions based on reasoned requests from the Parliament, Council, ESAs, and where relevant the ECB, NCAs and the ESRB;

2018/05/04
Committee: ECON

2017/2253(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Recalls the importance of National Competent Authorities (NCAs) in the authorisation process for financial institutions that wish to delegate part of their portfolio management or risk management to service providers in third countries where the regulatory regime is comparableat the ESAs must have an ever more important role in the analysis of third country supervisory frameworks as the EU continues to build towards the completion of Capital Markets Union; calls, in this respect, for the relevant ESAs to tha~~t of~~ve the ~~EU; considers that NCAs have sufficient technical knowledge and expertise to properly assess delegation approval requests; encourages the ESAs to develop further cooperation between~~ capacity and powers to collect, collate and analyse data; recalls the importance of close cooperation between ESAs and National Competent Authorities (NCAs) in order to share best practice concerning regulatory cooperation and activities with third countries;

2018/05/04
Committee: ECON

2017/2179(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Takes note of EASO's ongoing efforts to address deficiencies with regard to high staff turnover; Points out that the high turnover of ~~EASO national experts~~ staff can put at risk th~~reatening the quality of EASO’s work~~e achievement of objectives set in EASO’s annual and multi-annual work programmes;

2018/01/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2179(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Acknowledges that EASO, eu- LISA and to a much lesser extend EMCDDA did not fully comply with public procurement principles and rules laid down by the Financial Regulation; ~~notes that for EU~~understands that in the case of eu-LISA decisions had to be taken to ensure the stability and continuity of the border management of external borders of the Schengen area; notes that for eu-LISA, Frontex and EMCDDA the Court also identified weaknesses in monitoring contract implementations; highlights also the very significant weaknesses of EASO Internal Controls; welcomes however the commitment of these three Agencies to improve themselves and take the necessary corrective measures;

2018/01/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2179(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Points out that eu-LISA and EASO are the only JHA agencies for which there are no obligations to conduct regular external audits in their founding regulations; ~~requests these Agencies and the Commission~~calls on the co-legislators to evaluate options to address this important issue when revising their founding regulations;

2018/01/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2179(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Urges ~~in particular Eurojust, CEPOL, EASO and eu-LISA to step up their efforts for adopting in due time and for effectively implementing~~the Commission to ensure the swift adoption of its guidelines on whistleblowing that will consequently be immediately adopted and effectively implemented by Union Agencies, including Eurojust, CEPOL, EASO and eu-LISA, in the form of clear internal rules on the protection of whistle-blowers;

2018/01/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2178(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. ~~Is concerned~~Notes that the public procurement procedure launched for the further development and maintenance of the VIS system (EUR 1924 million for a six -year contract) ~~without precisely defining the services requested~~, as per the system's legal base, required tenderers to have access to the Biometric Matching Service technology developed by one single company ~~with no obligations to provide commercial access to tenderers~~; calls on the Agency to, whenever possible, avoid being locked- in to any vendors as this would be detrimental to its long term financial interests, damaging the cost- effectiveness of procurement procedures and limiting competition; urges the Agency to, whenever possible, conclude agreements with multiple suppliers and to define the services required precisely;

2018/01/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2178(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Welcomes the Court of Auditors' conclusions that the annual accounts of the European Agency for the Operational Management of Large-scale IT Systems in the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice (“the Agency”) present fairly its financial position on 31 December 2016 and that its transactions are legal and regular;

2018/01/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2178(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Notes that the Agency amended the construction contract for its premises in Strasbourg (EUR 21.2 million) to proceed with advance payments in order to increase its budget consumption; notes that such a change was linked to the financial cycle imposed by the Financial Regulation for non-differentiated appropriations; points out that by November 2016, the Agency had paid the ~~full~~ contract amount alin full, even though less than half of the work had been completed; notes that the risk was partly offset by financial and performance guarantees as stipulated in the contract; requests the Agency to better assess the necessity of taking such financial risks ~~as the use of financial guarantees does not cover all financial risk~~in future projects;

2018/01/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2178(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. ~~Regret~~Notes that, in 2016, the Agency received and accepted supplies amounting to EUR 2.8 million without having budget and contracts in place for it; understands that such a move was made to ensure the stability and continuity of the border management of external borders of the Schengen area; requests the Agency to better adhere to public procurement procedures;

2018/01/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2178(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Regrets that the internal whistleblowing procedure has not yet been implemented ~~yet~~; calls on the ~~Agency for an immediate~~European Commission to ensure the swift adoption of its guidelines on whistleblowing that will consequently be immediately adopted and effectively implement~~ation of the internal whistleblowing procedur~~ed by EU Agencies, including the Agency; understands that, as an interim measure, the Agency has been pro-active by including general whistleblowing principles in its code of conduct, which is easily accessible on the Agency's website;

2018/01/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2178(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Notes with concern that there is no specific legal requirement in the Regulation (EU) 1077/2011, establishing the Agency;, on publication of the individual statements of commitment, including the declarations of interests of the members of the Management Board and of the Advisory Group; urges the ~~Agency~~co- legislators to adopt, and consequently for the Agency to effectively implement, legal requirements and guidelines for a coherent policy on the prevention and management of conflicts of interest, as well as to develop a clear and transparent policy on these matters; welcomes that, in the absence of any legal requirement, the Agency has published individual statements of commitment of the members of the Management Board;

2018/01/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2178(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Stresses with concern that the first annual monitoring report on the implementation of the Agency’s anti-fraud strategy (April 2016) showed a ~~low~~ level of implementation close to 60%, while the next monitoring report (~~March~~November 2017) showsed a level of quantitative implementation of at least 80%; notes the progress made in this regard; calls on the Agency to constantly improve the implementation of its anti-fraud strategy;

2018/01/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2177(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. ~~Highlights that in order to cover its support to Member States of first entry, in particular for the registration and interviewing of asylum applicants and for the relocation scheme, the budget~~Welcomes the Court of Auditors' conclusions that the annual accounts of the European Asylum Support Office (‘the Office’) ~~inc~~prease~~d by 273 %; underlines the fact that the Office’s staff increased by only 34 % and that far fewer experts from Member States have been deployed to Member States of first entry than actually needed~~nt fairly its financial position on 31 December 2016; notes, however, that the Court of Auditors issued a qualified opinion on the payments underlying the Office's accounts;

2018/01/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2177(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Highlights that, in order to cover its support to Member States of first entry, in particular for the registration and interviewing of asylum applicants and for the relocation scheme, the budget of the European Asylum Support Office (‘the Office’) increased by 273 %; notes that the Office’s staff increased by 34 % and that fewer experts from Member States have been deployed to Member States of first entry than actually needed;

2018/01/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2177(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. ~~Requests the Office to improve its budgetary management as~~Notes that the level of committed appropriations for Title II (administrative expenditure) carried over was high at EUR 2,5 million (43,9 %) and corresponds to contracts signed towards the end of 2016 or for which invoices were only issued in 2017; requests therefore that the Office improve its budgetary management;

2018/01/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2177(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Regrets theat the Court of Auditors issued a qualified opinion on the payments underlying the Office's accounts due to fact that two of the five procurement procedures that audited payments (representing 2.9% of the total expenditures) ~~were irregular due to relate~~had irregular public procurement procedures; notes also the signature of an irregular additional framework contract for which no payments were made; re~~quests the Office to cancel all related contracts~~cognises that the Office agreed to the contract due to the extreme pressures it was facing at the time; highlights, nevertheless, that such irregular procurement procedures are unacceptable and asks the Office to ensure that they are not repeated;

2018/01/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2169(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Notes the relatively high level of carry-overs of committed appropriations for Title II (administrative expenditure) at EUR ~~4,2~~3,5 million, i.e. 41 39%; acknowledges that it is due to the nature of the administrative arrangements between Europol and its host state regarding building works; notes that Europol received an Internal Security Fund emergency assistance grant of EUR 1,5 million in 2016 with a view to deploying experts (guest officers) to hotspots to conduct secondary security checks, with this expenditure being audited and deemed as being eligible;

2018/01/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2169(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Notes the 102 % staff and 8,3 % budget increases of Europol in 2016 following the decision to entrust Europol with new tasks; notes the high implementation rates for commitment (99,8 %) and payment appropriations (91,0 %);

2018/01/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2169(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Welcomes the ~~commitment of~~steps taken by Europol to address in a timely fashion the single critical recommendation and the majority of the twenty-six very important recommendations identified as part of the internal audits conducted on operational support provided by the European Cybercrime Centre to Member States as well as on the implementation by Europol of internal control standards; calls on Europol to take the necessary action to address the remaining five recommendations that are still pending;

2018/01/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2169(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Stresses that in 2016 Europol’s ICT network architecture was updated and that the network hosting the core business data and systems was classified as CONFIDENTIEL UE/EU- CONFIDENTIAL; encourages, in that context, the work of Europol’s Data Protection Officer and its close cooperation with the European Data Protection Supervisor;deleted

2018/01/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2169(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Highlights that Europol’s new legal framework provides for additional measures in terms of providing the discharge authority with dedicated information about its work, including sensitive operational matters; ~~regrets, however, that~~welcomes the publication of declarations of interest ofby the members of Europol’'s mManagement ~~boar~~Board on Europol's website; welcomes Europol's updated version of its code of conduct and its ~~still pending;~~whistleblowing arrangements, which provide additional safeguards to Europol's operation.

2018/01/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2164(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. ~~Highlights that the mandate of Frontex was considerably extended with a budget increase of 75 % versus 18 % for its staff; notes in this context,~~Welcomes the Court of Auditors' conclusions that the annual accounts of ~~the Agency fairly present~~Frontex present fairly its financial position on 31 December 2016 and that its transactions are legal and regular; highlights that the mandate of Frontex was considerably extended with a budget increase of 75% and a staff increase of 18%;

2018/01/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2164(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Notes that, as a result of the migration crisis, Frontex faced problems in absorbing additional Union funds granted throughout 2016, leading to considerable difficulties in complying with budgetary and financial rules; stresses the high level of cancelled carry-overs from 2015 for Title III (16 %) %); notes in this regard the overall budget utilisation rate of 95,3% for the 2015 appropriations; underlines that it originally allocated EUR 20 million from its 2016 budget for expenditure dedicated to ‘hotspots’ ~~but~~; notes that the Agency has in the meantime al~~ready~~so committed almost EUR 35 million for that purpose~~; p~~ and the linked joints o~~ut that the Agency performed illicit “national returns” until October 2016, which resulted in irregular payments~~perational activities; acknowledges the Agency's 2016/36 Decision adopted by its Executive Director, which provided that it would be possible for joint return operations carried out by one single Member State facing disproportionate pressure to be financed from the Agency's budget; requests the Agency to ~~significantly~~always improve its financial planning and budget management capabilities;

2018/01/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2164(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Criticises the ~~irregular~~ recruitment of 14 temporary staff at high AST grades; ~~requests the Agency to strictly adhere to the Staff Regulations at all time~~notes, however, the efforts made by the Agency to balance the geographical distribution of its recruitment of qualified candidates, keeping in mind the difficulties faced to recruit the right candidates for certain profiles; requests the Agency to strictly adhere to the Staff Regulations at all times; notes in this regard that the Staff Regulations offer the necessary flexibility for labour market conditions prevailing in the Union to be taken into account when recruiting officials in order to address the specific needs of the institutions; stresses that the Agency’s staff will more than double from 2016 to 2020; regrets, however, that the increase iwas not based on a thorough analysis in the legislative financial statement prepared by the Commission; requests the Agency to better justify its needs in the future based on accurate and verifiable information;

2018/01/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2163(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Notes the high staff turnover of CEPOL after its relocation from the United Kingdom to Hungary; ~~not~~recognises that ithis is due to the difference in salary correction coefficients and the low recruitment grades; ~~encourage taking~~notes in this regard that the Staff Regulations offer the necessary flexibility for labour market conditions prevailing in the Union to be taken into account when recruiting officials in order to address the specific needs of the institutions; encourages CEPOL to take long term actions to stabilise staff turnover especially in the ICT area;

2018/01/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2163(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Notes that the outreach of CEPOL has significantly increased in 2016 with athe number of participants reaching 18, 009 compared to 12, 992 in 2015 (+38,6%); highlights the quality of CEPOL products, with 95% of participants being very satisfied or satisfied; welcomes that the certification of CEPOL ~~according to~~is in accordance with the Quality Management System Standard ISO 9001:2015;

2018/01/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2163(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Agrees with ~~the~~CEPOL's Management Board that ~~CEPOL~~the Agency has effectively delivered the expected products and services in accordance with its 2016 Work Programme;

2018/01/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2155(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Stresses the recommendation of the Court of Auditors of 2011 regarding ~~re-~~the redefinition of ~~respectiv~~the roles and responsibilities ~~between~~of the Administrative Director and the College, to avoid the overlaps of responsibilities; ~~regrets that no corrective measur~~acknowledges tha~~s been taken by Eurojust since 2011 since the new~~t the Eurojust Regulation was still ~~under consideration~~being negotiated by the co-legislator ~~end of 2016~~s in 2016, thus no corrective measures could have been taken to solve this matter;

2018/01/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2155(DEC)

Petr JEŽEK, Roberta METSOLA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. ~~Urges Eurojust to~~Calls on the European Commission to ensure the swift adoption of its guidelines on whistleblowing that will consequently be immediately adopted and effectively implemented by Union Agencies, including Eurojust; urges the Agency in the interim to further step up its efforts ~~for finalising~~to ensure clear internal rules onfor the protection of whistleblowers;.

2018/01/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2150(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Highlights the release of over 44 scientific and institutional publications; welcomes especially the publication of the flagships “2016 European Drug Report (EDR) package” and of the joint “EMCDDA–Europol 2016 EU Drug Markets Report”; notes as well that a total of 27 scientific articles or book chapters authored or co-authored by the Centre’s staff were also published during the year, enhancing the Centre’s scientific reputation;deleted

2018/01/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2150(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. ~~Encourag~~Welcomes the commitment of the Centre to provide improved access to its data to interested third parties; expects that such a commitment has to result in actions taken in this regard.

2018/01/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2149(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Notes that the Court of Auditors identified that formal delegations and sub- delegations from authorising officers were not always consistent with the corresponding authorisation rights for transactions in the Agency’s financial systems; notes the immediate correction of the error by the Agency ~~but requests that it also put in place mechanisms to detect and fix such errors much more quickly~~; reminds the Agency to establish the necessary internal mechanisms to ensure that this does not happen again in the future;

2018/01/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2149(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Notes that, as in 2015, carry-overs of committed appropriations were high for Title III (operating expenditure) at EUR 5,2 million, i.e. 68 %; acknowledges that this ~~year, as in the previous year, this simply~~ reflects the multi-annual nature of the Agency’s activities;

2018/01/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2149(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Regrets the fact that the Agency’s mandate still limits its role as regards the support for fundamental rights; stresses that the Agency should be able to offer opinions on legislative proposals on its own initiative and that its remit should extend to all areas of rights protected under the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, including issues of judicial and police cooperation in criminal matters; recommends the inclusion of the those thematic areas in the new multiannual financial framework;deleted

2018/01/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2144(DEC)

Petr JEŽEK, Roberta METSOLA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. ~~Welcomes efforts of the EDPS to help move forward the global debate on data protection and privacy; h~~Highlights the quality of the advi~~ses~~ce given to EU policy makers in relation to the adoption of the Umbrella agreement and the Privacy Shield ~~as well as in relation to the preparation of the adoption of new rules for the EU institutions and for e-Privacy in 2017~~; acknowledges the EDPS efforts to prepare itself for ensuring the Secretariat of the new European Data Protection Board (EDPB) as part of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR); notes with interest the launch of the Ethics Advisory Group;

2018/01/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2136(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Welcomes the opinion of the European Court of Auditors on the 2016 accounts of the Union; highlights especially the further reduction of payment errors in 2016 to the all-time low of 3.1 % and notes that this is the first time that the Court issues a qualified opinion on payments since 1994; ~~regrets however~~notes that the payment error rate for Heading 3 (Security and Citizenship) was not calculated by the Court ~~as only 15 transactions have been audited~~due to the small sample size of audited transactions;

2018/01/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2136(DEC)

Petr JEŽEK, Roberta METSOLA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Notes that the overall amount mobilised for ~~migration and asylum~~the refugee and migration crisis was not reported by the Commission in 2016 and is difficult to estimate; encourages therefore the Commission to develop a ~~coherent and comprehensive~~specific reporting structure for th~~at purpose; recalls its call on the Commission to split up budget lines in order to enhance transparency~~is purpose;

2018/01/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2136(DEC)

Nils TORVALDS, Thierry CORNILLET, Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS, Petr JEŽEK

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Reminds that special instruments were used extensively in 201~~5, 2016 and 2017~~6 to respond notably to the humanitarian situation faced by asylum- seekers in the EU and that there is therefore a risk that the amounts left until the end of the current MFF may not be sufficient to respond to unexpected events that may occur before 2020; requests the Commission to solve this structural issue in the next MFF;

2018/01/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2131(INL)

Louis MICHEL, Gérard DEPREZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Petr JEŽEK, Morten PETERSEN, Angelika MLINAR

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas the Union is founded on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities, as set out in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) and whereas those values, which are common to the Member States and are values to which all Member States have freely subscribed, constitute the foundation of the rights enjoyed by those living in the Union;

2018/05/17
Committee: LIBE

2017/2131(INL)

Louis MICHEL, Gérard DEPREZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Petr JEŽEK, Morten PETERSEN, Angelika MLINAR

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas any clear risk of a serious breach by a Member State of the values enshrined in Article 2 TEU does not concern solely the individual Member State where the risk materialises but has an impact on the other Member States, mutual trust between them and on the very nature of the Union and its citizens’ rights;

2018/05/17
Committee: LIBE

2017/2131(INL)

Louis MICHEL, Gérard DEPREZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Petr JEŽEK, Morten PETERSEN, Angelika MLINAR

Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)

Ba. whereas Article 7 , paragraph 1, TEU constitutes a preventive phase endowing the Union with the capacity to intervene in the event of a clear risk of a serious breach of common values; whereas such preventive action provides for a dialogue with the Member State concerned and is intended to avoid possible sanctions;

2018/05/17
Committee: LIBE

2017/2131(INL)

Louis MICHEL, Gérard DEPREZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Petr JEŽEK, Morten PETERSEN, Angelika MLINAR

Motion for a resolution
Annex I – point 1 a (new)

(1a) According to Article 49 TEU, accession to the Union requires respect for and the promotion of the values referred to in Article 2. The accession of Hungary was a voluntary act based on national sovereignty, with a broad consensus across the Hungarian political spectrum.

2018/05/17
Committee: LIBE

2017/2131(INL)

Louis MICHEL, Gérard DEPREZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Petr JEŽEK, Morten PETERSEN, Angelika MLINAR

Motion for a resolution
Annex I – point 4

(4) In its resolution of 17 May 2017 on the situation in Hungary, the European Parliament stated that the current situation in Hungary represents a clear risk of a serious breach of the values referred to in Article 2 TEU. and justified the triggering of the procedure provided for in Article 7, paragraph 1, TEU;

2018/05/17
Committee: LIBE

2017/2131(INL)

Louis MICHEL, Gérard DEPREZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Petr JEŽEK, Morten PETERSEN, Angelika MLINAR

Motion for a resolution
Annex I – point 5

(5) A wide range of actors at the national, European and international level, have repeatedly expressed their deep concerns about the situation of democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights in Hungary, includingIn its 2003 Communication on Article 7 of the Treaty on European Union1 a, the Commission cites the reports of international organisations and NGOs as sources of information enabling respect for common values to be monitored. In this regard, the Commission cites the United Nations Commission on Human Rights, the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, the OSCE and the NGOs Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and the International Federation for Human Rights. These bodies and NGOs and also the EU institutions and bodies ~~of the Union, the Council of Europe, the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), the United Nations (UN), as well as numerous civil society organisations.~~are among the players at the national, European and international level which have repeatedly expressed their deep concerns about the situation of democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights in Hungary. __________________ 1a COM(2003) 606

2018/05/17
Committee: LIBE

2017/2131(INL)

Louis MICHEL, Gérard DEPREZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Petr JEŽEK, Morten PETERSEN, Angelika MLINAR

Motion for a resolution
Annex I – point 10

(10) In recent years the Hungarian Government has extensively used national consultations, including one on migration and terrorism launched in May 2015. On 27 April 2017, the Commission pointed out that the national consultation “Let’s stop Brussels” contained several claims and allegations which were factually incorrect or highly misleading. Nevertheless, the Hungarian Government subsequently continued to have recourse to similar consultations.

2018/05/17
Committee: LIBE

2017/2131(INL)

Louis MICHEL, Gérard DEPREZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Petr JEŽEK, Morten PETERSEN, Angelika MLINAR

Motion for a resolution
Annex I – point 20 a (new)

(20a) According to the anti-corruption report published by the Commission in 20141 b, corruption is perceived as widespread (89%) in Hungary. According to the 2017 Corruption Perceptions Index published by Transparency International, Hungary has lost 10 points in six years, making it one of the lowest ranked states in the European Union. Hungary is one of the greatest recipients of EU funds and more than half of public investment comes from EU funds. Hungary, however, has refused to participate in the European Public Prosecutor's Office set up to combat infringements affecting the Union budget. __________________ 1b COM(2014) 38

2018/06/25
Committee: LIBE

2017/2124(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. whereas the ~~ECB has missed its 2 % inflation target~~inflation in the Eurozone has been significantly below 2 % in each of the four years since 2013 and forecasts that it will ~~not reach this target before~~stay below 2 % until 2020;

2017/09/18
Committee: ECON

2017/2124(INI)

Nils TORVALDS, Thierry CORNILLET, Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS, Petr JEŽEK, Enrique CALVET CHAMBON

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas in 2016, the ECB’s net profit stood at EUR 1.19 mbillion compared with EUR 1.08 mbillion in 2015;

2017/09/18
Committee: ECON

2017/2124(INI)

Nils TORVALDS, Thierry CORNILLET, Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS, Petr JEŽEK, Siegfried MUREŞAN, Sander LOONES

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Underlines the ~~federal natur~~independence of the ECB~~, which~~ in its ruole~~s out national vetoes, enabling it to act decisively in addressing the crisis~~ as the euro area´s monetary authority;

2017/09/18
Committee: ECON

2017/2124(INI)

Nils TORVALDS, Thierry CORNILLET, Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS, Petr JEŽEK, Enrique CALVET CHAMBON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Gives a positive assessment of the monetary policy pursued by the ECB in the period 2012-2016 in terms of its contribution to economic recovery by preventing deflation, preserving favourable financing conditions and maintaining financial stability and the proper functioning of the payment systems but stresses its concern regarding the potential consequences of a negative interest rate policy for individual savers and the financial equilibrium of pension schemes as well as about the build up of asset bubbles due to quantitative easing;

2017/09/18
Committee: ECON

2017/2124(INI)

Nils TORVALDS, Thierry CORNILLET, Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS, Petr JEŽEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. ~~Is concerned that the ECB will likely not reach its inflation target for at least six consecutive years and will remain below the medium-term target level of~~Notes that the inflation in the Eurozone is expected to remain below 2 % until at least 2020 despite ~~pursuing a very~~a accommodative monetary policy~~, which indicates that the economy is not operating at full capacity~~ by the ECB;

2017/09/18
Committee: ECON

2017/2124(INI)

Nils TORVALDS, Thierry CORNILLET, Petr JEŽEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

~~5. Acknowledges that without the ECB’s policy package, inflation would be almost 0.5 % lower on average than the rate currently projected for the years 2016-2019;~~deleted

2017/09/18
Committee: ECON

2017/2124(INI)

Nils TORVALDS, Thierry CORNILLET, Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS, Petr JEŽEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Agrees with the ECB that in order to reach the inflation target, ~~supportive fiscal policies and socially balanced productivity-enhancing~~a balanced mixed between fiscal policies and growth enhancing structural reforms are required;

2017/09/18
Committee: ECON

2017/2124(INI)

Nils TORVALDS, Thierry CORNILLET, Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS, Petr JEŽEK, Siegfried MUREŞAN, Sander LOONES

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Believes that additional policy measures should be considered in order to move closer and more rapidly towards the inflation objective, including an increase in monthly purchases, the inclusion of equity purchases in the APP and the extension of the TLTRO programme to households through zero-coupon perpetual loans;deleted

2017/09/18
Committee: ECON

2017/2124(INI)

Nils TORVALDS, Thierry CORNILLET, Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS, Petr JEŽEK, Siegfried MUREŞAN, Sander LOONES

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

~~8. Asks the ECB to consider complementing its price stability objective with nominal GDP growth targeting;~~deleted

2017/09/18
Committee: ECON

2017/2124(INI)

Nils TORVALDS, Thierry CORNILLET, Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS, Petr JEŽEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Notes that GDP growth in the Eurozone has been stable but modest, standing at 2 % in 2015 and 1.8 % in 2016, and that the Commission’s Spring 2017 Economic Forecast predicts that GDP growth will remain below 2 % until at least 2019;

2017/09/18
Committee: ECON

2017/2124(INI)

Nils TORVALDS, Thierry CORNILLET, Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS, Petr JEŽEK, Enrique CALVET CHAMBON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Underlines the positive effect of the ECB monetary policy on growth, employment and the financing costs of Member States, non-financial companies and households but stresses that monetary policy will fall short if not complemented by growth-enhancing structural reforms;

2017/09/18
Committee: ECON

2017/2124(INI)

Nils TORVALDS, Thierry CORNILLET, Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS, Petr JEŽEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Notes that according to the ECB, economic recovery in the Eurozone has ~~relied on the fall in oil prices and the ECB’s monetary policy, which will add a cumulative 1.7 % to growth in the period 2016-2019, with no sizable positive contribution from fiscal policy so far;~~been affected by the fall in oil prices

2017/09/18
Committee: ECON

2017/2124(INI)

Nils TORVALDS, Thierry CORNILLET, Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS, Petr JEŽEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Considers that the single monetary policy alone is not sufficient to achieve a sustainable and more even and inclusive economic recovery, and that public and private investments should therefore be encouraged in the context of a moderately positive fiscal stance in the Eurozone as proposed by the Commission;cannot stimulate aggregate demand unless it is complemented by sound fiscal policies and ambitious growth enhancing structural reform programmes at Member State level; recalls that the main benefit of monetary policy is to safeguard price stability in order to guarantee a stable environment for investment; considers that monetary policy is not the appropriate tool to solve the structural problems of the European economy

2017/09/18
Committee: ECON

2017/2124(INI)

Nils TORVALDS, Thierry CORNILLET, Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS, Petr JEŽEK, Enrique CALVET CHAMBON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)

14 a. Agrees with the ECB that all Eurozone countries would benefit from intensifying efforts towards achieving a more growth-friendly composition of public finances;

2017/09/18
Committee: ECON

2017/2124(INI)

Nils TORVALDS, Thierry CORNILLET, Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS, Petr JEŽEK, Enrique CALVET CHAMBON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Points out that while unemployment has decreased, aggregate demand in the euro area remains subdued, largely as a result of the rise in poor quality, temporary, low-paid jobs; calls on the ECB to evaluate how this phenomenon is slowing the recovery and explore ways to stimulate demand in spite of wage stagnationmany Eurozone continues to suffer from a high level of unemployment and more should be done to tackle youth unemployment and to create high quality jobs;

2017/09/18
Committee: ECON

2017/2124(INI)

Nils TORVALDS, Thierry CORNILLET, Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS, Petr JEŽEK, Enrique CALVET CHAMBON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)

15 a. Notes with concern that the Eurozone continues face a low level of productivity growth following a lack of investment since the beginning of the crises;is concerned that the still high level of public debt and large numbers of non- performing loans in the banking sector in some Member States are still fragmenting the financial markets, thus reducing room to manoeuvre to support the most fragile economies

2017/09/18
Committee: ECON

2017/2124(INI)

Nils TORVALDS, Thierry CORNILLET, Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS, Petr JEŽEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Stresses that the MIP foresees actions if excessive current account surpluses in some Member States ~~must be corrected through appropriate fiscal policie~~are detrimental to others;

2017/09/18
Committee: ECON

2017/2124(INI)

Nils TORVALDS, Thierry CORNILLET, Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS, Petr JEŽEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

~~17. Points out that even though M1 grew at a rate of 8.8 % in 2016, M3 continues to grow at just 5 % per year, which shows that the transmission of monetary policy is not fully effective;~~deleted

2017/09/18
Committee: ECON

2017/2124(INI)

Nils TORVALDS, Thierry CORNILLET, Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS, Petr JEŽEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Acknowledges that monetary policy has effectively reduced the cost of credit and helped to improve access to finance for companies and households; considers, however, that the effect of this policy is limited owing to the lack of sufficient credit demand in the euro area;deleted

2017/09/18
Committee: ECON

2017/2124(INI)

Nils TORVALDS, Thierry CORNILLET, Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS, Petr JEŽEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Agrees with the ECB that a bank’s profitability depends on its business model, low interest rates notwithstanding; and that the European banking sector is characterized by diversity, not least as a result of national specificities, but because it contributes to the stability of the financial system

2017/09/18
Committee: ECON

2017/2124(INI)

Nils TORVALDS, Thierry CORNILLET, Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS, Petr JEŽEK, Enrique CALVET CHAMBON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Acknowledges that the current policy of low interest rates has a positive effect on the level of nonperforming loans (NPLs); calls for a European strategy involving a secondary market for NPLs in order to alleviate the burden of NPLs in some Member States which would include strict conditionality on progress in Member States regarding insolvency law or banks' governance;

2017/09/18
Committee: ECON

2017/2124(INI)

Nils TORVALDS, Thierry CORNILLET, Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS, Petr JEŽEK, Enrique CALVET CHAMBON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23

23. Calls the ECB’s attention to the need for the sufficiently wide coverage of recent stress tests vis-à-vis the resolution or liquidation of certain banks; calls the ECB as overseer of financial market infrastructures to assess constantly the resilience of the individual cyber security systems, the network as a whole but also its own system;

2017/09/18
Committee: ECON

2017/2124(INI)

Nils TORVALDS, Thierry CORNILLET, Petr JEŽEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26

26. ~~Encourages~~Takes note of the possibility for the ECB to take steps to align its CSPP purchases with the EU’s commitment to tackling climate change;

2017/09/18
Committee: ECON

2017/2124(INI)

Nils TORVALDS, Thierry CORNILLET, Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS, Petr JEŽEK, Enrique CALVET CHAMBON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27

27. Agrees that a well-functioning, diversified and integrated capital market would support the transmission of the single monetary policy; is of the opinion that the CMU plays a key role in expanding the pool of capital in the EU; calls for the full and timely completion and implementation of the capital markets union and the banking union;

2017/09/18
Committee: ECON

2017/2124(INI)

Nils TORVALDS, Thierry CORNILLET, Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS, Petr JEŽEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28

28. ~~Welcomes the positive opinion of the ECB on the quick~~Considers that establishment of the European deposit insurance scheme (EDIS) as the third pillar of a fully-fledged banking union; stresses that the EDIS ~~will~~could further help to enhance and safeguard financial stability; underlines the importance of risk reduction measures preceding further risk sharing

2017/09/18
Committee: ECON

2017/2124(INI)

Nils TORVALDS, Thierry CORNILLET, Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS, Petr JEŽEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29

~~29. Underlines the urgent need to proceed towards establishing a truly European safe asset for the Eurozone’s banking union;~~deleted

2017/09/18
Committee: ECON

2017/2124(INI)

Nils TORVALDS, Thierry CORNILLET, Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS, Petr JEŽEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31

31. Agrees with the ECB on the importance of physical money as the only legal tender~~, and reminds all Eurozone countries that euro coins and banknotes must not be rejected in transactions~~;

2017/09/18
Committee: ECON

2017/2124(INI)

Nils TORVALDS, Thierry CORNILLET, Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS, Petr JEŽEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33

33. ~~Urge~~Asks the ECB to ~~support Greece, for example through ensuring the eligibility of Greek companies for the CSPP and the inclusion of Greek sovereign bonds in the APP~~continue providing the necessary support with any Member State of the Eurozone or to the area as a whole in accordance with the Treaty;

2017/09/18
Committee: ECON

2017/2124(INI)

Nils TORVALDS, Thierry CORNILLET, Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS, Petr JEŽEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35

35. Believes that ECB profits from seigniorage revenue shcould be considered an EU budgetary resource~~, since they are directly linked to a fully developed, sui generis European policy~~;

2017/09/18
Committee: ECON

2017/2124(INI)

Nils TORVALDS, Thierry CORNILLET, Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS, Petr JEŽEK, Enrique CALVET CHAMBON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36

36. Considers that the ECB’s growing number of responsibilities and tasks ~~necessitate~~ greater ECB transparency ~~and accountability towards Parliament~~goes hand in hand with a growing accountability towards Parliament in association with the CJEU, the European Ombudsman, the European Court of Auditors, the OLAF and the European Data Protection Supervisor;

2017/09/18
Committee: ECON

2017/2114(INI)

Lieve WIERINCK, Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS, Thierry CORNILLET, Petr JEŽEK, Enrique CALVET CHAMBON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)

11 a. Notes that difficulties in access to finance faced by companies across the EU, in particular by small and medium- sized enterprises, represents an obstacle to the overall competitiveness of the euro area;considers the implementation of measures to improve access to finance a key priority for the improvement of competitiveness in the euro area;

2017/07/10
Committee: ECON

2017/2114(INI)

Lieve WIERINCK, Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS, Thierry CORNILLET, Petr JEŽEK, Enrique CALVET CHAMBON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 b (new)

11 b. Considers the deepening of the single market to be a major contributor to the economic development of the euro area;notes that administrative, legal and financial obstacles remain to cross-border economic activity, which represent a particular burden to small and medium- size enterprises;considers that steps should be taken for the harmonisation of administrative, legal and financial requirements for cross-border economic activity;

2017/07/10
Committee: ECON

2017/2114(INI)

Lieve WIERINCK, Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS, Thierry CORNILLET, Petr JEŽEK, Enrique CALVET CHAMBON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 c (new)

11 c. Emphasises that excessive and inefficient government bureaucracy represents an obstacle to business across the EU, being particularly burdensome to small and medium-sized enterprises, and could represent a barrier to entry;considers that measures need to be implemented to streamline government bureaucracy and make it more efficient;stresses that digitalisation of such bureaucracy would be a welcomed step forward;

2017/07/10
Committee: ECON

2017/2114(INI)

Lieve WIERINCK, Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS, Thierry CORNILLET, Petr JEŽEK, Enrique CALVET CHAMBON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Considers that reforms removing investment bottlenecks would allow for immediate support for economic activity and at the same time set the conditions for long-term growth; stresses that the completion of the Capital Markets Union is a crucial factor to attract and to increase investment, and improve the financing of growth and jobs;

2017/07/10
Committee: ECON

2017/2114(INI)

Lieve WIERINCK, Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS, Thierry CORNILLET, Petr JEŽEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)

13 a. Considers research, technology and education to be of vital importance to the long-term economic development of the Euro area;stresses the vast disparities between member states in investment in these areas;notes that investment in these areas can contribute to the development of innovation in the EU;considers that member states should take active measures to meet their target gross domestic expenditure on research and development in the context of the Europe 2020 Strategy;

2017/07/10
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a decision
Recital 8 a (new)

Bank (8a) The new powers of the ECB regarding clearing systems for financial instruments under Article 22 of the Statute of the ESCB should be exercised alongside, and should not encroach on the regulatory competence of, other Union institutions, agencies and bodies on the basis of provisions relating to the establishment or functioning of the internal market provided for in Part III of the TFEU, including those contained in acts adopted by the Commission or by the Council pursuant to the powers conferred upon them. Therefore, in order to ensure that the respective powers of each entity are respected and to prevent conflicting rules and inconsistencies between the decisions taken by different Union institutions and agencies, the powers conferred under Article 22 of the Statute of the ESCB should only be exercised in a manner which fully recognises the general framework for the internal market established by the co-legislators and relevant Union institutions.

2018/06/12
Committee: ECON AFCO

2017/0810(COD)

Charles GOERENS, Petr JEŽEK, Thierry CORNILLET, Lieve WIERINCK

Proposal for a decision
Article 1 – paragraph 1

Statute of the European System of Central Banks and of the European Central Bank
Article 22

Bank The ECB and national central banks may provide facilities, and the ECB may make regulations, to ensure efficient and sound clearing and payment systems, and clearing systems for financial instruments, within the Union and with other countries. In order to achieve the objectives of the ESCB and perform its tasks, the ECB may make regulations concerning clearing systems for financial instruments within the Union and with third countries, provided that it does so in a manner that fully recognises the legislative acts adopted by the European Parliament and the Council in this area as well as measures adopted under such acts.

2018/06/12
Committee: ECON AFCO

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12

(12) Intragroup transactions involving non-financial counterparties represent a relatively small fraction of all OTC derivative transactions and are used primarily for internal hedging within groups. Those transactions therefore do not significantly contribute to systemic risk and interconnectedness, yet the obligation to report those transactions imposes important costs and burdens on non- financial counterparties. Intragroup transactions where at least one of the counterparties is a non-financial counterparty should therefore be exempted from the reporting obligation, regardless of the place of establishment of a non- financial counterparty.

2018/03/05
Committee: ECON

2017/0090(COD)

Petr JEŽEK, Thierry CORNILLET

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16 a (new)

(16a) Post trade risk reduction services can serve to reduce counterparty exposures as well as to reduce operational and counterparty risks from a build-up of market participants' gross outstanding positions. In order to ensure that these benefits may be fully realised, it is appropriate to exempt certain post trade risk reduction services from the clearing obligation, which would also align the provisions under this Regulation with those under Regulation (EU) No 600/20141a. _________________ 1aRegulation (EU) No 600/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 May 2014 on markets in financial instruments and amending Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 (OJ L 173 12.6.2014, p. 84).

2018/03/05
Committee: ECON

2017/0090(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16 b (new)

(16b) In order to avoid international regulatory divergence and limit the build- up of systemic risk, and bearing in mind the particular nature of such derivatives' trades, the mandatory exchange of variation margins on physically settled foreign exchange forwards and physically settled foreign exchange swaps should only apply to transactions between the most systemic counterparties

2018/03/05
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 a (new)

This Regulation shall apply from [3 months following the entry into force of this amending Regulation].

2018/03/05
Committee: ECON

2017/0090(COD)

Caroline NAGTEGAAL, Morten LØKKEGAARD, Petr JEŽEK, Wolf KLINZ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2

Notwithstanding the subparagraph 1a, the following shall apply: Article 1(3), Article 1(7)(d), and paragraphs 8, 10, and 11 of Article 1 shall apply from [PO please add the date 6 months after the entry into force] and Article 1(2)(c), Article 1(7)(e), Article 1(9), points (b) and (c) of Article 1(12) and Article 1(16) shall apply from [~~PO please add the date~~ 18 months after the entry into force].

2018/03/05
Committee: ECON

2017/0090(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 a (new)

If this Regulation enters into force after 16 August 2018, then Article 89(1) shall apply retrospectively to all OTC derivative contracts executed by PSAs after 16 August 2018 and before the date of entry into force of this Regulation.

2018/03/05
Committee: ECON

2017/0063(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 15

(15) To ensure the independence of NCAs, their staff and members of the decision-making body should act with integrity and refrain from any action which is incompatible with the performance of their duties. Th~~e need to prevent the independent assessment of staff or members of the decision-making body being jeopardised entails~~is means that that during their employment and term of office and for a reasonable period thereafter, they should refrain from any incompatible occupation, whether gainful or not that may give rise to a conflict of interests in a specific case. Furthermore, this also entails that in exercising their functions during their employment and their term of office, they should not have an interest in any businesses or organisations which ~~have dealings with a NCA~~are subject to proceedings for the enforcement of Articles 101 or 102 TFEU in which they take part to the extent that this has the potential to compromise their independence in the handling of the case concerned. The staff and ~~the~~ members of the decision-making body should declare any interest or asset which might create a conflict of interests in the performance of their duties. They should be required to ~~inform the decision-making body, the other members thereof or, in the case of NCAs in which~~abstain from any involvement in the decision- making p~~ower rests with only one person, their appointing authority, if, in the performance of their duties, they are called upon to decide~~rocess on a matter in which they have an interest which might impair their impartiality.

2017/11/06
Committee: ECON

2017/0063(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 28

(28) Where in the course of proceedings which may lead to an agreement or a practice being prohibited, undertakings or associations of undertakings offer NCAs commitments which meet their concerns, these authorities should be able to adopt decisions which make these commitments binding on, and enforceable against, the undertakings concerned. Such commitment decisions are not suited for secret cartels, for which NCAs should impose a fine. Commitment decisions should find that there are no longer grounds for action by the NCAs without concluding as to whether or not there has been an infringement of Article 101 TFEU or Article 102 TFEU. Commitment decisions are without prejudice to the powers of competition authorities and courts of the Member States to make such a finding of an infringement and decide upon a case.

2017/11/06
Committee: ECON

2017/0063(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 34

(34) The deterrent effect of fines differs widely across Europe and in some Member States the maximum amount of the fine that can be set is very low. To ensure NCAs can set deterrent fines, the maximum amount of the fine should be set at ~~a level of not less than~~least at 10% of the total worldwide turnover of the undertaking concerned. This should not prevent Member States from maintaining or introducing a higher maximum amount of the fine.

2017/11/06
Committee: ECON

2017/0063(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point a

(a) The director, staff and the members of the decision-making body of national administrative competition authorities can perform their duties and exercise their powers for the application of Articles 101 and 102 TFEU independently from political and other external influence;

2017/11/06
Committee: ECON

2017/0063(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point b

(b) The director, staff and the members of the decision-making body of national administrative competition authorities neither seek nor take any instructions from any government or other public or private entity when carrying out their duties and exercising their powers for the application of Articles 101 and 102 TFEU;

2017/11/06
Committee: ECON

2017/0063(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point c

(c) The director, the staff and the members of the decision-making body of national administrative competition authorities refrain from any action which is incompatible with the performance of their duties and exercise of their powers for the application of Articles 101 and 102 TFEU;

2017/11/06
Committee: ECON

2017/0063(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point d

(d) ~~The~~Appointments to the management and board of the decision-making body of national administrative competition authorities should be made on merit, backed by clear and transparent appointment procedures. The director, members of the decision- making body of national administrative competition authorities may be dismissed only if they no longer fulfil the conditions required for the performance of their duties or have been guilty of serious misconduct under national law. The grounds for dismissal should be laid down in advance in national law. They shall not be dismissed for reasons related to the proper performance of their duties and exercise of their powers in the application of Articles 101 and 102 TFEU as defined in Article 5(2);

2017/11/06
Committee: ECON

2017/0063(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1

1. Member States shall ensure that national competition authorities have thadequate and stable human, financial and technical resources, including premises and infrastructures that are necessary for the effective performance of their duties and exercise of their powers when applying Articles 101 and 102 TFEU as defined in paragraph 2. Member States shall ensure that national competition authorities have a separate annual budget and have autonomy in using their resources.

2017/11/06
Committee: ECON

2017/0063(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 2

2. Where an infringement by an association of undertakings relates to the activities of its members, the maximum amount of the fine shall ~~not~~ be set at ~~a level below~~least at 10 % of the sum of the total worldwide turnover of each member active on the market affected by the infringement of the association. However, the financial liability of each undertaking in respect of the payment of the fine shall not exceed the maximum amount set in accordance with paragraph 1.

2017/11/06
Committee: ECON

2017/0063(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 25 – paragraph 5

5. The requested authority shall ~~not be obliged to~~ enforce decisions pursuant to paragraph 1 ifunless it is able to demonstrate reasonable grounds to the applicant authority showing how this would be manifestly contrary to public policy in the Member State in which enforcement is sought.

2017/11/06
Committee: ECON

2017/0063(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 25 – paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Where an applicant authority disagrees with the refusal of the requested authority to enforce a decision in accordance with paragraph 5, the Commission may, upon the request of the Member State of the applicant authority, issue a binding decision, within three months of the refusal, determining whether the refusal is justified on public policy grounds. If the Commission finds the requested authority's refusal to be unjustified, the requested authority shall enforce the decision pursuant to paragraph 1.

2017/11/06
Committee: ECON

2017/0063(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 26 a (new)

Article 26a Cost sharing between national competition authorities Member States shall ensure that the national administrative competition authorities requesting assistance shall, upon the request of the requested authority: (a) in relation to action taken pursuant to Articles 23 and 24, bear all reasonable additional costs, including translation and administrative costs; (b) in relation to action taken pursuant to Article 25, allow the requested authority to recover all reasonable administrative costs from a collected fine or penalty payment.

2017/11/06
Committee: ECON

2017/0063(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 27 – paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. The Commission shall ensure that the notification of the start of a formal investigative measure received from a national competition authority under Article 11(3) of Regulation 1/2003 is made available to the national competition authorities of the other Member States within the European Competition Network System.

2017/11/06
Committee: ECON

2017/0063(COD)

Gérard DEPREZ, Morten LØKKEGAARD, Jean-Marie CAVADA, Petr JEŽEK, Pavel TELIČKA

Proposal for a directive
Article 29 – paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Paragraph1 shall be without prejudice to the requirements of national criminal law.

2017/11/06
Committee: ECON

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30

(30) Publicly available directories of end-users of electronic communications services are widely distributed. Publicly available directories means any directory or service containing end-users information such as phone numbers (including mobile phone numbers), email address contact details and includes inquiry services. The right to privacy and to protection of the personal data of a natural person requires that end-users that are natural persons ~~are asked for consent before~~have the possibility of objecting to their personal data ~~are~~being included in a directory. The legitimate interest of legal entities requires that end-users that are legal entities have the right to object to the data related to them being included in a directory.

2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE

2017/0003(COD)

Gérard DEPREZ, Morten LØKKEGAARD, Jean-Marie CAVADA, Petr JEŽEK, Pavel TELIČKA

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31

(31) If end-users that are natural persons ~~give their consen~~do not object to their data being included in such directories, they should be able to ~~determine on a consent~~make an objection on basis which categories of personal data are included in the directory (for example name, email address, home address, user name, phone number). In addition, providers of publicly available directories should ~~inform~~provide accessible information to the end-users of the purposes of the directory and of the search functions of the directory before including them in that directory. End-users should be able to ~~determine by consen~~object on the basis of which categories of personal data their contact details can be searched. The categories of personal data included in the directory and the categories of personal data on the basis of which the end-user’s contact details can be searched should not necessarily be the same.

2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE

2017/0003(COD)

Gérard DEPREZ, Morten LØKKEGAARD, Jean-Marie CAVADA, Petr JEŽEK, Louis MICHEL, Pavel TELIČKA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point c

(c) it is necessary for providing an information society service requested by the end-user especially in order to secure the integrity, security and access of the information society service, to enhance user experience or for measures to protect against unauthorised use or access to the information society services in agreement with the terms of use for making available the service to the end-user; or

2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE

2017/0003(COD)

Gérard DEPREZ, Morten LØKKEGAARD, Jean-Marie CAVADA, Petr JEŽEK, Pavel TELIČKA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point d

(d) if it is necessary for ~~web~~ audience measur~~ing, provided that such measurement is carried out by the provider of the information society service requested by the end-user.~~ement, including measurement with the purposes of determining collective rights, remuneration or other payment systems or

2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE

2017/0003(COD)

Gérard DEPREZ, Morten LØKKEGAARD, Jean-Marie CAVADA, Petr JEŽEK, Pavel TELIČKA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1

1. The definition of and conditions for consent provided for under Articles 4(11) and 7Article 7 (1), (2), and (3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679/EU shall apply.

2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE

2017/0003(COD)

Gérard DEPREZ, Morten LØKKEGAARD, Jean-Marie CAVADA, Petr JEŽEK, Pavel TELIČKA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2

2. W~~ithout prejudice to paragraph 1, w~~here technically possible and feasible, for the purposes of point (b) of Article 8(1), consent may be expressed by using the appropriate technical settings of a software application enabling access to the internet or by the continued use of the information society service after having been provided with accessible and comprehensive information about this action of the end-user.

2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE

2017/0003(COD)

Gérard DEPREZ, Morten LØKKEGAARD, Jean-Marie CAVADA, Petr JEŽEK, Louis MICHEL, Pavel TELIČKA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2

2. Upon installation, the software shall inform the end-user about the privacy settings options ~~and, to continue with the installation, require the end-user to consent to a setting~~.Such software shall ensure that a consent given by an end user under Article 8 (1) point (b) prevails over the privacy settings chosen at the installation of the software.

2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE

2017/0003(COD)

Gérard DEPREZ, Morten LØKKEGAARD, Jean-Marie CAVADA, Petr JEŽEK, Pavel TELIČKA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. The software shall not block data processing wich is legally allowed to Art. 8 (1) a), c) or d) or (2) a), irrespective of the browser settings.

2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE

2017/0003(COD)

Gérard DEPREZ, Morten LØKKEGAARD, Jean-Marie CAVADA, Petr JEŽEK, Pavel TELIČKA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1

1. The ~~providers of publicly available directories shall obtain the consent of~~operators of electronic communication shall provide the option to end- users who are natural persons to ~~include~~object to their personal data being included in the directory and, consequently, shall ~~obtain consent from these end-users for~~provide to these end-users the option to object to the inclusion of data per category of personal data, to the extent that such data are relevant for the purpose of the directory as determined by the provider of the directory. Providers shall give end- users who are natural persons the means to verify, correct and delete such data.

2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE

2017/0003(COD)

Gérard DEPREZ, Morten LØKKEGAARD, Jean-Marie CAVADA, Petr JEŽEK, Pavel TELIČKA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2

2. The providers of a publicly available directory shall ~~inform~~provide accessible and intelligible information to end-users who are natural persons whose personal data are in the directory of the available search functions of the directory and ~~obtain end-users’ consent before enabling~~provide the end-users' the option to disable such search functions related to their own data.

2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE

2017/0003(COD)

Gérard DEPREZ, Morten LØKKEGAARD, Jean-Marie CAVADA, Petr JEŽEK, Louis MICHEL, Pavel TELIČKA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 3

3. The ~~providers of publicly~~operators of electronic communication services available directories shall provide end-users that are legal persons with the possibility to object to data related to them being included in the directory. ~~Provide~~The operators shall give such end-users that are legal persons the means to verify, correct and delete such data. Natural persons who act for a commercial or economic purpose, such as freelancers, one-man businesses and individual professionals shall be considered legal persons

2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE

2017/0003(COD)

Gérard DEPREZ, Morten LØKKEGAARD, Jean-Marie CAVADA, Petr JEŽEK, Louis MICHEL, Pavel TELIČKA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1

1. ~~The independent supervisory authority or authorities responsible for monitoring the application of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 shall also~~Each member state shall determine which relevant supervisory authority should be responsible for monitoring the application of this Regulation. Chapter VI and VII of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 shall apply mutatis mutandis. The tasks and powers of the supervisory authorities shall be exercised with regard to end-users.

2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE

2016/2328(INI)

Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL, Petr JEŽEK, Angelika MLINAR, Nathalie GRIESBECK

Motion for a resolution
Citation 5 a (new)

- having regard to the United Nations Declaration of Basic Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime and Abuse of Power, adopted on 29 November 1985,

2018/03/09
Committee: LIBE FEMM

2016/2328(INI)

Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL, Petr JEŽEK, Angelika MLINAR, Nathalie GRIESBECK

Motion for a resolution
Citation 7 a (new)

- having regard to Council Directive 2004/80/EC of 29 April 2004 relating to compensation to crime victims,

2018/03/09
Committee: LIBE FEMM

2016/2328(INI)

Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL, Petr JEŽEK, Angelika MLINAR, Nathalie GRIESBECK

Motion for a resolution
Citation 11 a (new)

- having regard to Regulation (EU) No 606/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 June 2013 on mutual recognition of protection measures in civil matters,

2018/03/09
Committee: LIBE FEMM

2016/2328(INI)

Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL, Petr JEŽEK, Angelika MLINAR, Nathalie GRIESBECK

Motion for a resolution
Citation 13 a (new)

- having regard to the European Parliament study of September 2017 entitled 'How can the EU and the Member States better help victims of terrorism?'

2018/03/09
Committee: LIBE FEMM

2016/2328(INI)

Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL, Petr JEŽEK, Angelika MLINAR, Nathalie GRIESBECK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 b (new)

16b. Calls on the Member States to clarify their national provisions on extraterritoriality so as to guarantee the right of victims of crimes committed in a Member State other than that in which they reside to lodge complaints with the competent authorities of the Member State of residence;

2018/03/09
Committee: LIBE FEMM

2016/2328(INI)

Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL, Petr JEŽEK, Angelika MLINAR, Nathalie GRIESBECK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Calls on the Member States to pay particular attention to the individual assessment of minors and of child victims of ~~human trafficking~~any form of crime, and stresses the need to deal with children and young victims in a way that takes proper account of their vulnerability;

2018/03/09
Committee: LIBE FEMM

2016/2328(INI)

Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL, Petr JEŽEK, Angelika MLINAR, Nathalie GRIESBECK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to provide training programmes and guidelines for law practitioners, police officers, prosecutors and judges to ensuring that they are better able to execute individual assessments without delay once a crime has taken place, to avoid further victimisation or secondary victimisation experienced by victims of crime and to ~~empower victims~~provide victims with information about their rights and the services which they can access and to empower them, as a means of reducing post-traumatic stress; stresses that such training should also be included in education programmes and that compulsory training should be available, on a regular basis, to all professionals involved in dealing with victims of crime, in order to develop a victim-oriented mind- set;

2018/03/09
Committee: LIBE FEMM

2016/2328(INI)

Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL, Petr JEŽEK, Angelika MLINAR, Nathalie GRIESBECK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)

16a. Calls on the Member States to guarantee access for victims of crimes committed in another Member State to information concerning their rights and to the support services and compensation schemes available in the Member State in which the crime was committed; calls, in this regard, on the Member States to take appropriate action to facilitate cooperation between their competent authorities or entities providing specialist support to ensure that victims have effective access to such information and services;

2018/03/09
Committee: LIBE FEMM

2016/2328(INI)

Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL, Petr JEŽEK, Angelika MLINAR, Nathalie GRIESBECK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Urges the Commission and the Member States to engage actively in information campaigns to increase awareness about the rights of victims as established by EU law; stresses that such awareness-raising campaigns should also be organised in schools to inform children of their rights and also provide them with tools to detect all forms of crime they have suffered or witnessed;

2018/03/09
Committee: LIBE FEMM

2016/2328(INI)

Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL, Petr JEŽEK, Angelika MLINAR, Nathalie GRIESBECK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)

21a Reminds the Member States that particular attention should be paid to the risk of intimidation and retaliation and to the need to protect the dignity and physical integrity of victims, including during questioning and when testifying, in order to determine whether and to what extent they should receive protection measures during the criminal proceedings;

2018/03/09
Committee: LIBE FEMM

2016/2328(INI)

Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL, Petr JEŽEK, Angelika MLINAR, Nathalie GRIESBECK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33

33. Calls on the Member States to establish coordinated mechanisms to collect information on victims of a terrorist attack taking place in their territory, and to provide victims, through the creation and development of a one-stop shop, a web portal and an emergency telephone line, with ~~specific information relevant to their needs, including psychological first aid and referral possibilities in the immediate aftermath of the attack and during any criminal proceedings;~~a confidential, free of charge and easily accessible support service1 a. This support service must be able to provide assistance and support to victims of terrorism in accordance with their specific needs, such as emotional and psychological support, advice and information on any legal, practical or financial matters in the immediate aftermath of the attack and during any criminal proceedings, and assistance in national compensation claim procedures; _________________ 1a Support service as provided for in Article 24 of Directive (EU) 2017/541 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2017 on combating terrorism.

2018/03/09
Committee: LIBE FEMM

2016/2328(INI)

Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL, Petr JEŽEK, Angelika MLINAR, Nathalie GRIESBECK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34

34. Calls on the Member States to establish coordination mechanisms to ensure effective transition of support for victims from immediate care in the aftermath of a crime to assistance as needed in the longer term; stresses that such mechanisms should, in particular, ensure the referral of victims to long-term services whereby different organisations provide support during different phases, noting that these mechanisms should also have a cross-border functionality in order to provide victim support services, and guarantee the victim’s right to be informed, assisted and compensated in their place of residence when the crime has taken place in a Member State other than the one in which the victim resides;

2018/03/09
Committee: LIBE FEMM

2016/2328(INI)

Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL, Petr JEŽEK, Angelika MLINAR, Nathalie GRIESBECK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35

35. Calls on the Member States to establish a permanent dedicated website on which all public information on support services established following a terrorist attack that has taken place in that Member State can be accessed;

2018/03/09
Committee: LIBE FEMM

2016/2328(INI)

Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL, Petr JEŽEK, Angelika MLINAR, Nathalie GRIESBECK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35 a (new)

35a. Calls on the Commission to begin a dialogue with the Member States in order to reduce the strong disparities2 a in national financial compensation granted by each Member State to victims of terrorist attacks; _________________ 2aNational financial compensation ranges from the symbolic amount of one euro in some Member States up to EUR 250 000 or more in others.

2018/03/09
Committee: LIBE FEMM

2016/2247(INI)

Sylvie GOULARD, Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS, Michael THEURER, Petr JEŽEK, Enrique CALVET CHAMBON, Lieve WIERINCK

Motion for a resolution
Citation 14 a (new)

- having regard to its resolution of 12 April 2016 on the EU role in the framework of international financial, monetary and regulatory institutions and bodies (2015/2060(INI)),

2016/12/20
Committee: ECON

2016/2247(INI)

Sylvie GOULARD, Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS, Michael THEURER, Petr JEŽEK, Enrique CALVET CHAMBON, Lieve WIERINCK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Considers that there are risks associated with sovereign debt; notes, however, that government bonds play a critical role as a source of high-quality, liquid collateral and that modifying its prudential treatment could have a significant effect on both the financial and the public sector, which calls for caution in reform efforts; ~~awaits with interest the~~considers that, in the end, a better resgul~~ts of the~~atory framework, be it European or international, w~~ork on this issue~~ill be needed; considers that~~, in~~ the ~~end, a better regulatory framework, be it European or international, will be needed~~European framework should enable market discipline in delivering sustainable policies and providing safe assets for the financial sector and safe liabilities for governments;

2016/12/20
Committee: ECON

2016/2247(INI)

Sylvie GOULARD, Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS, Michael THEURER, Petr JEŽEK, Enrique CALVET CHAMBON, Lieve WIERINCK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Considers it essential to ensure the comparability of risk-weighted assets across institutions in order to allow for effective supervision; welcomes the work done internationally to streamline the resort to internal models and to re-establish the credibility of internal models, as well as the introduction of a leverage ratio to act as a backstop; recalls, however, that the regulatory changes planned should not result in ~~significant~~unjustified increases in capital requirements, nor harm the ability of banks to finance the real economy, in particular SMEs;

2016/12/20
Committee: ECON

2016/2247(INI)

Sylvie GOULARD, Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS, Michael THEURER, Petr JEŽEK, Enrique CALVET CHAMBON, Lieve WIERINCK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. SNotes that there are very different banking models within the Banking Union but stresses that national options and discretions are hindering the creation of a level playing field between Member States and the comparability of the financial reporting by banks to the public; welcomes the ECB guidance and regulation harmonising the exercise of some of these within the Banking Union; looks forward to the upcoming amendments to the CRR as a means ~~of closing the most significant one~~to keep only the ones strictly necessary because of the diversity of banking models;

2016/12/20
Committee: ECON

2016/2247(INI)

Sylvie GOULARD, Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS, Michael THEURER, Petr JEŽEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Stresses that there has been a natural learning phenomenon for all the members of the Supervisory Board since the creation of the SSM to deal with a variety of different business models and entities of different sizes, which needs to be supported and accelerated;

2016/12/20
Committee: ECON

2016/2247(INI)

Sylvie GOULARD, Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS, Michael THEURER, Petr JEŽEK, Lieve WIERINCK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Notes that the ‘'too-big-to-fail’' issue ~~still needs to be addressed~~is being addressed; recalls the words of Mark Carney, Chair of the Financial Stability Board, that agreement on proposals for a common international standard on total loss-absorbing capacity for G-SIBs is a watershed in ending "too big to fail" banks; stresses that these agreements, once implemented, will play important roles in enabling globally systemic banks to be resolved without recourse to public subsidy and without disruption to the wider financial system; notes that TLAC will complement EMIR's mandatory requirement to centrally clear and the capital surcharge for G-SIBs;

2016/12/20
Committee: ECON

2016/2247(INI)

Sylvie GOULARD, Michael THEURER, Petr JEŽEK, Lieve WIERINCK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8a. Underlines that the creation of the SSM has been accompanied by an increase of influence for the European Union on the international stage compared to the pre-existing situation;

2016/12/20
Committee: ECON

2016/2247(INI)

Sylvie GOULARD, Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS, Michael THEURER, Petr JEŽEK, Enrique CALVET CHAMBON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Recalls the need to find, in the exercise of supervision, a balance between the need for proportionality and the need for a consistent approach; invites the SSM to reduce as much as possible the supervisory fees; points out that all banks should be subject to an appropriate level of supervision; reminds that an appropriate supervision is key to monitor all risks whatever the size of the banks;

2016/12/20
Committee: ECON

2016/2247(INI)

Sylvie GOULARD, Michael THEURER, Petr JEŽEK, Enrique CALVET CHAMBON, Lieve WIERINCK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9a. Underlines that the safety and soundness of a bank cannot be captured by a point-in-time assessment of its balance sheet alone, as they are ensured through dynamic interactions between the bank and the markets, and affected by various elements in the entire economy; underlines therefore that a sound framework for financial stability and growth should be comprehensive and balanced to cover dynamic supervisory practices and not focus merely on static regulation with mainly quantitative aspects;

2016/12/20
Committee: ECON

2016/2247(INI)

Sylvie GOULARD, Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS, Michael THEURER, Petr JEŽEK, Enrique CALVET CHAMBON, Lieve WIERINCK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Takes note of the differences between the FSB TLAC standard and the MREL; stresses, however, that both standards share the same objective: to make sure that banks have enough regulatory capital and loss-absorbing liabilities to make bail-in an effective instrument in resolution (without causing financial instability and without needing public money); concludes therefore that a holistic approach to loss-absorption can be reached by combining the two; highlights that due consideration should be given to retaining the two criteria of size and risk- weighted assets;

2016/12/20
Committee: ECON

2016/2247(INI)

Sylvie GOULARD, Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS, Michael THEURER, Petr JEŽEK, Enrique CALVET CHAMBON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Stresses that it is crucial to harmonise the hierarchy of claims in bank insolvency across Member States in order to make the implementation of the BRRD more consistent and effective; welcomes the Commission's proposal on this subject;

2016/12/20
Committee: ECON

2016/2247(INI)

Sylvie GOULARD, Michael THEURER, Petr JEŽEK, Enrique CALVET CHAMBON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)

17a. reminds that bail-in instruments should only be sold to appropriate investors in the first place which can absorb potential losses without being threatened in their own sound financial standing and considers it fundamental to address the mis-selling of bail-in instruments to retail investors; asks the Commission to carefully assess the EU Investor Protection Framework and to present proposals if necessary;

2016/12/20
Committee: ECON

2016/2247(INI)

Sylvie GOULARD, Michael THEURER, Petr JEŽEK, Enrique CALVET CHAMBON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Regrets that the Commission did not allow for more time to assess the implementation of the DGSD before proposing the EDIS and did not conduct a proper impact assessment of the proposal; stands ready, however, to seize the opportunity generated by the proposal to discuss the DGSD and address some of the options and discretions it includes; takes note of the Commission services' non- paper of a supplementary analytical report on the effect of the proposal;

2016/12/20
Committee: ECON

2016/2243(INI)

Cora van NIEUWENHUIZEN, Sylvie GOULARD, Michael THEURER, Nils TORVALDS, Petr JEŽEK, Lieve WIERINCK

Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)

Ca. whereas investments in the application of Fintech represent billions of Euros and keep increasing every year;

2017/03/09
Committee: ECON

2016/2243(INI)

Cora van NIEUWENHUIZEN, Sylvie GOULARD, Michael THEURER, Nils TORVALDS, Petr JEŽEK, Lieve WIERINCK

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas FinTech can lead to considerable benefits, such as faster, cheaper, more transparent, more tailor- made and better financial services for consumers and businesses, and open up many new business opportunities for European entrepreneurs;

2017/03/09
Committee: ECON

2016/2243(INI)

Cora van NIEUWENHUIZEN, Sylvie GOULARD, Michael THEURER, Nils TORVALDS, Petr JEŽEK, Lieve WIERINCK

Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)

Ea. whereas FinTech can contribute to risk reduction in the financial system by decentralisation and de-concentration of risks, faster clearing and settlement of cash payments and securities trades, and better collateral management and capital optimisation;

2017/03/09
Committee: ECON

2016/2243(INI)

Cora van NIEUWENHUIZEN, Sylvie GOULARD, Michael THEURER, Nils TORVALDS, Petr JEŽEK, Lieve WIERINCK, Enrique CALVET CHAMBON

Motion for a resolution
Recital E b (new)

Eb. whereas creating a level-playing field for financial services in the EU is a prerequisite for boosting Fintech in Europe;

2017/03/09
Committee: ECON

2016/2243(INI)

Cora van NIEUWENHUIZEN, Sylvie GOULARD, Michael THEURER, Nils TORVALDS, Petr JEŽEK, Lieve WIERINCK, Enrique CALVET CHAMBON

Motion for a resolution
Recital L a (new)

La. whereas the ESAs have started identifying the potential risks and benefits of those technologies; whereas national competent authorities are monitoring these technological developments and have come up with different approaches;

2017/03/09
Committee: ECON

2016/2243(INI)

Cora van NIEUWENHUIZEN, Sylvie GOULARD, Michael THEURER, Nils TORVALDS, Petr JEŽEK, Lieve WIERINCK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Emphasises the importance of supervisors having sufficient technical expertise to adequately scrutinise increasingly complex FinTech services; recognises the necessity of breaking down supervisory silos across sectors to accommodate better manage risks concerning cyber-security and privacy; urges the ESAs as well as the national competent authorities to increase their cooperation with other relevant competent authorities across sectors;

2017/03/09
Committee: ECON

2016/2243(INI)

Cora van NIEUWENHUIZEN, Sylvie GOULARD, Michael THEURER, Nils TORVALDS, Petr JEŽEK, Lieve WIERINCK, Enrique CALVET CHAMBON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9a. Calls on the Commission and the ESAs to monitor and avoid overlaps of regulation, new barriers to entry on the market and national barriers to those services; calls on the Commission to prevent barriers between Member States due to inconsistencies between national regimes;

2017/03/09
Committee: ECON

2016/2243(INI)

Cora van NIEUWENHUIZEN, Sylvie GOULARD, Michael THEURER, Nils TORVALDS, Petr JEŽEK, Lieve WIERINCK, Enrique CALVET CHAMBON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)

10a. Emphasizes the need for clear rules on data ownership, access and transfer; highlights that increasing amounts of data are generated by machines or processes based on emerging technologies, such as machine learning; stresses that the General Data Protection Regulation provides a clear legal framework on personal data but that more legal certainty is needed regarding other categories of data; believes, in this regard, that a clear distinction should be made between raw data and data resulting from further processing;

2017/03/09
Committee: ECON

2016/2243(INI)

Cora van NIEUWENHUIZEN, Sylvie GOULARD, Michael THEURER, Nils TORVALDS, Petr JEŽEK, Lieve WIERINCK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. ~~Notes that there are no clear, comprehensive European guidelines for outsourcing data to the cloud with regard to the financial sector; stresses the need for the development of such guidelines;~~ Highlights the benefits that cloud computing can have for consumers and providers of financial services, in terms of cost efficiency, decreased time to market and a better use of ICT resources; notes that there are no clear, comprehensive European guidelines for outsourcing data to the cloud with regard to the financial sector; stresses the need for the development of such guidelines; stresses that such guidelines are necessary to bring agility and speed to cloud adoption; underlines that high standards of data security and consumer protection should be a part of these guidelines; calls on the Commission and the ESAs to study different possibilities in this regard, such as pre-approved contracts between cloud service providers and financial institutions;

2017/03/09
Committee: ECON

2016/2243(INI)

Cora van NIEUWENHUIZEN, Sylvie GOULARD, Michael THEURER, Nils TORVALDS, Petr JEŽEK, Lieve WIERINCK, Enrique CALVET CHAMBON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)

11a. Notes the necessity of creating more awareness among consumers as regards the value of their personal data; acknowledges that consumers can sell their personal data through re-sharing; underlines that this may lead to economic benefits but can also be used in a discriminatory way; calls on the Commission to investigate the possibility of a European data re-sharing strategy with the aim of putting consumers in control of their data; believes that a clear, consumer-centric approach will increase trust in cloud-based services and stimulate new innovative services offered by diverse actors in the financial value chain, e.g. by using API's or facilitating direct access to data for electronic payments services; asks the Commission to investigate the future potential of Personal Information Management Systems (PIMS) as technical tools for consumers to manage their personal data;

2017/03/09
Committee: ECON

2016/2243(INI)

Cora van NIEUWENHUIZEN, Sylvie GOULARD, Michael THEURER, Nils TORVALDS, Petr JEŽEK, Lieve WIERINCK, Enrique CALVET CHAMBON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Is concerned by the increased use of unpermissioned blockchain applications, in particular Bitcoin, for criminal activities, tax evasion, tax avoidance and money laundering; calls on the Commission to investigate the role of bitcoin mixers in this process; invites the Commission to organise an annual multi-stakeholder conference on this subject;

2017/03/09
Committee: ECON

2016/2243(INI)

Cora van NIEUWENHUIZEN, Sylvie GOULARD, Michael THEURER, Nils TORVALDS, Petr JEŽEK, Lieve WIERINCK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)

18a. Asks the ESAs to identify in which cases targeted- or risk-based authentication can be an alternative to strong authentication; further asks the Commission to investigate whether the strong authentication processes can also be executed by other entities than banks;

2017/03/09
Committee: ECON

2016/2243(INI)

Cora van NIEUWENHUIZEN, Sylvie GOULARD, Michael THEURER, Nils TORVALDS, Petr JEŽEK, Lieve WIERINCK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Calls on the ESAs to develop technology-neutral standards and licences for both know-your-customer techniques and remote identification methods, for example based on biometric criteria;

2017/03/09
Committee: ECON

2016/2243(INI)

Cora van NIEUWENHUIZEN, Sylvie GOULARD, Michael THEURER, Nils TORVALDS, Petr JEŽEK, Lieve WIERINCK, Enrique CALVET CHAMBON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)

21a. Calls on the ESAs to partner with private sector players in developing and evaluate innovative technologies that have the potential to safeguard financial stability and increase consumer protection, for instance by mitigating bias in algorithms or by increasing consumer awareness of cyber threats;

2017/03/09
Committee: ECON

2016/2243(INI)

Cora van NIEUWENHUIZEN, Sylvie GOULARD, Michael THEURER, Nils TORVALDS, Petr JEŽEK, Lieve WIERINCK, Enrique CALVET CHAMBON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 b (new)

21b. Notes that the increasing use of big data and artificial intelligence presents benefits to consumers but also entails questions concerning consumer protection; stresses that errors or biases that can lead to discrimination and exclusion in these algorithms can potentially cause systemic risk and harm consumers and investors; notes that insurance is a prominent example of a sector where these technologies are increasingly used, e.g. for risk assessment; asks the Commission and the European Supervisory Authorities (ESAs) to investigate discriminatory effects;

2017/03/09
Committee: ECON

2016/2243(INI)

Cora van NIEUWENHUIZEN, Sylvie GOULARD, Michael THEURER, Nils TORVALDS, Petr JEŽEK, Lieve WIERINCK, Enrique CALVET CHAMBON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)

22a. Emphasises that financial education is a prerequisite for raising awareness in society and equipping citizens with the knowledge that is necessary to make sound decisions concerning financial products and services;

2017/03/09
Committee: ECON

2016/2206(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Welcomes the commitment of all JHA Agencies to continue to further fine- tune budgetary procedures but stresses, however, that their priority should be to improve operational efficiency on the ground and to address the rather structural issues identified by the Court of Auditors and the IAS; requests that F~~RONTEX~~rontex streamline its financial management procedures by obtaining rights of using “simplified cost options” for the reimbursement of Member States’ expenditure and by using “other funding mechanisms” in addition to grants; requests that EUeu-LISA ~~bett~~continues to develop its internal control system to further address the risks involved ~~with~~in the implementation of high cost infrastructure projects ~~by fully adopting the financial regulation of the Union~~; requests that E~~UROJUST~~urojust avoid sub-optimal budget management due to uncertainties as to the availability of funds in order to implement its on-going projects and to procure its essential services;

2017/01/23
Committee: LIBE

2016/2193(DEC)

Gérard DEPREZ, Petr JEŽEK, Louis MICHEL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Regrets that the agency outsourced procurement of training services to a third party without ensuring that it acted in compliance with the financial regulation of the Union under this subcontract; regrets that a call for expression of interest for participation in a negotiated procedure took place without a formal delegation by the authorising officer; ~~regrets that the agency engaged in contractual agreements or negotiations with a single contractor without precisely defining the services requested;~~ acknowledges that the agency acted in compliance with its own financial regulation; requests however that given the very high financial amounts involved with the development and maintenance of JHA systems and the associated risks, the agency ~~fully~~continues to develop its internal control system in order to ensure compliances with the financial regulation of the Union;

2017/01/23
Committee: LIBE

4. Welcomes funding of AMIF (EUR 1.6 billion) and ISF (EUR 0.7 billion); considers that this increase adds to the need to ensure a fair and transparent distribution of annual funding between the different programs and objectives of the funds; supports the total funding (EUR 3 billion) for setting up the European Border and Coast Guard agency, the new Entry-Exit System, the new Common European Asylum System and for creating the instrument providing fast and efficient emergency humanitarian assistance within the EU;

2016/08/25
Committee: LIBE

2016/2047(BUD)

Gérard DEPREZ, Petr JEŽEK, Louis MICHEL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Supports the budget increase of the efficient JHA agencies involved with migration and security; highlights that the relevant agencies must be sufficiently resourced and staffed when their mandates are increased; requests to further justify the dramatic 92%, EUR 73 million increase of the budget of EU-LISA for the Entry Exit System and the revision of Dublin legislation as well as to explain break-down of appropriations between EU- LISA budget and the ISF;

2016/08/25
Committee: LIBE

2016/2047(BUD)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Supports the budget increase of the efficient JHA agencies involved with migration and security; requests to further justify the dramatic 92%, EUR 73 million increase of the budget of EU-LISA for the Entry Exit System, the revision of Eurodac regulation, the interoperability of Information Systems and the revision of Dublin legislation as well as to explain break-down of appropriations between EU- LISA budget and the ISF;

2016/08/25
Committee: LIBE

2016/2038(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas the ‘'Panama Papers’' and ‘'LuxLeaks’' scandals, as revealed by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ), have shown the urgent need for the EU and its Member States to fight tax evasion and avoidance and act for increased cooperation and transparency in order to re-establish tax ~~justice~~fairness for citizens and fair competition between companies;

2016/06/02
Committee: TAX2

2016/2038(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)

Ba. whereas within a budgetary framework of mutual control it is unacceptable for resources to be generated by taxes due in a Member State to actually be generated in another Member State through unfair and aggressive tax planning;

2016/06/02
Committee: TAX2

2016/2038(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)

Ea. whereas the European Parliament insisted on introducing measures to safeguard tax revenues in the « 2-pack » (article 9 of regulation EU No 472/2013 of 21 May 2013 on the strengthening of economic and budgetary surveillance of Member States in the euro area experiencing or threatened with serious difficulties with respect to their financial stability);

2016/06/02
Committee: TAX2

2016/2038(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Calls on the Commission to come up as soon as possible with a common Union list of uncooperative jurisdictions (i.e. a ‘'blacklist of tax havens’'), based on sound and objective criteria, including full implementation of OECD recommendations, BEPS actions and Automatic Exchange of Information standards, and welcomes the Commission’'s intention to reach an agreement on such a list within the next six months; calls on the Member States to endorse that agreement by the end of 2016; considers that this assessment should also include the countries which are OECD members;

2016/06/02
Committee: TAX2

2016/2038(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24

24. Stresses the importance of clear separation between legal, tax advising ~~services~~ and auditing services within accountancy firms; asks the Commission to study the possibility of revising the Accounting Directive and Regulation to this effect;

2016/06/02
Committee: TAX2

2016/2038(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30

30. Urges the Commission to propose as soon as possible a clear legal framework to guarantee the effective protection of whistleblowers, as well as of journalists and other persons connected with the press who aid and facilitate them; calls on the Member States to revise their current legislation with a view to preventing prosecution in such cases; considers that a credible and efficient framework should also prevent cases of unduly and detrimentally using whistleblowing as a strategy to deliberately damage the credibility of a company;

2016/06/02
Committee: TAX2

2016/2038(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34

34. Uacknowledges that the Code of Conduct Group enabled some improvements towards a more fair EU tax competition but urges the Member States to reform, as soon as possible, the criteria and governance aspects of the Code of Conduct Group, in order to increase its transparency and accountability and ensure the strong involvement of Parliament;

2016/06/02
Committee: TAX2

2016/2038(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38 a (new)

38a. Calls on the European Commission and the Member States to object to Third Countries' legislation having extraterritorial effects unless the EU has been offered to apply a similar mechanism in these jurisdictions;

2016/06/02
Committee: TAX2

2016/2038(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42

42. Calls on the OECD to start work on an ambitious BEPS II, to be based primarily on minimum standards and concrete objectives for implementation; considers that monitoring implementation is the new challenge ahead; stresses that the coordination between the Commission and the Member States which are members of the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) should be improved in order for the EU to make its voice heard;

2016/06/02
Committee: TAX2

2016/2033(INI)

Petr JEŽEK, Louis MICHEL

Draft opinion
Citation 5 a (new)

– having regard to Article 325 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union;

2016/06/09
Committee: LIBE

2016/2033(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 4 a (new)

– having regards to the Report on the future of VAT (2011/2082(INI)),

2016/06/02
Committee: ECON

2016/2033(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 4 b (new)

– having regard to the proposal for a directive on the fight against fraud to the Union's financial interests by means of criminal law (COM(2012)0363),

2016/06/02
Committee: ECON

2016/2033(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas the Single Market, established on 1 January 1993, has abolished border controls for intra- community trade and whereas, under Articles 402-404 of the current VAT Directive, the European Union VAT arrangements in place since 1993 are of a provisional and transitional nature only;

2016/06/02
Committee: ECON

2016/2033(INI)

Petr JEŽEK, Louis MICHEL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Considers it essential that Member States acknowledge the importance of a speedy and frequent exchange of information between them in order to effectively close the so-called VAT gap; considers that setting up national risk analysis tools could improve the efficiency of these exchanges of information;

2016/06/09
Committee: LIBE

2016/2033(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)

Ea. whereas, according to a COM study 1a , MTIC fraud (Missing Trader Intra-Community fraud, commonly called carousel fraud) alone is responsible for a VAT revenue loss of approximately €45 billion to €53 billion annually; __________________ 1a http://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/reso urces/documents/common/publications/st udies/ey_study_destination_principle.pdf

2016/06/02
Committee: ECON

2016/2033(INI)

Petr JEŽEK, Louis MICHEL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1b. Underlines the important role of the European Commission in collaboration with the Member States according to Article 325 TFEU;

2016/06/09
Committee: LIBE

2016/2033(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital E b (new)

Eb. whereas according to Europol estimates, between EUR 40 billion and EUR 60 billion of the annual VAT revenue losses of Member States are caused by organised crime groups, and 2 % of those groups are behind 80 % of missing trader intra-Community fraud;

2016/06/02
Committee: ECON

2016/2033(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital E c (new)

Ec. whereas several Member States under the coordination of Eurojust and Europol have recently conducted three successful and consecutive Vertigo Operations which uncovered in total a 320 million EUR carousel fraud scheme;

2016/06/02
Committee: ECON

2016/2033(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital F

F. whereas the high administrative costs incurred under the present VAT system, especially with regard to cross- border transactions, could be significantly reduced for small and medium-sized enterprises in particular through ~~the necessary reform~~simplification measures;

2016/06/02
Committee: ECON

2016/2033(INI)

Petr JEŽEK, Cora van NIEUWENHUIZEN, Enrique CALVET CHAMBON, Sylvie GOULARD

Motion for a resolution
Recital H

H. whereas, although unanimity in the European Council is required for the definitive VAT system to be established, 23 years after the introduction of the VAT Directive, the so called ‘standstill derogations’ are outdated, in particular with regards to the modern digital economy;

2016/06/02
Committee: ECON

2016/2033(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Notes that it is essential for the Member States to adopt a coordinated tax policy and improve the speed and frequency of their exchange information concerning intra community trade in order to combat tax evasion and tax avoidance more effectively and finally close the existing ‘VAT gap’;

2016/06/02
Committee: ECON

2016/2033(INI)

Petr JEŽEK, Sylvie GOULARD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Takes the view that cooperation between the Member State tax authorities has been inadequate in the past and the activities of Eurofisc have to date failed achieve any satisfactory results; is of the view that the information exchanged through Eurofisc should be better targeted to fraud;

2016/06/02
Committee: ECON

2016/2033(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8a. Notes that the data provided to Eurofisc by national authorities is not filtered in a way which transfers solely suspect cases and thus hinders the optimal functioning of the group; supports the initiative of several Member States that argue for the setting up of national risk analysis tools which would permit filtering of data and allow Eurofisc to quickly react against cross-border VAT fraud;

2016/06/02
Committee: ECON

2016/2033(INI)

Petr JEŽEK, Enrique CALVET CHAMBON, Sylvie GOULARD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Recalls that MS largely depend on information received from other MS concerning intra EU trade in order to be able to collect VAT in their territory; Calls on the authorities responsible to exchange VAT and excise information in particular and to use ~~all available technical means~~reliable and user-friendly IT means, such as electronic standard forms, to record cross-border deliveries of goods and services to end- users;

2016/06/02
Committee: ECON

2016/2033(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9a. Believes that the lack of comparable data and of adequate relevant indicators to measure Member States' performance affects the effectiveness of the EU system to tackle intra EU VAT fraud and thus calls on tax authorities to establish, in coordination with the COM, a common system to estimate the size of intra EU fraud and then set targets to reduce it, as this would enable the evaluation of MS's performances in tackling this issue;

2016/06/02
Committee: ECON

2016/2033(INI)

Petr JEŽEK, Cora van NIEUWENHUIZEN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)

20a. Notes that an application of the reverse charge mechanism only in selected business sectors has not proved to be a viable solution, as studies on the increasing VAT gap demonstrate, and agrees that in order to avoid fraudsters moving from one business sector or one MS to another, the introduction of the general reverse charge seems more appropriate; 1b __________________ 1b http://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/reso urces/documents/common/publications/st udies/vat_gap2013.pdf

2016/06/02
Committee: ECON

2016/2033(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Calls on the Commission to quickly conduct pilot projects to test out a general reverse charge procedure in terms of ~~cost,~~benefits, compliance cost, potential implementation problems and long-term advantages, as some Member States have offered to carry out or have called for;

2016/06/02
Committee: ECON

2016/2033(INI)

Petr JEŽEK, Sylvie GOULARD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)

22a. Takes the view that the Commission should closely monitor the performance of national tax authorities;

2016/06/02
Committee: ECON

2016/2033(INI)

Petr JEŽEK, Enrique CALVET CHAMBON, Sylvie GOULARD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 b (new)

22b. Welcomes the Commission announcement to expand the mini-one- stop-shop into a fully-fledged one-stop- shop; notes the paramount importance for it to be user-friendly and equally efficient in all 28 Member States; notes that creating a one-stop-shop would alleviate administrative burdens preventing companies from operating across borders and reduce costs for SMEs1c; __________________ 1c COM(2016) 0148 final

2016/06/02
Committee: ECON

2016/2033(INI)

Petr JEŽEK, Sylvie GOULARD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)

23a. Notes the Court of Justice of the European Union ruling in C-97/09[ASE1] ; takes note of the 28 different thresholds for exemption from VAT tax; takes note of the ensuing financial difficulties faced by SMEs and micro-businesses which would be exempted under their national systems; calls on the Commission to conduct further studies on establishing a threshold for the exemption to pay VAT for micro-businesses;

2016/06/02
Committee: ECON

2016/2033(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25

25. Welcomes the Commission's announcement that it will submit an SME package for VAT in 2017; recommends however that the implementation of the new framework should be gradual as it will trigger additional administrative costs (IT infrastructure, VAT processes);

2016/06/02
Committee: ECON

2016/2033(INI)

Petr JEŽEK, Enrique CALVET CHAMBON, Sylvie GOULARD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)

25a. Notes the complex filing system that imposes a high burden on SMEs and thus discourages cross-border trade; calls on the Commission to include in its SME package the proposal of a unified VAT filing, harmonised reporting requirements and deadlines;

2016/06/02
Committee: ECON

2016/2033(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26

26. Calls in the short term for a comprehensive internet portal for companies and end-users to find, clearly and easily, information on the VAT rates applicable to individual products and services in the Member States; further calls on the Commission to provide guidelines to national tax authorities on the classification of transactions with respect to the applied VAT rate in order to reduce compliance costs and legal disputes;

2016/06/02
Committee: ECON

2016/2007(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point a

(a) dramatically lowering transaction costs for payments and transfer of funds worldwide, quite possibly to well below 1%, compared to 2% - 4% for traditional online payment systems21 , and to more than 7 % on average for the cross-border transfer of remittances22, the~~nce~~refore, in the most optimistic estimate, potentially reducing global total costs for remittances by up to EUR 20 billion; __________________ 21 https://www.eba.europa.eu/documents/101 80/657547/EBA-Op-2014- 08+Opinion+on+Virtual+Currencies.pdf 22 https://remittanceprices.worldbank.org/site s/default/files/rpw_report_december_2015. pdf

2016/03/30
Committee: ECON

2016/2007(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Acknowledges the potential of DLT in assisting governments to reduce money laundering, fraud and corruption;

2016/03/30
Committee: ECON

2016/2007(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 b (new)

5b. Further notes that DLT could be used to increase data sharing, transparency and trust not only between government and citizens, but also between private sector actors and clients;

2016/03/30
Committee: ECON

2016/2007(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Recognises the potential of DLT well beyond the financial sector, including the potential of smart contracts, digital signatures and heightened data protection;

2016/03/30
Committee: ECON

2016/2007(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Calls for a proportionate regulatory approach so as not to stifle ~~innovation~~nor add superfluous costs to innovation and development at an early stage, while taking seriously the regulatory challenges that the widespread use of VCs and DLT might pose;

2016/03/30
Committee: ECON

2016/2007(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Welcomes the Commission’s suggestions for including VC exchange platforms in the AMLD; recommends further extending the scope to custodian wallet providers if and when the use of the VC(s) in question were to become so prevalent that users would no longer routinely need to exchange their VCs into legal tender; highlights that amendments to the AMLD should be targeted and justified based on a full analysis of the risks of VCs, such the potential of financing terrorist activities;

2016/03/30
Committee: ECON

2016/2007(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Recommends a ~~review of~~n analysis of whether any amendments should be made to the EU legislation on payments, including PSD and EMD, in light of the new possibilities afforded by new technological developments including VCs and DLT, with a view to further enhancing competition and lowering transaction costs, including by means of enhanced interoperability and possibly also via the promotion of a universal and non- proprietary electronic wallet;

2016/03/30
Committee: ECON

2016/2007(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Calls for the creation of a hHorizontal Task Force DLT (TF DLT) under the leadership of the Commission, in order to provide the necessary technical and regulatory expertise to support the relevant public actors, at both EU and Member State level, in their efforts to ensure a timely and well-informed response to the new opportunities and challenges arising with the introduction of DLT applications; observes that the potential of DLT use and the present investment dynamics justify TF DLT being equipped with a proper budget and being staffed with regulators and external technical experts dedicated cross- sectorally to the monitoring of DLT-based applications, identifying standards for best practice, and, where appropriate, recommending regulatory measures and addressing potentially arising consumer protection issues and systemic challenges;, led by the Commission and staffed with regulators and technical experts from business and academia; This TF DLT should have the following mandate:

2016/03/30
Committee: ECON

2016/2007(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 – point i (new)

(i) to support relevant public actors, at both EU and Member State level, in their efforts to ensure a timely and well- informed response to the new opportunities and challenges arising with the introduction of DLT applications;

2016/03/30
Committee: ECON

2016/2007(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 – point ii (new)

(ii) to closely monitor the development and usage of DLT systems in the EU and to follow developments worldwide;

2016/03/30
Committee: ECON

2016/2007(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 – point iii (new)

(iii) to assess current European regulation which may need to be updated to reflect the development of DLT;

2016/03/30
Committee: ECON

2016/2007(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 – point iv (new)

(iv) to propose a roadmap for future steps to be taken on a European level, and recommendations for action on a national level;

2016/03/30
Committee: ECON

2016/2007(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 – point v (new)

(v) to fully analyse the benefits and risks of the use of DLT to tackle money laundering, terrorism financing and fraud;

2016/03/30
Committee: ECON

2016/2007(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 – point vi (new)

(vi) to consider how DLT may affect consumer and data protection;

2016/03/30
Committee: ECON

2016/2007(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 – introductory part

14. Asks the Commission, on the basis of the findings and proposed roadmap of TF DLT, to explore the need for a legislative proposal requiring VCs and other DLT scheme actors which do not yet have to comply with suitable standards based on existing regulation to demonstrate whether their scheme:

2016/03/30
Committee: ECON

2016/2007(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 – point 1

1. if it is used on a large scale, is designed so as to ~~avoid harming~~maximise the benefits to consumers and users;

2016/03/30
Committee: ECON

2016/0414(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 8

(8) ~~Where~~Member States should ensure that certain types of money laundering activities are also punishable when committed by the perpetrator of the criminal activity that generated that property (so-called self-laundering) when committed with the intention to hide the illegal origin of the property. Where, in such cases, money laundering activity does not simply amount to the mere possession or use, but also involves the transfer or the concealing and disguise of property through the financial system and results in further damage than that already caused by the predicate offence, such as damaging the integrity of the financial system, that activity should be punished separately. Member States should thus ensure that such conduct is also punishable when committed by the perpetrator of the criminal activity that generated that property (so-called self- laundering)able.

2017/10/12
Committee: LIBE

2016/0414(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 9

(9) In order for measures countering money laundering to be an effective ~~tool against organised crime~~, it should not be necessary to ~~identify the specifics of the crime that~~establish precisely the circumstances relating to the predicate offence which generated the property, let alone require a prior or simultaneous conviction for that crime. Prosecutions for money laundering should also not be impeded by the mere fact that the predicate offence was committed in another Member State or third country, provided it is a criminal offence ~~in that Member State or third countr~~domestically. Member States may establish as a prerequisite the fact that the predicate offence would have been a crime in its national law, had it been committed there.

2017/10/12
Committee: LIBE

2016/0414(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 10

(10) This Directive aims to criminalise money laundering when committed intentionally and with the knowledge that the property had been derived from criminal activity. Intention and knowledge may be inferred from objective, factual circumstances. As this Directive provides for minimum rules, Member States are free to adopt or maintain more stringent criminal law rules for money laundering. Member States may, for example, provide that money laundering committed recklessly or by serious negligence constitutes a criminal offence.

2017/10/12
Committee: LIBE

2016/0414(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 11

(11) In order to deter money laundering throughout the Union, Member States should lay down minimum types and levels of penalties when the criminal offences defined in this Directive are committed. Where the offence is committed within a criminal organisation within the meaning of Council Framework Decision 2008/841/JHA37 8 or where the perpetrator abused their professional position to enable money laundering, or where the money or the property being laundered is derived from terrorist activities as defined in Directive 2017/541; or where the offender is a Politically Exposed person as defined by Directive 2015/849, Member States should provide for aggravating circumstances in accordance with the applicable rules established by their legal systems. _________________ 37 Council Framework Decision 2008/841/JHA of 24 October 2008 on the fight against organised crime, (OJ L 300, 11.11.2008, p. 42)

2017/10/12
Committee: LIBE

2016/0414(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 12 a (new)

(12a) To ensure the success of investigations and the prosecution of money laundering offences, those responsible for investigating or prosecuting such offences should have the possibility to make use of effective investigative tools such as those which are used in combating organised crime or other serious crimes. The use of such tools, in accordance with national law, should be targeted and take into account the principle of proportionality and the nature and seriousness of the offences under investigation and should respect the right to the protection of personal data.

2017/10/12
Committee: LIBE

2016/0414(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 12 b (new)

(12b) Furthermore, the cross-border nature of money laundering activities requires a strong coordinated response and cooperation within and between the Member States, as well as with and among the competent Union agencies and bodies to counter money laundering, including Eurojust and Europol. To that end, efficient use of the available tools and resources for cooperation should be made, such as joint investigation teams and coordination meetings facilitated by Eurojust. The global character of money laundering necessitates international action, requiring the Union and its Member States to strengthen cooperation with relevant third countries.

2017/10/12
Committee: LIBE

2016/0414(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 13 a (new)

(13a) This Directive respects the principles recognised by Article 2 TEU, respects fundamental rights and freedoms and observes the principles recognised, in particular, by the Charter, which encompass, inter alia, the principles of legality and proportionality of criminal offences and penalties, covering also the requirement of precision, clarity and foreseeability in criminal law, the presumption of innocence. This Directive has to be implemented in accordance with those rights and principles taking also into account the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and other human rights obligations under international law.

2017/10/12
Committee: LIBE

2016/0414(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point u a (new)

(ua) tax crimes relating to direct taxes and indirect taxes as defined in the national law of the Member States;

2017/10/12
Committee: LIBE

2016/0414(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point v

(v) all offences~~, including tax crimes relating to direct taxes and indirect taxes as defined in the national law of the Member States,~~ which are punishable by deprivation of liberty or a detention order for a maximum of more than one year or, as regards Member States that have a minimum threshold for offences in their legal system, all offences punishable by deprivation of liberty or a detention order for a minimum of more than six months;

2017/10/12
Committee: LIBE

2016/0414(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point c

(c) whether the criminal activity that generated the property was carried out in the territory of another Member State or in that of a third country, when the relevant conduct ~~is a criminal offence under the national law of the Member State or the third country where the conduct was committed and would be~~would constitute a criminal activity had it occurred domestically. Member States may further require that the predicate offence constitutes a criminal offence under the national law of the other Member State ~~implementing or apply~~or that of a third country, expect when the third country is mentioned ing th~~is Article had it been committed there~~e list of countries at high risk of money laundering as referred to in Directive 2015/849;

2017/10/12
Committee: LIBE

2016/0414(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2

2. Each Member State shall ensure that the offences referred to in Article 3 shall be punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of at least four years~~, at least in serious cases~~.

2017/10/12
Committee: LIBE

2016/0414(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)

(ba) The offender is a politically exposed person in the sense of Directive 2015/849;

2017/10/12
Committee: LIBE

2016/0414(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b b (new)

(bb) The property being laundered is derived from terrorist activities as defined in Directive 2017/541;

2017/10/12
Committee: LIBE

2016/0414(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point a

(a) the offence is committed in whole or in part in its territory or;

2017/10/12
Committee: LIBE

2016/0414(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point b

(b) the offender is one of its nationals. or habitual resident or;

2017/10/12
Committee: LIBE

2016/0414(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)

(ba) the offence is committed for the benefit of a legal person established in its territory.

2017/10/12
Committee: LIBE

2016/0414(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 2

2. A Member State shall inform the Commission where it decides to establish further jurisdiction over the offences referred to in Articles 3 and 4 committed outside its territory where: (a) the offender is a habitual resident in its territory; (b) the offence is committed for the benefit of a legal person established in its territory.deleted

2017/10/12
Committee: LIBE

2016/0414(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. When an offence falls within the jurisdiction of more than one Member State and when any of the Member States concerned can validly prosecute on the basis of the same facts, the Member States concerned shall cooperate in order to decide which of them will prosecute the offenders with the aim, if possible, of centralising proceedings in a single Member State. To this end, the Member States may have recourse to Eurojust in order to facilitate cooperation between their judicial authorities and the coordination of their action. Account shall be taken of the following factors: (a) the Member State shall be that in the territory of which the offence was committed; (b) the Member State shall be that of which the offender is a national or resident; (c) the Member State shall be that in the territory of which the offender was found.

2017/10/12
Committee: LIBE

2016/0414(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – title

Investigative tools and confiscation

2017/10/12
Committee: LIBE

2016/0414(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that their competent authorities freeze or confiscate, as appropriate, in accordance with Directive 2014/42/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council, the proceeds derived from and instrumentalities used or intended to be used in the commission or contribution to the commission of any of the offences referred to in this Directive.

2017/10/12
Committee: LIBE

2016/0414(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive by [124 months after adoption] at the latest. They shall immediately communicate the text of those provisions to the Commission.

2017/10/12
Committee: LIBE

2016/0414(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1

The Commission shall, by [124 months after the deadline for implementation of this Directive], submit a report to the European Parliament and to the Council, assessing the extent to which the Member States have taken the necessary measures to comply with this Directive.

2017/10/12
Committee: LIBE

2016/0413(COD)