Activities of Alfred SANT
Plenary speeches (84)
Humanitarian assistance in the Mediterranean (debate)
Appointment of the President of the European Central Bank - Candidate: Ms Christine Lagarde (debate)
Fight against cancer (topical debate)
Review of the Juncker Commission (debate)
EU steel sector: how to protect European workers and industries? (debate)
The 30th Anniversary of the Velvet revolution: importance of the fight for freedom and democracy in Central and Eastern Europe for the historical unification of Europe (debate)
The Rule of Law in Malta, after the recent revelations around the murder of Daphne Caruana Galizia (debate)
Situation in Libya (debate)
Institutions and bodies in the Economic and Monetary Union: Preventing post-public employment conflicts of interest (debate)
Commission communication on the Review of the economic governance (debate)
European Central Bank - annual report 2018 (debate)
Coronavirus outbreak, state of play and ensuring a coordinated European response to the health, economic and social impact (debate)
European coordinated response to the COVID-19 outbreak (debate)
EU coordinated action to combat the COVID-19 pandemic and its consequences (continuation of debate)
70th anniversary of the Schuman Declaration (debate)
EU Recovery package (debate)
Preparation of the European Council meeting of 19 June 2020 - Recommendations on the negotiations for a new partnership with the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (debate)
State of play of Council negotiations on the Regulation on the protection of the Union’s budget in case of generalised deficiencies as regards the rule of law in the Member States (debate)
Conclusions of the extraordinary European Council meeting of 17-21 July 2020 (continuation of debate)
State of the Union (topical debate) (continuation of debate)
Digital Finance: emerging risks in crypto-assets - regulatory and supervisory challenges in the area of financial services, institutions and markets - Further development of the Capital Markets Union (CMU): improving access to capital market finance, in particular by SMEs, and further enabling retail investor participation (debate)
Serious security threats through the sale of EU passports and visas to criminals (debate)
Multiannual Financial Framework (including Own Resources), Rule of Law Conditionality Mechanism and the Recovery Fund for Europe (continuation of debate)
Markets in financial instruments: amending information requirements, product governance requirements and position limits to help the recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic (debate)
The fight against impunity for crimes committed against journalists around the world (debate)
Conclusions of the European Council meeting of 10-11 December 2020 – MFF, Rule of Law Conditionality and Own Resources – Council regulation laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2021 to 2027 – Proposal for an Interinstitutional Agreement between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline, on cooperation in budgetary matters and on sound financial management, as well as on new own resources, including a roadmap towards the introduction of new own resources – Regulation on the protection of the Union’s budget in case of generalised deficiencies as regards the rule of law in the Member States (debate)
EU global strategy on COVID-19 vaccinations (debate)
Inauguration of the new President of the United States and the current political situation (debate)
The state of play of the EU’s COVID-19 Vaccination Strategy (continuation of debate)
Markets in financial instruments – EU Recovery prospectus and targeted adjustments for financial intermediaries to help the recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic (debate)
Tackling the economic impact of the COVID pandemic by focusing on investment, competitiveness and skills (debate)
European Semester: annual sustainable growth strategy 2021 – European Semester: employment and social aspects in the annual sustainable growth strategy 2021 (debate)
Preparation of the European Council meeting of 25 and 26 March 2021 – Digital Green Certificate (debate)
Assassination of Daphne Caruana Galizia and the rule of law in Malta (debate)
Saving the summer tourism season - EU support to the hospitality sector (debate)
EU strategy towards Israel-Palestine (debate)
State of the SMEs Union – Implementation of better regulation agenda / Reduction target for administrative burden (continuation of debate)
Competition policy – annual report 2020 (debate)
Preparation of the European Council meeting of 24-25 June 2021 – Relaunch of the Malta Declaration and the use of an effective solidarity mechanism (debate)
Financial activities of the European Investment Bank - annual report 2020 - Control of the financial activities of the European Investment Bank - annual report 2019 (debate)
State of the Union (continuation of debate)
The future of EU-US relations (debate)
European solutions to the rise of energy prices for businesses and consumers: the role of energy efficiency and renewable energy and the need to tackle energy poverty (debate)
Banking Union - annual report 2020 (debate)
Pushbacks at the EU's external border (debate)
Disclosure of income tax information by certain undertakings and branches (debate)
Coordination of Member States’ measures in light of increasing cases of COVID-19 in the EU (debate)
State of play of the RRF (Recovery and Resilience Facility) (debate)
Digital Services Act (continuation of debate)
EU-Africa relations (debate)
EU-Russia relations, European security and Russia’s military threat against Ukraine (continuation of debate)
Debate with the Prime Minister of Estonia, Kaja Kallas - The EU's role in a changing world and the security situation of Europe following the Russian aggression and invasion of Ukraine (continuation of debate)
Suisse Secrets - How to implement anti-money laundering standards in third countries (debate)
Conclusions of the European Council meeting of 24-25 March 2022: including the latest developments of the war against Ukraine and the EU sanctions against Russia and their implementation (debate)
The social and economic consequences for the EU of the Russian war in Ukraine - reinforcing the EU’s capacity to act (debate)
Use of the Pegasus Software by EU Member States against individuals including MEPs and the violation of fundamental rights (topical debate)
Competition policy – annual report 2021 (debate)
The Commission's proposal for "Attracting skills and talent to the EU", particularly the Talent Partnerships with North African countries (topical debate)
Conclusions of the European Council meeting of 23-24 June 2022 (continuation of debate)
EU response to the increase in energy prices in Europe (debate)
The EU's actions in the field of freedom of religion or belief worldwide (debate)
The Rule of Law in Malta, five years after the assassination of Daphne Caruana Galizia (debate)
Keep the bills down: social and economic consequences of the war in Ukraine and the introduction of a windfall tax (debate)
Digital finance: Digital Operational Resilience Act (DORA) - Digital Finance: Amending Directive regarding Digital Operational Resilience requirements (debate)
The need for a European solution on asylum and migration including search and rescue (debate)
Suspicions of corruption from Qatar and the broader need for transparency and accountability in the European institutions (debate) (debate)
An EU strategy to boost industrial competitiveness, trade and quality jobs (debate)
Preparation of the Special European Council meeting of February, in particular the need to develop sustainable solutions in the area of asylum and migration (debate)
EU response to the humanitarian situation following the earthquake in Türkiye and Syria (debate)
More Europe, more jobs: we are building the competitive economy of tomorrow for the benefit of all (topical debate)
The need for a coherent strategy for EU-China Relations (debate)
Markets in Crypto-assets (MiCa) - Information accompanying transfers of funds and certain crypto-assets (recast) (debate)
Revision of the Stability and Growth Pact (debate)
Foreign interference in all democratic processes in the European Union, including disinformation - Election integrity and resilience build-up towards European elections 2024 (debate)
Lessons learnt from the Pandora Papers and other revelations (debate)
Financial activities of the European Investment Bank – annual report 2022 - Control of the financial activities of the European Investment Bank - annual report 2022 (joint debate - European Investment Bank)
State of the Union (debate)
Decent Housing for All (topical debate)
European green bonds (debate)
System of own resources of the European Union (debate)
Humanitarian situation in Gaza, the need for the release of hostages and for an immediate humanitarian truce leading to a ceasefire and the prospects for peace and security in the Middle East (debate)
EU-China relations (debate)
Conclusions of the European Council meetings, in particular the special European Council meeting of 1 February 2024 (debate)
War in the Gaza Strip and the need to reach a ceasefire, including recent developments in the region (debate)
Reports (3)
REPORT on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 2014/65/EU to make public capital markets in the Union more attractive for companies and to facilitate access to capital for small and medium-sized enterprises and repealing Directive 2001/34/EC
REPORT on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulations (EU) 2017/1129, (EU) No 596/2014 and (EU) No 600/2014 to make public capital markets in the Union more attractive for companies and to facilitate access to capital for small and medium-sized enterprises
REPORT on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on multiple-vote share structures in companies that seek the admission to trading of their shares on an SME growth market
Shadow reports (10)
REPORT on the proposal for a Council directive amending Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 as regards provisions relating to distance sales of goods and certain domestic supplies of goods
REPORT on the draft Council directive amending Directive 2006/112/EC on the common system of value added tax as regards the special scheme for small enterprises and Regulation (EU) No 904/2010 as regards the administrative cooperation and exchange of information for the purpose of monitoring the correct application of the special scheme for small enterprises
REPORT on the proposal for a Council regulation amending Regulation (EU) 2017/2454 as regards the dates of application due to the outbreak of the COVID-19 crisis
REPORT on the proposal for a Council decision amending Directives (EU) 2017/2455 and (EU) 2019/1995 as regards the dates of transposition and application due to the outbreak of the COVID-19 crisis
REPORT on further development of the Capital Markets Union (CMU): improving access to capital market finance, in particular by SMEs, and further enabling retail investor participation
REPORT on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) 2017/1129 as regards the EU Recovery prospectus and targeted adjustments for financial intermediaries to help the recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic
REPORT on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on digital operational resilience for the financial sector and amending Regulations (EC) No 1060/2009, (EU) No 648/2012, (EU) No 600/2014 and (EU) No 909/2014
REPORT on the implementation of the Sixth VAT Directive: what is the missing part to reduce the EU VAT gap?
REPORT on the financial activities of the European Investment Bank – annual report 2022
REPORT on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulations (EU) No 1092/2010, (EU) No 1093/2010, (EU) No 1094/2010, (EU) No 1095/2010 and (EU) 2021/523 as regards certain reporting requirements in the fields of financial services and investment support
Shadow opinions (2)
OPINION on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on a Single Market For Digital Services (Digital Services Act) and amending Directive 2000/31/EC
OPINION on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on foreign subsidies distorting the internal market
Oral questions (2)
An EU Commissioner for Animal Welfare
An EU Commissioner for Animal Welfare
Written explanations (171)
Draft amending budget No 2/2019: reinforcement of key programmes for EU competitiveness: Horizon 2020 and Erasmus+ (A9-0004/2019 - John Howarth)
. ‒ I am glad to have voted in favour of the draft amending budget reinforcing the commitment appropriations of two key EU programmes – Horizon 2020 and Erasmus+ – by EUR 100 million. In this perspective, I would like to remark the significance of the EU’s support for education and research innovation. A high level of financing in these two areas is an essential precondition for economic growth and citizens’ wellbeing in Europe.One should never underestimate the importance of research innovation as an essential driver of economic progress and the creation of good quality jobs. Undeniably, if we want the European economy to prosper, there is no other option but to keep on investing in top-notch innovation. By taking the lead, Europe can keep on growing and selling its products without devaluing its labour costs. Finally, one cannot ignore the return on investment in research on health issues. Finding new ways to prevent diseases and therapies that are more effective is one of the most important signs of European and human progress.
The UK’s withdrawal from the EU (B9-0038/2019, B9-0039/2019)
I abstained on this resolution as I disagree that it can serve a useful purpose at the present stage of the stand—off between the EU and the UK.The position of the European Parliament has been clearly asserted a number of times and is therefore well—known. Nothing has happened to change it.The real problem at the moment is that the UK is in the middle of a huge institutional crisis that could push the country into major economic and social discontinuity.Hopefully some last—gasp compromise can be offered by the British Government for a Brexit deal that would satisfy the EU side. In that case, this Parliament would be briefed about the development and would assume its responsibilities. Either way, today’s resolution will have no effect on the ongoing situation, except by creating further political noise, of which there is already too much.Keeping silent on the issue now would not amount to disinterest. To the contrary. We must and will keep our eyes open, our understanding at the ready.As the song goes: ‘Silence is golden, golden, But our eyes still see’.
State of implementation of anti-money laundering legislation (B9-0045/2019, B9-0046/2019)
The abolition of capital controls opened the doors for money laundering. Globalisation multiplied the opportunities for it. AML legislation – more complex than capital controls – is intended to extinguish money laundering but still seems to be two steps behind it, conceptually and in the implementation of measures. In financial services, this holds for the largest jurisdictions and even more for the small ones. When the financial services sector undergoes a significant expansion, the difficulties are compounded, especially if a substantial part of the industry is intermediated by small operators.This is the case of Malta: a recent MONEYVAL report, while identifying weaknesses, highlighted that Malta has a sound legal framework to address money-laundering issues. The government has committed to implementing all MONEYVAL recommendations. A national AML strategy is in place and is being strengthened, not least by allocating significant new resources to it. There can be no ifs or buts: AML measures have to be implemented in full by all across the board, and those who have difficulties in catching up with the ongoing reforms should be helped to do so.I have thus voted in favour of this resolution.
Foreign electoral interference and disinformation in national and European democratic processes (B9-0108/2019, B9-0111/2019)
I have abstained on this resolution. I agree that foreign interference in the electoral affairs of a country is a very serious issue and has to be monitored and controlled.It has long been practiced under different forms, from the setting up of policy institutes in the smaller countries by the parties of large European states to campaigns waged in foreign media against individual countries, and to the escalation that has happened in recent years towards the fraudulent manipulation of soft media on a global scale.So, this Parliament’s resolutions over the years on the internal affairs of outside countries could be considered an intervention in their electoral politics. Likewise, arguably, the creation of transnational lists for elections to this Parliament.What makes foreign interventions of any kind acceptable, legitimate or legal? I come from a country which has long been subject to such interventions, from both the right and the left. And I know that we would be indulging in another fruitless exercise where we proclaim how pure we are, and how defiled others can be – unless we have clear replies to questions of the acceptable-legitimate-legal sort. Even if well-intentioned, the resolution makes no attempt to identify such replies.Therefore, I cannot support it.
Multiannual Financial Framework 2021-2027 and own resources: time to meet citizens' expectations (B9-0110/2019, B9-0112/2019, B9-0113/2019)
I voted in favour of the Resolution on the 2021-2027 multiannual financial framework and own resources because it is essential that an agreement on the matter is reached as swiftly as possible.EU citizens need a robust and well-crafted budget to benefit from policies based on long-established priorities such as cohesion, agriculture, fisheries, and research funding.However, the following reservations apply:One can agree that a reform on the own resources system is needed.A tax in line with the EU’s environmental goals would be tolerable.Still clauses that refer to the implementation of a common consolidated corporate tax base or the setting up of a financial transaction tax impact on the sovereignty of Member States and are objectionable. .Further, current stated goals, such as those related to EU cohesion, have remained beyond reach.Yet new grand programmes such as the Defence Union and the Just Transition Fund are being proposed.The EU cannot afford to put aside its long-standing priorities.While one understands that new situations require new funding programmes, these cannot come at the expense of the fundamental priorities of the Union.
Implementation and financing of the EU general budget in 2020 in relation to the UK's withdrawal from the EU (A9-0018/2019 - Johan Van Overtveldt)
. – I voted in favour of the Recommendation on the Council draft Regulation dealing with the short-term budgetary questions of the United Kingdom withdrawal from the European Union because financial obligations already agreed upon under this financial framework should be maintained.A UK withdrawal (Brexit) without an agreement could, dangerously, leave no legal arrangements for the UK’s immediate budgetary relations with the EU. EU funding beneficiaries involved in ongoing projects should have a guarantee of the money their work depends on. And uncertainty about what the EU had committed to finance would also be damaging to the Union’s image as a stable and secure source of funding.The proposal to maintain eligibility for EU funding for UK entities and UK-related projects until this financial programme ends in 2020, conditioned by the UK’s commitment to contribute its share for the same period, is a fair proposal.Finally, it is imperative that the European Parliament should fully support the preparation of programmes to cushion against instabilities that could arise as a result of the various possible scenarios under which the UK withdrawal from the EU could occur.
General budget of the European Union for 2020 - all sections (A9-0017/2019 - Monika Hohlmeier, Eider Gardiazabal Rubial)
I voted in favour of the EP Report on the Council Position for the draft general budget of the EU for the financial year 2020 because I believe that the EP proposals are putting forward a strong budget in areas that urgently need it.Especially, I fully support the EP’s proposal to increase the money committed for the Connecting Europe Facility in the background of interoperability of electricity and gas networks across borders as well as to end energy isolation.This goes in line with the amendments that I have tabled in the Budget Committee.Further, on the need to securing affordable clean energy for all Europeans, my proposal for a Pilot Project dedicated to teaching island authorities on how to tender for renewable energy projects goes in line with the above. It is good that this proposal is also being included in the EP’s report.More EU resources need to pour towards ending the isolation of islands when it comes to their energy needs.I am satisfied to have positively contributed to this process and look forward to the results of the negotiations with the Commission and the Council in order to have delivered an appropriate budget for next year.
State of play of the disclosure of income tax information by certain undertakings and branches - public country-by-country reporting (B9-0117/2019)
I have voted in favour of this resolution to trigger negotiations between the Council and the Parliament on the proposal relating to the disclosure of income tax information by certain undertakings and branches (so-called public country-by-country reporting) – a proposal with which I disagree.After a great number of technical meetings have been held on the issue, a compromise text has been elaborated. The resolution calls for the Council to unblock its procedures for negotiations to commence.The European Parliament voted in favour of entering into negotiations in March this year, while its Economic and Legal Committees submitted their reports more than two years ago.My doubts concerning the substantive proposals being made arise because of the disadvantages they could burden European firms with, compared to their non-EU competitors.Requiring EU big companies to declare and to have publicly available sensitive information on their taxes and assets without reciprocity from outside the EU could be risky in this respect.Tax transparency needs to be boosted, but in ways by which EU champions are not put at a competitive disadvantage.This being said, one might disagree with the proposal at stake but blatantly blocking any further negotiations on a quite mature file is certainly not a constructive approach.
Distance sales of goods and certain domestic supplies of goods (A9-0019/2019 - Ondřej Kovařík)
I have voted in favour of this report, which pursues the objective of ensuring that VAT is paid when goods are sold through online marketplaces by independent sellers.The legislation covering this policy forms part of a broader reform of VAT systems meant to make them more resistant to fraud while ensuring the safe exchange of information on payments and the collection of VAT from Internet sales.VAT fraud in EU e-commerce (which is growing by 14% annually) represents a tax loss of some EUR 5 billion every year.Currently, if a company sells goods online to consumers in other Member States and the threshold of the distance sales is exceeded, the supplier is obliged to charge local VAT in the Member State of the customer.An independent online seller is obliged to have a local VAT identification number in that other country. It’s complicated.Through the new single counter (‘One-Stop Shop’), independent online sellers going cross-border with their business need one single EU VAT identification number.Ultimately, this should give encouragement to small businesses in e-commerce activities across the EU, while limiting VAT fraud.The measure is of special relevance to Malta, where buyers are increasingly going online.
Criminalisation of sexual education in Poland (B9-0166/2019, B9-0167/2019, B9-0168/2019)
I voted in favour of the Resolution contesting the draft bill from the Polish parliament that could result in criminalising the provision of sexual education. Essentially, the measure, billed as a ‘Stop Paedophilia’ legislative initiative criminalises the most important branch of education. This is regressive and damaging to the younger generations of Poland and Europe. It is clear that the establishment of study curricula is a matter of national competence. And should rightly remain so. Nevertheless, here we have an EU member state which adopts a law that is so out-of-date in concept and so wrong headed on so many fundamental aspects of different aspects of the educational experience. Even for one like me who abhors EU interventions in the internal affairs of Member States, it is difficult not to express strong dissent. For here, educators are risking jail time if they teach minors safe sex practices. When so much effort is being expended to combat sexually transmitted diseases, undesired pregnancies and domestic abuse, the measures deployed in Poland jar.Indeed, support for this resolution is crucial in safeguarding the rights to healthcare and education, the rights of women, children, and the LGBT community. The message is clear: providing comprehensive sexuality education to young people is not a crime, but an essential part of education!
Election of the Commission
. – I voted in favour of the new Commission. The agenda and the team were shaped by political negotiations and it is to be hoped that this will not just satisfy strategic goals but will make for a strong and dynamic team. Great importance was given in the proposed action programme to the environment. During the mandate ahead, it is hoped that the so-called Green New Deal will not be just a slogan but will, for example, translate into proper cooperation among all Commission directorates in the effort to reverse climate change. Similarly, a gender-balanced Commission like this one should lead to bold policies promoting gender equality across Europe.Many promises were made around an economy that works for people. The Commissioner for jobs will be in charge of ‘Employment and Social Rights’. In practice this should allow for the injection of a social dimension in a wide range of directives and regulations in the next five years. Another area where leadership from the Commission is expected relates to progress along the road of eurozone reform. Credibility and coherence should be the hallmarks of the President and ‘her’ College to ensure concrete implementation of the ambitious programme they have laid out.
Mobilisation of the European Union Solidarity Fund to provide assistance to Greece (A9-0040/2019 - Eva Kaili)
. – I voted in favour of this report allowing the EU, through the European Union Solidarity Fund, to mobilise over EUR 4 million to Greece in both commitment and payment appropriations. Support through such mobilisation is a practical demonstration of EU solidarity through real and tangible assistance when needed. It is reasonable that Greece gets this assistance in order to deal with damages produced by heavy rains and storms that resulted in flooding and a landslide disaster on the island of Crete earlier this year in February.Following the disaster, the country applied for a contribution from the Solidarity Fund on 15 May 2019. Such assistance could come at a swifter pace as for those who suffered this damage, every extra day of waiting could be detrimental. Lastly, the mechanism leading to the launching of such assistance might be revisited when directed towards small Member States, and especially those EU countries considered a one-region country under the Solidarity Fund. On both these last two counts, I am thinking specifically of the huge damages suffered by Maltese farmers from a huge storm that hit the island earlier this year, and for which some kind of financial relief arrived very late.
Mobilisation of the Flexibility Instrument to finance immediate budgetary measures to address the on-going challenges of migration, refugee inflows and security threats (A9-0039/2019 - Monika Hohlmeier)
. – The aim of the Flexibility Instrument is to allow the financing of clearly identified expenditures that cannot be covered without exceeding the maximum annual amount of funding allocated under the multiannual financial framework. In this setting, I voted in favour of the use of this special instrument in the EU’s budget heading 3, to address the ongoing and urgent challenges of migration, refugee inflows and security threats since all other financing possibilities under the same heading have been exhausted.This commitment demonstrates that the pre-established 2020 ceilings for this area do not allow for adequate financing of established priorities. The added amount of EUR 778 million still does not fill the funding gap for these important sectors. Yet, it will definitely be of an added drive towards achieving EU objectives. This money now has to be spent appropriately, and where it is most urgently needed. Finally, this decision further confirms the need for the EU to be more flexible in its budgetary plans, whereby budgetary authorities can have the possibility to put the money where it is most needed at an appropriate time.
2020 budgetary procedure: joint text (A9-0035/2019 - Monika Hohlmeier, Eider Gardiazabal Rubial)
I voted in favour of the conciliation for the EU budget 2020 because the result is a good compromise between major interests of the EU.Specifically, the compromise sees the approval of more funding towards climate actions and support for young Europeans in the line of more funding towards the Erasmus Programme as well as to fight youth unemployment.Especially welcome is the extra funding dedicated to the Connecting European Facility. This increase follows the amendments by a number of MEPs, including myself. Such funding is essential in the EU vision towards a Europe-wide energy connection, and in this setting to cushion some of the isolation difficulties faced by insular regions in Europe.I also look forward to see the first Commission plans for our Preparatory Action proposal dedicated to teaching island authorities on how to tender for renewable energy projects, which has now passed the final budgetary hurdle towards obtaining funding for 2020.As the EU cycle keeps moving, the view now is to maintain such priorities, and where possible further strengthen for the upcoming Multiannual Financial Framework.
Macro-financial assistance to Jordan (A9-0045/2019 - Luisa Regimenti)
. ‒ I voted in favour of giving consent to the third macro-financial allocation to the Hashemite kingdom of Jordan. The assistance will take place in the form of EUR 500 million of EU aid aimed at the recovery of Jordan’s economy.Jordan is an important actor in the Middle East, and has been for the last years a strategic ally for the European Union. The committed macrofinancial assistance offers a sign of hope in the struggle to overcome the country’s economic problems. Further, it provides support and assistance to a country that hosts the second highest share of refugees per capita in the world, while maintaining a commitment to the fight against Islamic terrorism. Such assistance contributes significantly to Jordan’s efforts to preserve internal stability and enhance growth prospects.At this point, it is essential that the Memorandum of Understanding for this aid is negotiated in a manner that effectively promotes the development of the Jordanian economy, thereby strengthening the role the country can play to stabilise the region and hopefully create the conditions for a lasting peace.
Fair taxation in a digitalised and globalised economy - BEPS 2.0 (B9-0238/2019)
I have voted against this resolution.The text does not adequately take into account the conditions of smaller Member States with an open economy. Moreover, this resolution considers that tax competition should be eliminated or significantly curbed, a stance that I do not share. Practical solutions that provide full transparency at national and EU levels can be found to counter tax evasion and avoidance, without impinging on the competitiveness of certain countries.This text supports the establishment of a minimum effective rate of taxation and movement towards an EU system harmonising rules for corporate income tax rates (the Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base, CCCTB). It does not leave room for any different approach to taxation than the one favouring big countries. In addition, the solutions proposed are built around the idea that large digital firms should be taxed in market jurisdictions where sales and users are located, which would also be favouring larger markets.Finally, it should be stressed that full and effective tax transparency remains the most workable tool for all Member States to stop companies from avoiding paying their taxes while still allowing for healthy, open competition in the EU.
The Rule of Law in Malta, after the recent revelations around the murder of Daphne Caruana Galizia (B9-0240/2019)
I voted against this resolution with the utmost conviction. The debate has confirmed my worst suspicions about how this Parliament considers rule of law issues. They are being turned, as has this one, into a partisan tug of war, in which the side wins which is most successful in creating political momentum around significant facts, real or fake.There is no care about how such facts are assessed and put into perspective. True: Malta faces great problems of governance that need urgent solution. It also needs to be made urgently clear in full all criminal and other responsibilities regarding the hideous assassination of Mrs Caruana Galizia. Malta is passing through a time of political transition, which should have been taken into account here. It was not.In its ‘contribution’ to the Malta situation, this Parliament has relied on a report by a committee, one of whose main members is a leading opponent of the Maltese Government. In debate, it concentrated on calling for the immediate resignation of the Maltese Prime Minister, which stamps its resolution with a month-long expiry date. It swamped its resolution with a host of irrelevant, contentious, subjective conjectures that should have no place in a political resolution. I need say no more.
Common system of value added tax as regards the special scheme for small enterprises (A9-0055/2019 - Inese Vaidere)
I have voted in favour of this report in the framework of a re-consultation procedure to ensure that these rules will be rapidly transposed into national laws. Such tangible facilitators for our growing SMEs should not wait to be implemented.Looking at this proposal again, one is reminded of the different burdens faced by small and medium companies. One is as well reminded of the need to unblock some of the inflexibilities of VAT when such companies are willing to engage more in EU cross-border trade. The extension of the VAT exemption scheme should concretely help them to do so.In its September 2018 report, this House had considerably improved the text. It proposed that small enterprises should be allowed to continue to benefit from a VAT exemption for two more years, instead of one year, when their annual turnover exceeds the SME threshold. Moreover, it proposed that the Commission set up an online portal to help entitled companies to benefit from the VAT exemption in another Member State.
Implementing and monitoring the provisions on citizens’ rights in the Withdrawal Agreement (B9-0031/2020)
I voted in favour of this Resolution because it is imperative that the way of life of millions of European citizens who are directly impacted by the UK withdrawal from the EU is protected. Action has been taken by all national authorities aimed at protecting the interests of citizens living in their territories. Yet a very high degree of uncertainty remains. It is clear that the rights of EU citizens who chose to move to or outside the United Kingdom will weaken. Most probably such rights will gradually be further reduced and become equivalent to those of other third country nationals. Given the frame that has been set for Brexit, it is highly unlikely that any fully-fledged agreement on the lines of that established with EFTA countries could be reached any time shortly. Based on the above, one cannot but share the concerns of many in the European Parliament over the future of those millions of EU citizens who live in the United Kingdom. Stronger and more long-term assurances are needed. It is important that EU countries remain united in their understanding of the underlying problem and in their stand to arrive at an equitable solution.
Annual report on the implementation of the common foreign and security policy (A9-0054/2019 - David McAllister)
I have abstained on this report, for the following reasons. In the context of the deterioration of the EU’s strategic environment, this report rightfully stresses the need for a unified action concerning terrorism, cyberattacks and disinformation campaigns, foreign interference in European electoral processes and climate change. Nevertheless, I cannot support the regulation on a European Defence Fund, which is contributing to common foreign and security policy objectives. The reason being that it takes for granted the support of the EU as a whole to the diversion of investment funds from civilian to defence objectives and military programmes. Its budgetary implications are not just an issue for neutral EU members and greater clarity is needed on the legal and financial implications of this initiative. Finally, the report does not refer to national specificities in terms of security and defence. Decisions on common foreign and security policy should remain decisions taken by unanimity. It is the only way forward to safeguard the principle of neutrality upheld by certain Member States, including Malta.
Annual report on the implementation of the common security and defence policy (A9-0052/2019 - Arnaud Danjean)
I have abstained on this report for the following reasons. The present text, reporting on the operations ensuring security at our borders and in its immediate neighbourhood, fails in capturing the complexity of migration, which is not just an issue for Southern Member States. Illegal immigration, piracy and illegal fishing constitute major security risks and are an integral part of our common European challenges. It cannot be stressed enough how maritime security should be at the core of the EU’s security strategy. A proper maritime strategy is the only way forward to ensure the protection of our economic activities, such as fisheries, but also shipping, tourism and all types of maritime operations. Although the reports addresses a number of other challenges to national security across the EU, it does not refer to national specificities in terms of security and defence. Member States all have their different standards in the area of defence and this report does not consider Member States who follow a policy of neutrality. It becomes thus difficult to understand how they could fit into a common security and defence structure.
European Parliament's position on the Conference on the Future of Europe (B9-0036/2020, B9-0037/2020, B9-0038/2020)
I voted for the motion regarding the Future of Europe Conference but I will not conceal my doubts as to whether the Conference will be really worthwhile, and this independently of the structures adopted to run it.Having been a member of the Convention on a European Constitution of the early 1990s, I have seen at close range how this kind of gathering can excel debating worthy ideas and proposals but lose contact with the concrete realities of getting nation-states to cooperate with each other on a give-and-take basis. Theoretical ideas about federalism or its contrary, both enthusiastically proclaimed, take front row. Documents are adopted that are far reaching but also far from the day-to-day aspirations of people.The danger remains that discussion of the tasks that could realistically be achieved by tomorrow is obfuscated by what basically amount to verbiage describing visions about what should be done by next month. Tomorrow’s tasks are then delayed while next month’s vision never becomes reality.Among the areas which could fall victim to this problem are immigration, the banking union, progress to combat climate change and the promotion of real equality.I hope this will not be the fate of the Future of Europe Conference.
Agreement on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community (A9-0004/2020 - Guy Verhofstadt)
I have voted in favour of the withdrawal agreement of the UK from the European Union. The hope is that while losing a strategic member, the EU will not be losing an ally. A political framework for a close partnership is being elaborated and negotiated to achieve a close partnership between the two sides. May it be concluded as soon as possible. For peripheral countries, regions and islands, the presence of the UK within the EU served as a counterbalance to centrifugal forces that reinforce one-size-fits-all solutions within an overriding continental purpose. The UK contribution in this sense will be missed. From the Maltese perspective too, the absence of the UK as a major economy that is hugely reliant on financial services can create complications, since the voice of financial service providers will become weaker in EU councils. Another impact will be to increase the relative weight of the eurozone within an EU having twenty seven members. Pressure within the eurozone for more stringent regulations on a one-size-fits-all basis could increase. Finally, the British withdrawal should not mean the creation of new barriers between young people. Erasmus should continue to allow British and European youths to benefit mutually from learning across borders.
Gender pay gap (B9-0069/2020, B9-0073/2020, B9-0083/2020, B9-0084/2020)
. ‒ I have voted in favour of this resolution.The principle of equal pay for work of equal value was reiterated in the European Pillar of Social Rights. Closing the gender pay gap shall be at the forefront of the fight for social justice.Illegal pay discrimination among men and women is still practiced in the EU. Companies participating in its persistence are preventing women from being autonomous and independent, denying their empowerment.The causes are numerous. Women being the main caregivers of families can explain it, with career breaks and lower hours. Discontinuous careers should be better valued by our societies as this is later reflected in the pension gap and retirement ages. Nevertheless, other causes remain unexplained, linked to gender stereotypes and undervaluation of female-dominated work. This is unacceptable.I would for instance support assessing whether companies to which EU funds are addressed have high working standards and whether they ban all forms of discriminatory practices towards women.Finally, pay transparency is still rare in the private sector. Lack of pay transparency opens opportunity to perpetuate inequality. The EU is currently working on a European-wide answer, with the aim of helping the victims to be better informed on wage structures and in order for them to contest unequal treatments.
Conclusion of the EU-Viet Nam Free Trade Agreement (Resolution) (A9-0017/2020 - Geert Bourgeois)
I have voted in favour of the EU-Vietnam free trade agreement as it is of strategic importance to both parties. I took note of the arguments that the implementation of the agreement should be made conditional on human rights reforms in Vietnam. I acknowledge that there are grounds for genuine concern about the respect of human rights in that country. However, I doubt that trade and investment agreements between developed and developing countries (or unions of countries) provide the right context or tools for the promotion of human rights in developing territories. The exception to this would be labour rights, since trade and investment exchanges cannot be established around production processes that rely on exploitation of workers to achieve economic gain. But it is not clear that extending this condition to the full range of human rights does achieve the aims set for it. Indeed, it is more likely in my view to affect negatively the living standards of low-income families in developing countries, with marginal impact on the ruling elites. Even so, the EU should make a discussion of human rights part of the joint conversation when the implementation of the agreement is being scrutinised.
Objection pursuant to Rule 112: Lead and its compounds (B9-0089/2020)
I voted in favour of the objection raised in this European Parliament resolution and therefore against the Commission proposal on the recovery of waste PVC (Polyvinyl chloride) that would lead to the carry-over of lead compounds into a new generation of products.European policy should favour all possible ways of recycling. Yet, such recycling must not put the health of citizens at risk. No economic reasoning can justify such threats. Products containing hazardous waste should simply be phased out rather than be recycled into products to be sold on the market.That lead is a highly toxic substance is well known. For this reason, lead is on a phase down in the EU due to its serious health impacts. In this background, the proposal to reintroduce this element into consumer products such as pipes, packaging and windows is bizarre to say the least.For the sake of the circular economy that Europe is trying to embrace, recycled goods need to be of good quality, with high health and environmental standards. Otherwise, consumers would sideline these products, and all efforts in the sector would be totally wasted.
Proposed mandate for negotiations for a new partnership with the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (B9-0098/2020)
. ‒ I voted in favour of this resolution that describes the EU’s position in negotiations on a comprehensive partnership between the UK and the EU following Brexit. It covers provisions that go well beyond free trade and investment cooperation. It acknowledges that the EU and the UK will continue to have many interests in common. The Commission is rightly urged to conduct negotiations transparently, through public consultation and dialogue with social partners. Inclusion of national parliaments will too be a key factor.The proposed mandate contains some very tough positions. At the opening of any negotiation, this is how a mandate should be formulated. However it also confirms and updates the concept of a European state having relations with the EU in the form of a partnership. Some years ago, the concept of a partnership used to be derided in my country, Malta, as meaningless. Not only has this point of view been debunked, but it has become increasingly evident that the EU will continue to develop the partnership framework as the best method by which to maintain deep and close relations with European states that do not aspire to become members of the Union. I welcome this development.
Allocation of slots at Community airports: common rules
I have voted in favour of this urgent proposal aimed at dropping the ‘use it or lose it’ rule for airlines’ landing slots in congested airports for a given period this year.The amendment by which this period, as proposed by the European Commission, was extended in line with the Council’s decision was timely.Airlines are facing the unprecedented challenges brought by the spread of the corona virus.The current grounding of most aircraft implies huge losses.Flying empty in order to respect European rules and not lose slots makes no sense.Among the worst hit airlines are those that service periphery countries, some of them legacy airlines, whose operations are also aimed at improving the connectivity options for businesses, investors and ordinary citizens.Such airlines have already been under stress in the past decade, in part because of legacy issues, in part because they suffer from diseconomies of scale.Their clout in negotiating good slots in major European airports has always been weak.Yet they still fulfil an important role in supporting the economies (based on tourism and other services) of small and peripheral countries.The decisions approved in this waiver will protect their position in connecting with European airports.
Specific measures to mobilise investments in the health care systems of the Member States and in other sectors of their economies in response to the COVID-19 outbreak (Coronavirus Response Investment Initiative)
I voted in favour of the Corona Response Investment Initiative because I believe that it is imperative to deploy meaningfully all available cash reserves held by the Union in this very delicate moment.The proposal must be implemented with total urgency. With Europe in quasi-lockdown, economic activity is grinding to a halt. Many people are making huge sacrifices to keep going. Therefore, measures must be supported that aim to increase flexibility when EU funds are disbursed to assist economic sectors directly hit by the pandemic we are experiencing.Further, it is also important to boost investment in health care and in other sectors that are relevant to the containment of the corona virus pandemic. On another tack, I am very satisfied that this Commission proposal also takes into account the damage that fishermen might suffer in the context of a public health crisis.Clearly, much more needs to be done at an EU level. We are all waiting for encouraging signs from the Union and its Member States that they really are putting all available resources together to sustain the continent’s economy and the health of its people.
Draft amending budget No 1/2020: Assistance to Greece in response to increased migration pressure - Immediate measures in the context of the COVID-19 outbreak - Support to post-earthquake reconstruction in Albania - Other adjustments
I voted in favour of this draft amending budget because funding to counter both the increased migration pressure in Greece, as well as to support post-earthquake reconstruction in Albania, is needed.On the same basis, the EU should funnel funding to counter the migration crisis that is escalating in the Central Mediterranean region. The emergency has become more acute because of the escalation in fighting around Tripoli in Libya.Already hard hit by the global pandemic, the EU’s border regions must also deal with a worsening migration crisis..Islands in the Mediterranean are having to cope with a growing influx of irregular migration, putting further huge pressures on their sanitary and economic systems.In Malta, the country’s capacities are already overstretched as health services endeavour to contain the spread of COVID—19 while coping with one of the highest per capita rates of irregular immigration to Europe. Other islands are, or could soon be, in a similar position.The European Commission should urgently consider concrete proposals made recently in this sense by the Maltese Government.
Introduction of specific measures for addressing the COVID-19 crisis
I have voted in favour of the proposed Regulation aiming at introducing specific measures in favour of the poorest to handle the coronavirus pandemic. The main objective is to address the functioning of the Fund for European Aid to the Most Deprived (FEAD), as public authorities and social organisations are facing different challenges.The current crisis is increasing the risks for vulnerable populations. Confinement and social distancing prevent the distribution of basic materials and social support. It becomes more difficult for volunteers to be mobilised.Thus, protective equipment will be provided for organisations outside of the technical assistance budget. It will be possible for Member States to apply to a co-financing rate of 100 % for the accounting year 2020-2021, and more flexibility will be granted with, for example, alternative schemes of delivery through electronic vouchers to avoid contamination.It is crucial in this pandemic to be attentive to vulnerable populations, which are not only the elderly or homeless people, but also those who deeply struggle financially and mentally. A person can become vulnerable if the policy response is inadequate. It is thus key that all vulnerable groups are properly identified. Each Member State has to assess this and fairly support those at the highest risk.
A safety net to protect the beneficiaries of EU programmes: setting up an MFF contingency plan (A9-0099/2020 - Jan Olbrycht, Margarida Marques)
I voted in favour of the European Parliament Report asking for a safety net for the beneficiaries of EU programmes through an MFF contingency plan because I believe that more than ever, in this moment, we cannot afford any added degree of financial uncertainty.Further, it is natural that such a contingency plan should be including a tangible answer to the socioeconomic consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic with targeted reinforcements and revisions of budgetary rules.Yet, my vote in favour is conditioned by the following reservation:The contingency plan should act solely as a fallback position in case that an MFF agreement cannot not be reached on time. In no way should this Contingency Plan be considered as a proper alternative solution.As indicated in my Committee amendment for the same file, the overarching priority must remain a swift and timely agreement for a new Multiannual Financial Framework. It should remain in a position to support both the already established long-term priorities, as well as the newly expected challenges arising from the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.All negotiators, including those from this House, should strive to achieve that end.
Discharge 2018: European Banking Authority (A9-0060/2020 - Ryszard Czarnecki)
I have voted in favour of this discharge for the budget of the EBA, assessing its performances and activities, for the following reasons.I welcome the idea of a single banking rulebook to which the EBA is contributing - while expressing a reservation.The EBA has intensified its contacts with Member States and should continue doing so with national and commercial banks. Such communication is key for collaboration with the perspective of creating a single banking rulebook. It would allow for closing regulatory loopholes and for smoother operations across the EU. This being said, national flexibility should simultaneously be safeguarded as economic cycles are not uniform across the EU.The EBA has been promoting a common supervisory regime across the EU financial system. Supervising the financial sector is not only key for financial stability but also has been shown as an effective tool for combating tax fraud and money laundering. Pushing banks to be more transparent about their situation will benefit everyone, from supervisors to deposit-holders and investors. Finally, I welcome the EBA’s stance regarding its support to local economies. In the current crisis, the EBA pushed for capital reliefs to serve businesses and households, reminding banks that measures should not serve to provide leeway for increases in the distribution of dividends.
New MFF, own resources and Recovery plan
. – I voted in favour of this resolution because I believe that the next multiannual financial framework (MFF) could provide the platform needed for the EU to face up to the coronavirus pandemic while launching a recovery programme. The MFF is already ‘mutualised’ under agreed norms. Using it as an instrument for the recovery guarantees that national budgets do not get caught in the obligations of others.That spending targets must be increased over the levels about which squabbling prevailed in the last years should be common sense. How much that raise should be must be settled. Simply, it has to be robust enough to protect the most vulnerable sectors of the European economy and serve as the launch pad for recovery. It must cover all the vital interests that define the single market, while maintaining the longstanding priorities of the Union, like EU-wide socioeconomic convergence and environmental reform. In this context, having the Commission to steer and manage the recovery programme would also ensure that no new supranational mechanisms are set up.I have one disagreement with the resolution: I do not support most of the new own resources for the Union which it identifies.
Recommendations on the negotiations for a new partnership with the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (A9-0117/2020 - Kati Piri, Christophe Hansen)
Though I voted for this resolution, I have to register my reservations regarding how negotiations are proceeding. It seems to me that both sides have spent too much negotiating time digging into their initial positions and maintaining them. In any negotiations, if agreement is to be reached, the lookout should be for acceptable compromises reached on a mutually satisfactory give and take basis. It does not look as if we are close to reaching this approach in the current negotiations. There is no point in blaming just one side for this; both are responsible. Yet meanwhile a huge economic recession is creeping in. Pessimism about the outcome of the Brexit negotiations or indeed their breakdown, will only serve to fuel further negative trends right across the board. This should be considered as unacceptable by all concerned. Both sides at the negotiating table need to drop their rigid and dogmatic approaches. They should stop considering the talks as also serving to give messages and signals to third parties about the implications of the Brexit development, which is now a fait accompli. The priority should be that of arriving at a reasonable deal as quickly as possible.
Conference on the Future of Europe (B9-0170/2020, B9-0179/2020)
I voted in favour of the Resolution on the Conference on the Future of Europe because I believe that a debate on where Europe is heading could be useful.Nevertheless, I have serious doubts on the approach adopted by some Brussels based entities.Rather than listening to what European citizens from the different parts of the continent would wish for their future, some political actors seem to wish to impose their agendas on this conference.Yet, if Europe wants to succeed, it is essential that a bottom-up approach for this debate is adopted.The actual needs of citizens need to be at the forefront of this conference. The debate should focus on realistic and doable achievements rather than on endless discussions that lead to no conclusion.Finally, many should come to a realisation that despite the increasing power of the Union, citizens continue to feel closer to their national governments and parliaments. It is therefore essential that national representatives are given a leading role in this debate for the rest of us to listen and understand what is needed for a better future.
Competition policy - annual report 2019 (A9-0022/2020 - Stéphanie Yon-Courtin)
I voted in favour of the annual competition report because it is an overall good document with a strong social component.In particular, I am very glad to see the S&D amendment calling on the Commission to make it compulsory for banks receiving state aid to retain their full retail banking services has made it through the final text of the Report. The amendment further requests the Commission to ensure that banks are not allowed to use the COVID-19 crisis as a pretext for permanently reducing such services.This comes in the setting of diminishing retail banking services all over Europe, also with the excuse of the COVID-19 crisis.State aid to banks must be accompanied with an obligation towards providing retail services to their small clients.Let us not forget that the shrinking of such services usually comes at the detriment of low-income workers and pensioners in particular. But, not only they.Following such a strong call, I urge the European Commission to urgently act on the matter.Many citizens who are among the more vulnerable have already been waiting for too long for some attention.
Setting up a subcommittee on tax matters (B9-0187/2020)
. – I have voted in favour of setting up a subcommittee on tax matters, as I agree that the fight against tax fraud and for financial transparency matters. Taxation has occupied a growing space in the EU political agenda in the last five years. Its role is crucial in our budgets and in the distribution of resources. Various financial scandals have revealed how transparency essential is for social justice.A strong tax transparency framework has been put in place, helping to curb tax fraud and increasing the cooperation among our tax authorities. Moreover, the EU is currently modernising its VAT system to help Member States collect around 50 billion euros more per year. It makes sense in this context that the European Parliament has its own permanent working structure. I will continue to support a necessary and healthy tax competition in the EU.This needs to be framed in a fair and transparent way, also adapted to the very dynamic platform economy. The tax subcommittee should represent diversified perspectives. The interests of small peripheral countries are crucial in this respect and their role in shaping the future of tax policies in Europe is just as valid as that of bigger players and markets.
Banking Union - annual report 2019 (A9-0026/2020 - Pedro Marques)
I have voted in favour of this report.As is frequently acknowledged, an increasingly convergent and stable Economic and Monetary Union requires a solid Banking Union. Despite progress towards a single banking policy in the euro area, the Banking Union project has stagnated for years. It is still early to say, but the current pandemic crisis might highlight the risks posed by its incompletion. The differences in regimes across the EU could create significant vulnerabilities.The report also addresses issues deep running consumer issues. EU citizens are confronted by obscure and unfair commercial practices. The interests of vulnerable groups are frequently ignored. The pandemic could exacerbate such aspects with the reduction of banking services to small clients.Finally, the report tackles the issue of the fight against money laundering. Giving powers for anti-money laundering supervision to an independent Union agency with a single rule book, could be a truly effective way to tackle cross-border illegal activities. However, its prerogatives would need to be implemented in the same way everywhere, with equivalent approaches for all credit institutions across Member States.Only a truly impartial EU body could preserve the integrity of the EU financial system.
Tourism and transport in 2020 and beyond (RC-B9-0166/2020, B9-0166/2020, B9-0175/2020, B9-0177/2020, B9-0178/2020, B9-0180/2020, B9-0182/2020, B9-0184/2020)
I voted in favour of this resolution, which tackles the issue of tourism after the COVID-19 crisis.Tourism cross cuts across various economic sectors, and has a wide-ranging impact on economic growth, employment, and social and sustainable development.Although it is one of the economic activities worst affected by the pandemic, it is not yet being given its true importance in proposals for the upcoming recovery phase.Moreover, special care should be given when/if support programmes for the sector are going to be subject to conditionality by way of implementing structural reforms and respecting ecological standards. This could be a problem for vulnerable stakeholders.In a survival scenario, swift access to funding should be secured, without prematurely burdening small tourism companies with reforms. Similarly, one should strive to limit administrative burdens when accessing funding programmes.As stressed in the report, I would welcome additional support to the sector based on the share that tourism contributes to a Member State’s economy.Finally, it should be recognised that reliance on national tourism is feasible as a stop-gap measure for large countries with a sizeable population. The option is not available to small countries and recovery programmes should take good note of this.
Administrative cooperation in the field of taxation: deferring certain time limits due to the COVID-19 pandemic (C9-0134/2020)
I voted in favour of this measure, which, owing to the COVID-19 pandemic, would defer certain time limits for the filing and exchange of information in the field of taxation.In 2018, the EU introduced a new reporting regime to increase the level of transparency surrounding harmful tax practices. With more stringent disclosure, this new filing and exchange of information system represented a major change for tax advisors and taxpayers.The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted operating conditions across a wide range of reporting and administrative activities.It became reasonable to defer the introduction of the new system to allow stakeholders to adapt to it smoothly and effectively.This in no way means that the EU is less committed to the fight against tax evasion and avoidance. Indeed, tax transparency will be more essential than ever in the upcoming recovery period. Tax abuses cannot be allowed to siphon off public revenues needed for investment in citizens’ welfare and economic renewal.The new administrative requirements for Member States and stakeholders are to be deferred for three months. Once that period is over, all the reportable tax arrangements made during the postponement period will still have to be reported.
The PRC national security law for Hong Kong and the need for the EU to defend Hong Kong's high degree of autonomy (RC-B9-0169/2020, B9-0169/2020, B9-0171/2020, B9-0173/2020, B9-0174/2020, B9-0176/2020, B9-0181/2020, B9-0193/2020)
I have abstained on this resolution, but not because I support the erosion of civil and political liberties in Hong Kong or wherever it may happen.I did so because it seems to me that when deciding on this and similar issues, this Parliament takes decisions according to criteria that, while being politically loaded, are if not warped, then certainly non-transparent.From a legal and diplomatic point of view, I do not see much difference in the way in which the central Chinese Government considers its relationship with Hong Kong and that, for instance, of the central Spanish Government in dealing with Catalonia. Yet, the considerations brought forward in the two cases by this Parliament are totally different.Nor in my view, does it hold water to make for Spain the claim that it is democratic while China, by European standards, is not. Certainly if that argument is legitimate, then the whole historic background relating to the actions of European powers in China must also be brought into the picture.The euro-centrism that guides the versions we approve of diplomatic realities makes me fear that we do not take the full panoply of facts into account; therefore, I abstained.
Ειδικοί κανόνες για την απόσπαση οδηγών στον τομέα των οδικών μεταφορών και απαιτήσεις επιβολής (A9-0114/2020 - Kateřina Konečná) (A9-0114/2020 - Kateřina Konečná)
. – I voted against the Mobility Package and in favour of some amendments that could at least have improved the package.The Mobility Package has been divisive for the past years. Its biggest problem is the obligation for a truck to return to base every 8 weeks, even if empty. This blatantly discriminates against Europe’s periphery. Countries at the core of Europe have smaller distances and obstacles to face to return home for the same period. Also, the likely increase in the number of empty runs contradicts the purposes of the Green Deal.Malta supported the main objectives of the proposal: better social conditions for drivers, sustainability of road transport and proper functioning of the EU single market. However, one cannot support a package that restricts the mobility of drivers. Such inflexibility will be administratively and financially burdensome for trucking companies that are mainly SMEs especially, again, if working from the periphery.Indeed, the European Commission launched a detailed impact assessment to be concluded in autumn 2020, which demonstrates how there are still doubts about the whole process.In such conditions, adoption of the package sends an extremely negative signal and unnecessarily divides Member States in a crucial sector for the European economy.
Daily and weekly driving times, minimum breaks and rest periods and positioning by means of tachographs (A9-0115/2020 - Henna Virkkunen)
. – I voted against the mobility package and in favour of some amendments that could at least have improved the package.The mobility package has been divisive for the past years. Its biggest problem is the obligation for a truck to return to base every eight weeks, even if empty. This blatantly discriminates against Europe’s periphery. Countries at the core of Europe have smaller distances and obstacles to face to return home for the same period. Also, the likely increase in the number of empty runs contradicts the purposes of the Green Deal.Malta supported the main objectives of the proposal: better social conditions for drivers, sustainability of road transport and proper functioning of the EU single market. However, one cannot support a package that restricts the mobility of drivers. Such inflexibility will be administratively and financially burdensome for trucking companies, that are mainly SMEs, especially again, if working from the periphery.Indeed, the Commission launched a detailed impact assessment to be concluded in autumn 2020, which demonstrates how there are still doubts about the whole process.In such conditions, adoption of the package sends an extremely negative signal and unnecessarily divides Member States in a crucial sector for the European economy.
Adapting to development in the road transport sector (A9-0116/2020 - Ismail Ertug)
. – I voted against the mobility package and in favour of some amendments that could at least have improved the package.The mobility package has been divisive for the past years. Its biggest problem is the obligation for a truck to return to base every eight weeks, even if empty. This blatantly discriminates against Europe’s periphery. Countries at the core of Europe have smaller distances and obstacles to face to return home for the same period. Also, the likely increase in the number of empty runs contradicts the purposes of the Green Deal.Malta supported the main objectives of the proposal: better social conditions for drivers, sustainability of road transport and proper functioning of the EU single market. However, one cannot support a package that restricts the mobility of drivers. Such inflexibility will be administratively and financially burdensome for trucking companies, that are mainly SMEs, especially again, if working from the periphery.Indeed, the Commission launched a detailed impact assessment to be concluded in autumn 2020, which demonstrates how there still are doubts about the whole process.In such conditions, adoption of the package sends an extremely negative signal and unnecessarily divides Member States in a crucial sector for the European economy.
A comprehensive Union policy on preventing money laundering and terrorist financing – Commission's Action plan and other recent developments (B9-0207/2020)
. – I fully support many of the measures proposed in this resolution and believe they would serve to give renewed impetus to ongoing efforts to eliminate money laundering and terrorism financing, much of which happens across borders.At a time when governments are struggling to mount full-scale recovery programmes in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic, the war against criminals who siphon off funds that rightly belong to the community as a whole must be intensified.However, I have had to abstain on this resolution on two counts.First, it contains proposals that directly, or by implication, fail to fully satisfy the balance that should be maintained between what devolves on central EU institutional and on national – in part sovereign – competences. When such a balance is not maintained, EU programmes are likely to fail.Second, it seems to endorse a perspective on my country Malta that, to a large extent, reflects a one-sided partisan and distorted assessment of the political, economic and professional situation there. The time has come to ensure that our resolutions in this House are no longer guided by not-so-hidden agendas that end up obscuring the aims which we seek to achieve.
Draft Council decision on the system of own resources of the European Union (A9-0146/2020 - José Manuel Fernandes, Valerie Hayer)
Clearly, the European Union, in the current economic situation and as it expands its policy horizons, needs lots more money to spend.A revision of the EU’s current system of own resources is therefore inevitable.Proposals reflecting EU objectives acknowledged by all, such as the plastic levy agreed upon at Council level, are extremely fit for purpose.Nevertheless, other proposals in the text on which we voted have been advanced with a regrettable disregard for the damage they would inflict on the economy of individual Member States.A case in point: the proposals calling for the Union-wide introduction of tax measures that target very specific sectors of the economy, such as a financial transaction tax or the common consolidated corporate tax base.The problem is that mostly the smaller to smallest Member States are affected. Were it otherwise, and the interests of the larger states were involved, the approach would be much more cautious.The questions as to whether own resources are the best response to the EU’s crying need for more funds to carry out its mission, and how new own resources should be identified, merit an urgent revisit.For this reason, I voted against the resolution.
Determination of a clear risk of a serious breach by the Republic of Poland of the rule of law
I abstained on the final vote and on all the main separate votes on this resolution regarding the situation in Poland.This in no way means that I approve or condone any measures in any state, including Poland, that prove to be breaches of the rule or law and of fundamental rights, by way of hostility to gay rights, withdrawal from the European treaty aimed at preventing violence towards women and the undermining of judicial independence. Far from it.I voted in this manner to remain consistent with my position regarding reports on the rule of law and similar issues prepared by this House.In my view, the European Parliament lacks the ‘objective’ tools by which to assess breaches of the rule of law and related issues.Its preliminary positions, assessments and final resolutions are conditioned right through by the pressures of political bargaining and manoeuvring between governments, political groups and assorted factions.If this House considers it has the right to report and judge on critical situations in Member States and elsewhere, then it must do so through an objective quasi-judicial process, that will not depend on political calculation.Otherwise the judgement of this Parliament can only become devalued and in the end, discredited.
Situation in Belarus
Events following the Belarusian presidential elections of the 9th August have left the country destabilised. Though I am personally averse to this Parliament pronouncing itself on the affairs of outside countries, there come moments when solidarity with the struggle for democracy and against dictatorship overrides all other considerations.Belarus’s political system has now reached an unacceptable level of state repression aimed to reinforce a totalitarian government. I must vote for a resolution that condemns this state of affairs. Nevertheless, doubts remain on major elements of the text as presented.Requests for direct intervention by the EU can easily boomerang. Similarly, statements indicating the recognition of a Belarusian political leader as president-elect seem premature and politically motivated. A process of national reconciliation and democratisation has to come first. The EP cannot condemn Russian interference in Belarusian affairs while inviting Union actors to do the same.A real risk is that Belarus becomes yet another theatre for confrontation between the EU’s soft power and Russia’s realpolitik. So, while not taking part in the main separate votes on this report, I voted in favour of the final text, as a gesture of solidarity with the Belarusian people in their fight for liberty.
Situation in Russia, the poisoning of Alexei Navalny
In past resolutions on Russia before this House, I always sought to take a prudent abstentionist stance. I believed that they were based on premises that were too rigidly euro-centric and not sufficiently mindful of Russia’s legitimate geopolitical interests and aspirations.This did not mean that I endorsed the increasingly authoritarian approach of the Putin administration.Though the Skripal case and the spying and interference in the political processes of Western countries raised serious concerns, I remained cautious when this House denounced them, because similar transgressions have been committed by our friends and allies. However the Navalny poisoning has been a step way too far.It negates the essence of democratic politics, which allows full space and protection to political critics and opponents. It takes us back to the days of the Borgias. Clearly, only a state agency could have organised the poisoning on territory that is under the full control of the Russian state.To show full solidarity with Mr Navalny, I voted in favour of this resolution. However, as I am still unconvinced by this House’s overall approach towards Russia, I did not participate on all the other ancillary votes that led to the final text.
Cultural recovery of Europe
I welcome the resolution on cultural recovery and have voted for it. The ongoing Covid-19 pandemic has blighted the prospects of the European cultural sector. Art forms that rely on the presence of an audience, such as theatre but not only, are suffering greatly. Promoters, agents, creators and schools of the performing arts are going through a very tough time. Shows have been cancelled, audience sales have dwindled, and funding, public as well as private, has in many cases vanished. Probably this situation will last for a good while.Policy-makers at both national and European levels, must support the industry by all possible means: financial and regulatory. It is an essential part of the social, cultural and economic fabric that binds together the national European spaces.The EP call to have at least 2% of the Recovery and Resilience Fund attached to the recovery of cultural and creative sectors is spot on. Only in this way can arts performers, creators, educators, publishers, authors, promoters and agents survive the storm, and once the conditions are right, again provide arts and cultural events that entertain while giving meaning to the life we live.
The Establishment of an EU Mechanism on Democracy, the Rule of Law and Fundamental Rights (A9-0170/2020 - Michal Šimečka)
. ‒ I abstained on the vote on the establishment of an EU mechanism on the rule of law.I will repeat my usual statement: such abstention does not mean that I do not uphold highly the values of Article 2 of the EU Treaties. Those values serve as the common base for all Member States and they underpin the entire functioning of the Union. I doubt however whether this mechanism, as currently designed to monitor all Member States annually with respect to their adherence to Union values, has the capacity to assess such adherence in a transparent and objective way. Who would be in charge of processing the facts? Impartial legal experts?I have witnessed too many prejudiced and politically partisan approaches to situations that should be screened in a neutral and factual manner. How can a cooperation between highly politicised institutions like this Parliament and the Council lead to a fair mechanism? So long as this question is not clearly answered, I will be maintaining my reservation.
Implementation of the common commercial policy – annual report 2018 (A9-0160/2020 - Jörgen Warborn)
I voted in favour of the Annual Report on the implementation of the EU’s common commercial policy because of its objective and progressive approach to trade, conditioned by human rights and climate protection considerations.It is also very positive that a new partnership with Africa is on the agenda. The concept of aid for trade as part of a package of commercial relations with Africa needs to be kept under scrutiny. Trade cannot be defined by a reciprocity-based free market approach. Europe must allow a wide leeway for protectionist practices in African countries that will enable them to nurture new industries for their local markets, thereby providing jobs, not least in the food industries.Finally, the attention given to the situation faced in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic is crucial. The pandemic, especially in its initial period, has shown the limitations of EU trade policy when it comes to securing the supply of basic protective gear and medical equipment. Moreover, the limitations of the European medical industry have been very evident. While trade is and will remain beneficial, the EU must assure its autonomy in strategic economic sectors or otherwise face the prospect of instability at the least sign of crisis.
The rule of law and fundamental rights in Bulgaria (B9-0309/2020)
. ‒ For the last six years I have been questioning the legitimacy of this kind of resolution, when applied to Malta’s government for sure, but equally when applied to other governments. If a judgement is going to be applied to any government system, it has to be based on a dispassionate, objective examination. That process does not exist. What happens is, in my view, a polarised, politically skewed method, both at Parliament and at Commission level. I cannot but denounce the political hypocrisy which accompanies the process.During this debate, we saw an esteemed member of the PPE, who has been at the forefront in blindly fomenting and promoting before this Chamber allegations, strictures and sanctions against the government of Malta, the country which she represents here, light a candle for the Bulgarian Government and present now amendments in defence or mitigation of its position. This is indefensible.In the circumstances, in full coherence with my stance about a process which I consider to still be a political charade, I had no hesitation to vote against the PPE amendments and to abstain on the final resolution. In no way should this be taken as an explicit or implicit endorsement of what is happening in Bulgaria. To the contrary.
Reinforcing the Youth Guarantee (B9-0310/2020)
I voted in favour of the EP Resolution on the youth guarantee because it is an essential element in the programme needed to provide protection for the future generations of Europe.Youth unemployment has long been a grave problem in Europe.It has been an issue in Southern Europe especially, but not only.The COVID-19 pandemic has further exacerbated the problem and is creating huge obstacles for young people when looking for meaningful employment.The EU’s Youth Guarantee has in the past helped millions of young citizens to make it into the job market.Given the track record of the Guarantee, the Council should revise its current inexplicable plans to dilute the strength of the guarantee.Rather, the Guarantee should be reinforced by providing it with the necessary funds from the EU budget while ensuring they are properly spent.Moreover, in the interest of maintaining the right social conditions around labour markets and while taking into account the current market dynamics, European decision makers should seek to eliminate all forms of social dumping.The application of stricter rules in this area would serve to enhance job opportunities for European youths.
The future of European education in the context of Covid-19 (B9-0338/2020)
My vote has been conditioned by the following:The pandemic has caused disruptions in education systems, exposing an entire generation of young people to huge discontinuities in their learning experience.The ongoing digital transition in education was accelerated more than existing infrastructures were ready for.Online classes have confirmed a digital divide among students, related to differences in access to digital devices, the quality of online teaching, unequal personal capacities to learn alone on a computer, and the class divide.Reports stress that the too rapid switch to digital educational processes occurred in a context where 43 percent of Europeans still lacked basic digital skills. The digital education gap has exacerbated existing inequalities.There is an opportunity to rethink the future of education but it has to be coupled to the priority of addressing the digital education gap. The European Council’s decision to slash flagship education programmes in the next long-term EU budget undercuts both opportunity and priority.Moreover, the educational needs of remote and rural areas need to be given greater attention.Finally, efforts should concentrate on ensuring that in-person learning can resume in a COVID-19-secure environment, in balance with ongoing online instruction, according to the latest best practice guidelines.
Economic policies of the euro area 2020 (A9-0193/2020 - Joachim Schuster)
I voted in favour of this year’s EP Report on the economic policies of the Euro area 2020 because, despite the compromises it contains, the right focus has been retained on a strong social and environmental commitment.This must guide all our approaches to the major economic issues that the EU is currently facing.Furthermore, the report covers more than adequately the ongoing pandemic and the impact it is having on the Union’s fiscal and economic governance.The pandemic arrived at what was already a delicate situation where many were openly doubting whether the ‘old’ fiscal rules, as enshrined in the SGP, still made sense.COVID-19 exacerbated this dilemma, not least by ensuring that there was quick consensus that at least for a while, SGP guidelines were to be thrown out of the window.The EU is now at a critical juncture: can it afford to retain and implement existing European fiscal rules on the same basis as pre-COVID?No. The time has come for a root and branch review, no holds barred, regarding how a new set of simplified, sustainable and more relevant rules can devised by which to promote optimal economic and financial governance within the EU as a whole.
Common agricultural policy - support for strategic plans to be drawn up by Member States and financed by the EAGF and by the EAFRD (A8-0200/2019 - Peter Jahr)
The EU’s common agricultural policy remains today a very relevant and much needed tool for European farmers.Since 2003, a third of EU farms have closed down. It is therefore essential that the CAP is adapted to the current socio—economic conditions of all Member States.Such adaptation has to include the needs of the different landscapes within the EU.Unfortunately, both the original Commission proposal on the CAP Strategic Plans, as well as the EP text amending it, fail to do so.Specific to my constituency, Malta, the derogation allowing the allocation of up to EUR 3 million per year of voluntary coupled support remains missing.Without this derogation, Maltese farmers would face massive drops of essential support that could mean the definite collapse of the sector.It can no longer be denied that over the long term, EU membership has resulted in a steady erosion of the Maltese agricultural sector.CAP interventions in Malta should be designed in such a way as to rectify the damage. There is no other way by which they would make sense.On the basis of these concerns, I voted vote against both the Commission Proposal, as well as the final EP plenary report on the CAP Strategic Plans.
General budget of the European Union for the financial year 2021 - all sections (A9-0206/2020 - Pierre Larrouturou, Olivier Chastel)
I voted in favour of the EP Report on the draft general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2021 because it contains some very important elements. Some reflect my own amendments, such as the long-term focus on socioeconomic convergence in the EU budget, and the special consideration towards islands within the Connect Europe Facility. Also essential is the focus on the ongoing situation faced by Europeans due to COVID. Here I totally approve the special attention given to the hard-hit cultural and tourism sectors.Likewise, I totally support the Resolution’s call for the creation of a dedicated budget line to support the political process in Libya, as well as the multilateral approach adopted in this Resolution towards resolving the Belarus problem.Yet, I still must regret the emphasis given to the defence and military areas which ignores the position of neutral Member States like Malta. Colleagues here must not take for granted the support of the EU as a whole to the diversion of investment funds to which we all contribute, away from civilian purposes, and towards defence and military objectives.
Sustainable Europe Investment Plan - How to finance the Green Deal (A9-0198/2020 -Siegfried Mureşan, Paul Tang)
I have voted in favour of this report despite some reservations.Putting sustainability at the heart of investment decisions is essential. In the recent plan for a Capital Markets Union, it was key to ensure that investors would be putting into practice the set of criteria for investments with environmental objectives.On the public side, governments are expected to build resilient and green infrastructures. Currently, the socio—economic impact of the pandemic has raised concerns that decarbonisation strategies could be jeopardised.The fact is that, independently from the current circumstances, not all countries are aligned or start from the same point. This is why providing support to public administrations is essential. Reaffirming a strong commitment to the Green Deal is not enough to deal with the reality of the implementation on the ground.The Just Transition Fund should continue being available to all regions, irrespective of their dependence on fossil fuels. No region should be punished because it could not afford to follow ambitious targets earlier on. One has to be realistic and accompany regions in the green transition, not penalise them.Similarly, the targets for climate spending should be ambitious, feasible. Better to move forward incrementally than setting target spending that risks being impractical and deepening the existing divergences.
Objection pursuant to Rule 112: Lead in gunshot in or around wetlands (B9-0365/2020)
One can only agree to the main argument behind the scope of the Commission proposal to replace lead in ammunition. This will bring a wide range of environmental benefits, not only for our countryside, but also to human health, food safety and food markets.However, the proposal in its current format is fundamentally flawed.To start with, the proposal removes the presumption of innocence and reverses the burden of proof. A person found in possession of lead gunshot within a 100 metre buffer zone to ‘wetland’ must prove that the ammunition is intended to be used elsewhere than in a wetland or buffer zone. This goes too far and should be revised.Furthermore, there is clearly a problem of one-size-fits-all approach with the drafting of the definition of wetlands. Malta’s geodemographic structure would mean that these restrictions would go over the scope and original intent of the proposal.Indeed, such an approach fails to apply the principle of proportionality: the content and form of the action proposed in the Regulation must be in keeping with the aim pursued.For these reasons, I voted in favour of the Resolution calling for the withdrawal and eventual modification of the draft regulation in its current format.
Stocktaking of European elections (A9-0211/2020 - Pascal Durand)
I voted against the Report on Stocktaking of European Elections because it deviates towards an imposition of a Euro-centralist agenda for future elections.In doing this, it is ignoring the democratic political traditions and demographic structures of the different Member States forming the European Union.True, the plenary vote removed some very contestable proposals by the EP’s Committee for Constitutional Affairs, such as calls for transnational lists and a change to the one Commissioner per Member State rule.Still, the resolution retained proposals with which I cannot agree.In particular, it aims at imposing uniform rules on the establishment of political parties, admission rules for candidates and voting rights.Any attempt to ride roughshod over constitutional traditions developed in the course of decades and centuries could be dangerous as it opens up a whole range of manoeuvre for the extreme right to attack and undermine national democratic freedoms.The Resolution also requests a transformation of the Council into a second legislative chamber of the Union.This half-baked proposal neither fits into the requirements of a federal union nor into those of a European Union which claims to promote unity through diversity.
EU Trade Policy Review (B9-0370/2020)
I have voted in favour of this report.The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted supply chains and exposed the EU’s dependency on non-EU sources. The EU trading bloc has been more than put to the test. Tensions with China and the US could be eased given the change of administration but are not likely to go away overnight.In the middle of this uncertainty, the EU cannot only be doing damage control.Greater resilience can merely be built through stronger cooperation with our partners, promoting the euro as the main trading currency. Providing for a full and transparent inclusion of civil society and trade unions, a functioning multilateral trading system, paired with trade agreements, still has proved up to this date to be an effective way not only to ensure multiple sources of manufacturing but also to promote the international role of the euro.On another note, global markets are a source of business for SMEs too. Yet their interest in international trade is not taken sufficiently into account when trade agreements are drawn up. An interesting concrete proposal is to suggest that the European Commission should address the issue of the cost for SMEs to comply with increasingly complex trade legislation.I believe these are essential ways forward.
Implementation of the Dublin III Regulation (A9-0245/2020 - Fabienne Keller)
I have voted in favour of this initiative report for an updated analysis of the Dublin III Regulation.The Commission has acknowledged that this a system that places a disproportionate responsibility on certain Member States while encouraging uncontrolled migratory flows.So have other member states.Yet, shortcomings and inefficient procedures still rule.Although Member States have been encouraged to show solidarity towards frontline States, the burden is still disproportionate on the countries concerned.In this, support by Frontex is not enough.Citizens living at the periphery of the European Union have been affected more than others by the inefficiencies of the regulation.Their authorities have had to manage practically alone the financial and administrative consequences of being a Member State of first arrival.Such difficulties have been worsened by COVID-19.Illegal migration and the growing influx of irregular migration are an integral part of our common European issues.Unless a proper solidarity mechanism, which makes for fair sharing of burdens and responsibility among Member States, including through relocation on the basis of objective criteria, is put in place, we will continue facing a political roadblock.This creates popular resentment and backlashes that can become dangerous.The challenge is not just political.It is also a moral one.
Sustainable corporate governance (A9-0240/2020 - Pascal Durand)
I have voted in favour of this report, as society should be put before shareholders. Nevertheless, I have some doubts concerning the outline of an EU corporate sustainability strategy. A company is defined not only in relation to short-term profit maximisation, but also in relation to environmental and social challenges. Long-term benefits and sustainability risks, as well as opportunities, are entirely part of a company’s strategy. I believe many entrepreneurs out there are already on the go in this respect.The rapporteur has put forward the need for an EU framework ensuring that the members of the administrative, management and supervisory bodies of undertakings have the collective responsibility to define a corporate sustainability strategy. I agree that there should be in this regard a clear definition of a fair salary policy.However, care should be given with respect to the establishment of advisory and monitoring committees that might end up asphyxiating European companies, already busy with heavy schedules of obligations. For them, additional rules and administrative burdens would be detrimental to innovation and organic growth. So, SMEs might be exempted from establishing such a committee.Furthermore, I agree that any EU sustainability strategy should be based on facts, including measurable and scientifically based targets.
New general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2021 (A9-0267/2020 - Pierre Larrouturou, Olivier Chastel)
. – I voted in favour of the report on the new general EU budget for the financial year 2021 because it represents a good and balanced compromise that allocates much needed money in the context of agreed EU policies. In particular, it is very positive that the European Parliament secured an additional EUR 183 million for areas related to transport policy, digital policy, environmental action, jobs, fundamental rights, gender equality, infrastructure and humanitarian aid. Also very positive is the addition of EUR 10.2 million for the neighbourhood and development policy.However, considering the unstable situation on both the eastern and the southern neighbourhoods of the EU, especially Libya, this addition remains relatively small. More is needed in this area in order to both assist our neighbours, as well as to prevent bigger and wider problems related to security and irregular activity directed towards the EU. Finally, it should be noted that this is the first, and hopefully the last, EU annual budget drafted within the context of tackling the COVID-19 pandemic. We all hope for quick results, especially when it comes to funding dedicated to those sectors most affected, such as tourism and SMEs.
Monitoring the application of EU law 2017, 2018 and 2019 (A9-0270/2020 -Sabrina Pignedoli)
. ‒ I voted in favour of this report identifying a wide range of key issues for the application of EU law.I especially welcome the focus on the respect for the principle of subsidiarity in this text and the recognition of the crucial role of national parliaments. It is true that current forms of cooperation could be improved, while regional and local authorities, in subsidiarity control, could be better involved.The report also touches upon important sensitive issues such as solidarity for the relocation of asylum seekers.What I cannot support in this resolution is the clause asking the European Commission to come up with a legislation banning citizenship by investment schemes. My position remains the same: while citizenship/visa programmes can be screened and criticised through appropriate EU anti-money laundering legislation, these programmes form part of the sovereign rights of member-states. They are by no means attached to Union policies.
Implementation of the Common Foreign and Security Policy - annual report 2020 (A9-0266/2020 -David McAllister)
I have abstained on this report which from a certain perspective, could be seen as calling for further militarisation of Europe.I did so out of prudence.The text ignores the neutrality principle that is a constitutional core of EU Member States like Malta. Moreover, I am critical of the Defence Fund and the so-called ‘strategic autonomy’ focusing on the military that are being advocated in it. About a half of the grants allocated under the fund happen to go to the biggest EU arms producers and exporters, which leaves arms suppliers from other EU Member States with limited funding on which to draw.Moreover, the whole process by which the fund has been set up seems flawed. Companies whose leaders were part of the 2016 Group of Personalities advising the European Commission to create a military research programme are largely benefiting from those programmes today. Complaints that this has been happening with a lack of transparency need to be investigated.One can only remain sceptical about a strategic ‘security’ policy that ignores the perspectives of neutral EU Member States that also have no stake in arms production. Yet they are contributing to the fund from which EU ‘security’ programmes are being disbursed to arms producers.
Implementation of the Common Security and Defence Policy - annual report 2020 (A9-0265/2020 - Sven Mikser)
I have abstained on this report which from a certain perspective, could be seen as calling for further militarisation of Europe.I did so out of prudence. The text ignores the neutrality principle that is a constitutional core of EU Member States like Malta. Moreover, I am critical of the Defence Fund and the so-called ‘strategic autonomy’ focusing on the military that are being advocated in it.About a half of the grants allocated under the fund happen to go to the biggest EU arms producers and exporters, which leaves arms suppliers from other EU Member States with limited funding on which to draw. Moreover, the whole process by which the fund has been set up seems flawed.Companies whose leaders were part of the 2016 Group of Personalities advising the European Commission to create a military research programme are largely benefiting from those programmes today. Complaints that this has been happening with a lack of transparency need to be investigated.One can only remain sceptical about a strategic ‘security’ policy that ignores the perspectives of neutral EU Member States that also have no stake in arms production. Yet they are contributing to the fund from which EU ‘security’ programmes are being disbursed to arms producers.
Decent and affordable housing for all (A9-0247/2020 - Kim Van Sparrentak)
I voted in favour of this Resolution because it sends a timely political message at a moment when a growing number of Europeans are facing difficulties in accessing a decent level of housing.The ongoing economic crisis is leaving behind a new poverty on the continent.Now is the moment for European countries to revaluate national housing policies.Governments need to assert political will to enhance and deepen the supply side of the market. Likewise, EU state-aid rules on social housing should be relaxed.The housing emergency has been piling up for decades. Free market laissez-faire in housing policies, plus the 2008 financial crisis and the austerity measures that followed magnified the phenomenon.Already back in 2016, according to reports made during a debate on the topic organised by my office with the European Federation of National Organisations Working with the Homeless, the situation was getting out of hand.That housing affordability is now being included in the Semester process and the Commission’s country specific recommendations system is positive. This should be a mainstay of the EU’s commitment to strengthen the social pillar of EU action.Measures to avoid a repeat of the 2008 social debacle in the housing sector must reflect an ‘all that it takes’ approach.
Reforming the EU list of tax havens (B9-0052/2021)
I voted against this report, while supporting the objectives of drawing up an EU list of tax havens, which I understand to mean jurisdictions that blatantly and knowingly run tax systems that help outside persons, corporations and other financial entities evade or avoid the taxes they should be paying.I fully agree that such approaches should be denounced and combated, which is why I support the increase of public scrutiny in the processes of the Code of Conduct Group that draws up the list. I also welcome the call to strengthen the screening criteria and make the list more effective in an increasingly digitalised economy.However, I disagree that this resolution should seek to override the tax sovereignty that Member States have under the treaties. This runs parallel with another exercise to name and shame certain EU members for being ‘secrecy’ jurisdictions when in fact they are applying EU laws on tax transparency and anti-abuse measures. The idea which the resolution supports for Europe-wide minimum tax rates denies the legitimate right of peripheral countries to set tax rates that compensate for the endowment and situational handicaps that they carry in the single market. I absolutely cannot support the disproportionate proposals for tax harmonisation featured in the resolution.
Establishing the Recovery and Resilience Facility (A9-0214/2020 - Eider Gardiazabal Rubial, Siegfried Mureşan, Dragoș Pîslaru)
I voted in favour of the final agreement on the proposal establishing a Recovery and Resilience Facility because the launch of this facility is a crucial measure by which to counter the ongoing economic crisis.An EU agreement on this public injection of money is an important step forward, especially in contrast to the very different approach adopted during the 2008 financial crisis. It is also very positive that the facility gives attention to economic, social and territorial cohesion, as well as to the Pillar of Social Rights.However, one cannot but criticise the complex operational structure of the Facility, with a long list of targets pre-imposed on the plans national authorities are supposed to autonomously draft. Although well intentioned – as one would think – this one-size-fits-all approach might still in practice create unnecessary constraints on the economies of some of the smaller Member States.Finally, considering the difficulties already faced in the past, the strict linkage of the Facility to the European Semester process is very problematic. Even more so, is the acceptance by those on the progressive side of EU politics to let macroeconomic conditionality be attached to the approval of funding under the Facility.
European Central Bank – annual report 2020 (A9-0002/2021 - Sven Simon)
I have, with some unease, voted in favour of the European Central Bank’s report for 2020.The ECB has been an essential element in the ongoing effort to contain and repair the economic and financial damage caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. For quite a while, till the recovery package was fully negotiated by the EU partners, the ECB seemed like the only actor at EU level with a proactive and concrete strategy able to do so.The launch of the specially designed pandemic emergency purchase programme was indicative of this, serving as an ‘adequate’ early response. However one cannot but feel unease at how the ECB, not for the first time, seems to assume a leading role in strategic firefighting or policy innovation.In the US, Federal Reserve action to counter the pandemic was paralleled almost right from the start by fiscal responses from the US Government side. True ECB action was underpinned by national budgetary initiatives while eurozone rules were relaxed. But it is not the same thing.Surely allowing at EU level, an ‘independent’ technocratic set-up to lead the charge is tantamount to loosening the constraints of democratic control and accountability that the EU needs to maintain, especially during extremely serious crisis situations.
Reducing inequalities with a special focus on in-work poverty (A9-0006/2021 - Özlem Demirel)
. ‒ I voted in favour of the Report on reducing inequalities with a special focus on in-work poverty because it is essential that an EU-level structured debate on this sector takes place. EU policymaking has been for too long side-lining poverty issues, effectively providing them with only a secondary focus in major proposals – if at all.In the meantime, the EU is facing a second major economic crisis in a very short period. This is resulting in the growth of inequalities and poverty, worsened by a high level of precarious and low-quality jobs. Furthermore, the emergence of work undertaken via online platforms is worsening the situation for many entering the labour market. The austerity approach featured in major EU policymaking for the last two decades did not help either.At this point, the report’s proposals aimed at reducing in-work poverty, especially through stronger collective bargaining systems and adequate minimum income and pensions are highly commendable. The EU needs to decisively change its approach if it wants to reverse the growing trend of poverty and an economy based on low-grade jobs that is weakening the quality of life of its citizens.
Markets in financial instruments (A9-0208/2020 - Markus Ferber)
As I have previously expressed, the approach chosen for this proposal is deeply flawed. This is why I voted, together with the Socialists and Democrats Group, against the present agreement.The Capital Markets recovery package aims at mobilising private capital to help companies facing the COVID-19 crisis. In parallel, we have high regulatory standards that were introduced after the deregulation-incurred 2008 crisis. If flexibility has to be introduced, one cannot abandon our prudential rules and the fundamental reforms that led to them.A comprehensive review of the framework is scheduled for the near future. I simply do not see why we should pre-empt it with the excuse of the pandemic without a thorough assessment.At a time of crisis, investor confidence is key, and if we decrease consumer protection, it will be counterproductive to objectives of activating private funds.
EU Association Agreement with Ukraine (A9-0219/2020 - Michael Gahler)
I have abstained on the final vote on this report and refrained from voting on all the separate measures it contained that were brought to a roll call vote.I certainly support, in itself, the Association Agreement that lays the grounds for a meaningful economic relationship with Ukraine, one which respects the country’s sovereignty and serves to encourage the independent development of its institutions flowing from a genuinely free and democratic electoral system.The EU has committed to co-operate on a broad range of areas, and the agreement notably focuses on the modernisation of Ukraine’s energy infrastructure. With all this I fully agree.However, a number of opinions and facts are being alleged in this report regarding the electoral situation and the relationship of Ukraine with its direct neighbour, Russia.I have become increasingly suspicious of all parties involved in the Ukraine situation, their bona fide and the veracity of what they say to each other and to third parties, including the EU and its diverse representatives.At this time, taking sides one way or the other – as the resolution does at many points – just does not make sense, in my view.
InvestEU Programme (A9-0203/2020 - José Manuel Fernandes, Irene Tinagli)
I voted in favour of the InvestEU Programme because through its implementation the EU economy will continue to receive an injection of much needed public investment.Although not any longer the highlight of EU funding packages, the InvestEU programme remains essential in that it should create EUR 400 billion of investment towards major EU priorities such as the digital transition and climate targets.Furthermore, the funding programme should support strategic investments in the area of health – a sector which urgently needs public support after years of dwindling investment and laissez-faire attitude by EU governments.Looking forward, EU institutions should keep the pressure on implementing partners in order to avoid a situation whereby support goes for the easy projects. Rather, the focus here should be on economic areas and regions where investment is most direly needed and where private actors would hesitate to invest.Finally, one hopes that unlike its predecessor, the InvestEU programme will achieve greater and deeper geographical balance in its disbursement of funding. In this regard, it is very positive that my Committee amendments in line with this goal have been maintained in the final text of the agreement.
Administrative cooperation in the field of taxation (A9-0015/2021 - Sven Giegold)
I have voted in favour of this report concerning the 7th Directive on administrative cooperation in the field of taxation.Tax transparency and close cooperation of tax authorities in the EU ensure that the freedom to invest and to operate cross border is done in a fair way. Cooperation among tax authorities has indeed proven to be an adequate method to detect and prevent tax fraud and evasion.Improvements to this directive are also welcome, especially when, as in the present revision, the main aim is to conform to the requirements of an increasingly digitised economy.Digital platforms should be reporting sellers and the income they derive using their platform.However, I strongly disagree with certain provisions of the report that exceed what is really necessary. For instance, I cannot support a harmonised system of penalties across the Union, as such an arrangement would not take into consideration differences between Member States and their taxation systems.Finally, I disagree with the tactic currently being deployed to use measures that should be meant to sustain fair tax competition among open and attractive economies, as a boost for the harmonisation of direct taxation across Europe.
Corporate due diligence and corporate accountability (A9-0018/2021 - Lara Wolters)
This EP own-initiative report on corporate due diligence and accountability paves the way for stronger vigilance on the part of companies, especially multinationals, when questions arise about their responsibility for violations of human, social and environmental rights in their value chain.Preventing companies - in a binding manner - from scrambling tracks and escaping their responsibilities by holding them accountable for all aspects of their value chain should introduce fairness and liability in the globalised production process.Binding EU due diligence rules would oblige companies to identify and address infringements of social, trade union and labour rights. It would also address issues such as deforestation, corruption, bribery, etc. by helping to curb and reverse abuses.Companies covered by future legislation should no longer be able to dust off due diligence obligations onto suppliers.Effective remedies and access to justice should also be made available for victims of violations, including trade unions. Their voice should be given a central role.Yet, measures have to be proportionate and reflect the severity of any abuse and the size of the undertaking.The resolution covers only listed and high-risk profile SMEs, which is reasonable.For all these reasons, I voted in favour.
The Syrian conflict - 10 years after the uprising (B9-0175/2021, B9-0176/2021, B9-0177/2021, B9-0178/2021, B9-0179/2021, B9-0180/2021, B9-0181/2021)
The Syrian conflict has left tens of thousands of victims, displacing huge populations.Meanwhile, sanctions are mainly hurting civilians.The Assad regime commits widespread atrocities.Yet, voting on resolutions such as the present one raises highly political, highly ethical dilemmas.This House is entrenched in the belief that it has the compass by which to judge political behaviour elsewhere.Among its criteria, are mentioned the values of human rights as defined in Western Europe, which I share.However, this House interprets them in political mode, even if we pretend differently.Double standards prevail when votes are decided.Slanted information snippets get slit into resolutions.On Russia, the Crimea and Navalny; on China, the Uighurs and Hong Kong; on Turkey and the Kurds; on Venezuela; on Myanmar; on the Catalan representation in this House, the arising issues demand a principled, non-eurocentric and consistent approach.We do not have it, even as admittedly, more reprehensible developments occur in situations outside our parliamentary competence, upon which we seek to stand in judgement.In the circumstances, in order to remain coherent with the values I believe in, I can only abstain or stay absent on resolutions like this one on Syria, even though the evidence of reprehensible state action remains very strong.
Application of Regulation (EC) 2020/2092, the Rule of Law conditionality mechanism (B9-0206/2021, B9-0207/2021, B9-0208/2021)
I voted in favour of this Resolution on the Rule of Law mechanism not without hesitation.Obviously, I agree with the principle that the respect of fundamental rights should be safeguarded in all the EU’s acts and policies. Procedures to implement this objective must be transparent and objective if they are to be valid and meaningful. They must be free of all subjective and partisan political manoeuvring, and applicable independently of the EU’s ‘executive’ and ‘legislative’ branches.Unfortunately, the record has been patchy at best when rule of law considerations have come up for scrutiny by EU institutions, not least this Parliament. Consistently, political criteria served to trump fact-based approaches. All sides have played this game.However, the text we have voted upon limits such effects. It puts clear boundaries to the field of application of rule of law checks. This is not ideal but in the circumstances, it promotes a meaningful focus for how rule of law considerations can be developed.So this resolution could be a step forward in the process by which EU mechanisms are introduced that would truly and legitimately safeguard the rule of law in the Union. At present, despite the rhetoric, such mechanisms do not exist.
Guidelines for the 2022 Budget - Section III (A9-0046/2021 - Karlo Ressler)
I voted in favour of the Resolution on the Guidelines for the 2022 Budget because, on the whole, the right priorities are set forward for next year’s budget.In particular, I appreciate the inclusion of my amendments giving due attention to island regions in the context of EU transport and energy policy and the EU’s approach to demographic issues.On the same note, the call is well-taken for a structured recovery strategy for young Europeans, with a focus on those entering the labour market, which has been included in the final text.However, on migration I admit that the mixed barrage of messages carried by the resolution is confusing.I am glad that my request for more funding for coordinating irregular migration with transit countries and countries of origin has been incorporated in the budgetary guidelines for 2022.By contrast, the Report’s approach to border control and the situation of EU border countries is poorly focused. Irregular migration is a pan-European issue and cannot be treated simply as a border concern.The real focus should be on the social and economic factors that constitute the root of forced migration, and not a border-control emphasis that is often anything but humane.
Multiannual management plan for bluefin tuna in the eastern Atlantic and the Mediterranean (A9-0149/2020 - Giuseppe Ferrandino)
. – Tuna fishing in the Mediterranean forms part of a strong tradition for many island and coastal communities in the region. Fishing communities here have long been associated with the traditional way of tuna fishing which is getting swept away by quasi-factory methods of harvesting tuna. Hence, it is very positive that Parliament’s list of amendments includes a strong message towards the protection of small-scale fishermen and their communities. For this reason, I supported these same amendments with my vote.In the overall context of how tuna is fished and marketed worldwide, global players have moved in to satisfy the ever-increasing demand for the food product by promoting factory farming approaches. The proposal in the new regulation to shift the responsibility from flag states of catching vessels to farming states would put at great disadvantage countries where tuna farming is strong, especially in an international context. For the latter reason, I cannot support the finalised text as proposed in today’s vote. One hopes that the upcoming negotiations can lead to both a high level of protection for small-scale fishermen as proposed by this House, as well as a reversal for the rules on farming quotas.
Digital taxation: OECD negotiations, tax residency of digital companies and a possible European Digital Tax (A9-0103/2021 - Andreas Schwab, Martin Hlaváček)
I have voted against this report.Under the guise of laying out plans for a fairer tax system fit for the digital age, a minimum corporate tax rate is being introduced.International taxation has been changing a lot over the past years. Yes, it needs to adapt to digitalisation. Taxation systems should reflect, I agree, the fact that as a result of digitalisation, businesses and consumers interact differently. Value is being more often created in digital environments.What I disagree with is the method currently foreseen to implement digital taxation. Small countries with small markets would be put at a great disadvantage with regard to how taxing rights would be established. I will continue to make the case for tax competition at EU level and at global level. Peripheral economies need and will continue to need to attract foreign direct investment thanks to an appealing tax system. Not everyone is out there to cheat, but rather to compete for investments in a legitimate way. I also strongly disagree that if progress at international level stalls, the EU should go alone.The international tax environment that faces our EU businesses present on a global scale is already complex enough. It would be inappropriate to add another level of uncoordinated requirements.
Assassination of Daphne Caruana Galizia and the rule of law in Malta (B9-0219/2021)
This resolution presents a distorted and unjust picture of the Maltese political situation.This has been done for political partisan reasons, relative to the situation in this Parliament and Malta.Clearly, political groups here find it convenient to shoot on rule of law issues at a member party of the S&D, which has been throughout at the forefront of the fight to enhance such issues, mostly to the disadvantage of parties within their membership.Maltese members of the EPP consider it useful to promote such a resolution in order, they believe, to bolster their own party’s anaemic standing within Malta.Consequently, this resolution ignores or belittles the big advances that the current Maltese Labour administration led by Robert Abela has made to strengthen the country’s institutions.It treats similarly the huge progress made in tracking down and bringing to full justice the actors responsible for the heinous murder of Daphne Caruana Galizia.Moreover the resolution indulges in tendentious political argumentation and speculation based on evidence still being given in courts of law, undermining thereby respect for the very rule of law it proclaims, as well as the credibility of the process by which the rule of law in the EU should be safeguarded.I have therefore voted against.
Russia, the case of Alexei Navalny, military build-up on Ukraine's border and Russian attack in the Czech Republic (B9-0235/2021, RC-B9-0236/2021, B9-0236/2021, B9-0237/2021, B9-0250/2021, B9-0251/2021, B9-0252/2021)
This resolution dealing with Russian policy towards internal opposition as well as its approach to Western neighbours is the latest of a long series of resolutions by this House denouncing that country.I agree to condemn without any reservations the treatment being given across the line to opposition leader Alexei Navalny.As a full member of the Council of Europe, Russia is failing to honour its commitment under the Council’s charter.I also agree that the EU’s relationship with Russia should be based on a mutual respect of international law, human rights standards and fundamental freedoms, with the aim of strengthening peace and security in the region.However, the resolution repeats and amplifies accusations that are part of a long exchange game between Russia and its critics.The objectivity and transparency of these claims is doubtful.Furthermore, on many levels, the Parliament’s position as described in the resolution contains rhetoric that can only lead to a further escalation of hostile sentiments between the two sides.Clearly, the end point to such escalation could be war, for which the blame would not be attached to only one side.The way forward should be less confrontational and more objective.Therefore, I abstained on this resolution.
2019-2020 Reports on Turkey (A9-0153/2021 - Nacho Sánchez Amor)
Sadly, the EU’s relations with Turkey have become highly problematic during the last few years.I am one of those who believe that a main reason for the problems is not solely confined to the Turkish administration, but extends to the EU itself, for first agreeing to the option of Turkish membership, then dilly-dallying over it, practically in bad faith.The report here voted rightly tackles issues related with the enlargement process of the country, and on which, the EU and Turkey are failing to converge.It is also correct in condemning the unacceptable strong-arm tactics against Greece and Cyprus.On the other hand, the report fails to give a tangible positive way forward for EU-Turkey relations. Instead, while the Resolution asks Turkey to follow the EU’s foreign and security policy, and while it wants Turkey to keep absorbing the bulk of migration flows from the Middle East, it wants to penalise the country for not following major EU lines in other areas.This approach can only fail to achieve whatever it is seeking to achieve, and can indeed be faulted for incoherence.Moreover, as is often the case in such reports, the conclusions clearly reflect a one-sided judgment.Therefore, I abstained on the final vote.
The EU's Cybersecurity Strategy for the Digital Decade (B9-0305/2021)
I have voted for this resolution which highlights the urgent need to face squarely all digital and cybersecurity challenges in a context where the EU lags behind China and the US.Cyber-security readiness and awareness must remain key.The resolution emphasizes that the workforce gap has widened by 20% since 2015. Traditional recruitment channels are not meeting the demand for digital-savvy personnel.Indeed, education and training are essential to ensure SMEs and individuals are digitally skilful.With widespread digital interconnection, weaknesses in one sector will negatively impact on others.Considering cyber-security horizontally is a welcome perspective.It ensures coherence and interoperability across all sectors.Such a concern is at the heart of a current draft regulation I am working on, the Digital Operational Resilience Regulation for financial services (‘DORA’).This sector-specific regulation complies too with the principle of digital sovereignty, as cloud services would need to have a legal presence in the EU, to ensure EU law is enforced.The EU’s strategic resilience will depend on our capacity to frame, perhaps reduce, dependency on non-EU technologies.If the EU is at present, no leader in the field, it should still offer an ultra-secure and innovation-friendly environment to citizens and businesses alike.
Rule of Law situation in the European Union and the application of the conditionality regulation 2020/2092 (B9-0317/2021, B9-0319/2021, B9-0320/2021)
The procedure leading to the application of EU Regulation 2020/2092 on a general regime of conditionality for the protection of the Union budget should be one based on a technocratic, transparent and independent investigation, focusing on the flaws in the rule of law in a Member State according to a well-thought out methodology.Political statements that attempt to amplify or screen the real situation on the ground should not influence this procedure.The same Regulation states that when the Commission is assessing the conditions of a country, it shall take into account relevant information including decisions, conclusions and recommendations of Union institutions.However, it is unacceptable that a political entity such as the European Parliament, with many of its Members having a direct conflict of interest in the case, attempts to impose its will on the investigative entity - the European Commission.Through this resolution, the Parliament is in my view overstepping its role, with the procedure followed being highly inappropriate and detrimental to European values.Having said all of this, in no way can I condone or support most of the measures that are bringing the mentioned Member States under scrutiny.For these reasons, I abstained on the final vote.
European Parliament’s Scrutiny on the ongoing assessment by the Commission and the Council of the national recovery and resilience plans (RC-B9-0331/2021, B9-0331/2021, B9-0333/2021, B9-0334/2021, B9-0335/2021, B9-0337/2021, B9-0338/2021)
I voted in favour of this resolution because I agree with its general thrust: that the EP has the right to scrutinise the progress on the ongoing assessment by the Commission and the Council of the national recovery and resilience plans.However, this vote in favour is conditioned by the following reservations:Firstly, the European Parliament’s role is to scrutinise the Commission’s performance in defending the pre-agreed targets, complex as they are, as adopted through the Regulation. This cannot translate into direct interference by this house in the design of the single Member States’ national plans.Secondly, the Resolution contains a strong reference to the European Semester’s Country Specific Recommendations. Recommendations tied to macroeconomic conditionality and relevant structural measures are already controversial in their own right.The obstinate resolve of various political factions to impose such recommendations over the social dimension that these national plans should have is reprehensible, especially in a moment where both society and economy are attempting to exit the biggest crisis in Europe since World War II.
Public sector loan facility under the Just Transition Mechanism (A9-0195/2020 - Johan Van Overtveldt, Henrike Hahn)
I voted in favour of the final agreement on the Public Sector Loan Facility because it is an essential pillar of the Just Transition Mechanism. With this Regulation, public authorities will have an added instrument with which they can invest money in a socially-just transition towards a climate neutral economy.The facility has a strong social dimension aimed at tackling the potential social inequalities that will result from this transition. For vital though it is, the transition is bound to create new inequalities. Policymakers must therefore do their best to guarantee that really, nobody is left behind.No European region, no economic sector, and most importantly, no individual should be left alone to carry the burdens that will develop. Moreover, the funnelling of money should not only go towards those that are quickest at eyeing an investment opportunity arising from the transition. Rather, those responsible for disbursing the funding need to dig well in order to target support towards the weaker sections of society, even those who are unaware of their changing circumstances due to the transition, so that they too can benefit from the new emerging economy.
Sexual and reproductive health and rights in the EU, in the frame of women’s health (A9-0169/2021 - Predrag Fred Matić)
I support the principles this resolution upholds.Truly, an open debate on abortion is needed.Projecting people who are in favour of abortion as heartless or amoral makes no sense and is hypocritical.The inalienable rights of all women to bodily integrity and autonomous decision-making should be universally recognised.From such a point of departure, the complex dilemmas that abortion issues raise should be resolved by communities following an open and tolerant debate.The debate should respect prevalent cultural and behavioural norms but not let them override inalienable rights.It should be carried out on a national basis.The EU should have little to no say in such matters.Which is why I abstained on the final vote.Malta implemented the most radical changes in favour of LGTBQ rights without any EU pressures.So let it be with abortion.Meanwhile, I welcome other elements in the text, such as – the call for a universal access to SRHR and for an enhanced use of emerging technologies for treatments and diagnostic methods; the stress on the provision of a comprehensive range of health services, including physical and mental health; and the call for Member States to make available toxin-free health products for women.
Protection of the EU’s financial interests - combatting fraud - annual report 2019 (A9-0209/2021 - Caterina Chinnici)
I fully support the principles laid out in this report, according to which Member States and Commission have a shared responsibility to protect the EU financial interests.Fighting corruption can only be achieved through transparency and effective anti-fraud mechanisms, especially when it comes to infrastructure works financed by EU funds.However I strongly oppose the manner by which parts of this resolution have been crafted.In an attempt to shame it, Malta is named as having failed to appoint its prosecutor to the EPPO.The drafters knew that the delay in naming a prosecutor was due to the inability to find a suitable appointee following the timely launch of a call for applications, which was then rerun.They knew that the problem had been finally solved.Trying to project this as a deliberate act that needed to be named and shamed is unworthy of this institution and I want to register my protest against such a distorted way of conducting the business of this House.For this reason, I would have voted against the resolution.Only, this could again have been wilfully mis-interpreted as a vote against the principles that must be followed to protect the EU’s financial interests.So, I have abstained.
The creation of guidelines for the application of the general regime of conditionality for the protection of the Union budget (A9-0226/2021 - Eider Gardiazabal Rubial, Petri Sarvamaa)
I voted for this report because I agree that the EP needs to be informed on how the general regime of conditionality to protect the Union budget is functioning.That process must be applied without unnecessary delays.However, the following reservations hold:The European Parliament debate on the rule of law in Member States has been transformed into a political ping-pong between the major political groups.This is a disquieting development that has been eroding the credibility of the Parliament among citizens of the countries under critical scrutiny – but not only them.The adoption of new rules creating a clear conditionality related to the EU budget should – one hopes – make for a serious and objective if circumscribed debate in rule of law terms regarding conditionality.Meanwhile, the European Commission’s role in the process of investigating conditionality is increasingly being questioned.Is it the right instrument to accomplish this task? Doubtful.For its part, the European Parliament cannot adopt the position of judge, jury and prosecution on conditionality cases, or make it seem like it covets such a triple role.Should the EP seem like it is overstepping its fundamental legislative role, limited as it is, the damage inflicted on the defence of European law, rights and values could be irreversible.
Breaches of EU law and of the rights of LGBTIQ citizens in Hungary as a result of the adopted legal changes in the Hungarian Parliament (B9-0412/2021, B9-0413/2021)
I have voted in favour of this resolution. The issues at stake go beyond considerations and legal procedures related to Article 7, which have in the past been subject to partisan manipulation. They relate to human rights values as enshrined in Article 2 of the TFEU. About these, there can be no compromise. One cannot tolerate that in the EU there is public discrimination and hate speech against LGBTI citizens and other minorities.It is even more unacceptable that such discrimination and injustice is being set into a national Law, as in Hungary, one which blatantly restricts the rights and freedoms of LGBTIQ persons, as well as children’s rights.Under the guise of ‘protecting children from information advocating for a denial of traditional family values’, a government in the European Union is discriminating between citizens on the basis of their sexual orientation.The new law, purposely vague, will create a context in which LGBTIQ people will feel threatened, unprotected and where homophobic attacks could be allowed.This way, fascism beckons. An elected democratic government respectful of European values should equally protect each citizen without any discrimination.The new legislation in Hungary is disgraceful.
Draft amending budget No 1/2021: Brexit Adjustment Reserve (A9-0263/2021 - Pierre Larrouturou)
I voted in favour of this draft amending budget, because its adoption is essential to allow the mobilisation of the funds allocated to the Brexit Adjustment Reserve.This special instrument, proposed outside the planned EU multiannual financial framework, aims to counter the adverse consequences of Brexit for the economies of the Member States.The social, economic and political impact of Brexit has been somehow overlooked over the last two years due to other major events, namely those connected to the COVID-19 crisis. However, Brexit is still having a huge socio-economic impact on businesses and citizens alike, especially those most linked to the United Kingdom’s economy.I come from a country which has been directly experiencing the resulting consequences. The economy has been greatly impacted by Brexit, since the value of all imports from the UK is equivalent to 27.3% of Malta’s GDP, the highest for any Member State.Therefore, I strongly support the general call for a quick European response to those regions and businesses suffering most.Finally, the speed with which this agreement has been reached is commendable. One surely hopes for the same straightforward approach when it comes to other very essential instruments.
A new EU-China strategy (A9-0252/2021 - Hilde Vautmans)
I have voted against this report for several reasons.Mainly because it endorses new initiatives with Taiwan that undermine the ‘one China one nation’ notion, which China rightly considers as the defining principle of its existence.But also because the report is imbued with a euro-centrism that at different levels makes its analysis of complex realities one-sided to the point of naivety, thus creating the basis for mistrust and frustration towards China.The report does emphasise certain key topics, like the importance of cooperating with China to prevent Afghanistan from becoming a new terrorist base and the need for dialogue and cooperation.Indeed, it is on the basis of openness and transparency that issues which cause unease within the EU should be raised – like the Belt and Road Initiative, concerns about forced labour and the competition over access to microchips.Such a process should allow for both sides – again in full transparency – to express in all frankness reservations about any aspects of the policies they follow.For instance, in my case I consider the policies presently being followed by China on the ground in Hong Kong and Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region as misguided and wrong.
Implementation of EU requirements for exchange of tax information (A9-0193/2021 - Sven Giegold)
I have abstained on this report although I am supportive of the directives on administrative cooperation for exchange of tax information.I am in favour of widening the scope of the directives to cover income and assets, since with their exclusion, circumventing taxes is facilitated.However, this change is being powered by a paradigm shift on taxation which, initiated over recent years, ignores part of the issues at stake.The final aim is to override the tax sovereignty of Member States. I cannot agree with this.Moreover, the approach is broad-brush and drastic. So another aim is to eradicate so-called aggressive tax planning without deigning to provide a sound legal definition for it.This has the dubious effect of allowing loose attacks on legal tax practices, to render them arbitrarily illegitimate.At the same time, tax competition is also to be considered outside the pale.Yet peripheral regions and small countries need to maintain tax differentials with larger, more sophisticated ones if they are to attract businesses and investments in a continental free market economy.Such considerations plus others are not being taken into sufficient account when the future of what we want to be ‘fair’ tax systems is being debated, which is unacceptable.
Situation in Afghanistan (RC-B9-0455/2021, B9-0433/2021, B9-0453/2021, B9-0455/2021, B9-0458/2021, B9-0459/2021, B9-0460/2021, B9-0462/2021)
Many perceive the US withdrawal from Afghanistan as a second Vietnam due to the similar circumstances and outcomes.Understandably, therefore, policymakers are looking at the Western rapprochement to Vietnam, as the model for post-war Afghanistan: a structured policy for the refugees wanting to leave Afghanistan, money aid with imposed conditionality, and a relationship based on diplomacy and trade.At this point, the success of such approach will much depend on the Taliban willingness to engage. Western parties should also be aware, however, that while Vietnamese communists were always inspired by progress, emancipation, and autonomy of their people, the current Afghan leadership seems locked into conservatism and religious dogmatism.It is therefore correct that this Parliament resolution condemns the ongoing persecutions in Afghanistan, the repression of women and minorities in the country.It is also right to request a continental approach to the refugee crisis arising from the US departure from the country.However, I totally disagree with the tactic adopted in the Resolution to use this situation as another opportunity to push for a European Defence Union, or even worse, to remove unanimity in favour of qualified majority voting in the field of EU foreign affairs policy.
Rebuilding fish stocks in the Mediterranean (A9-0225/2021 - Raffaele Stancanelli)
. ‒ I voted in favour of this report because there is an urgent need to work towards a process of rebuilding fish stocks in the Mediterranean region. Depletion of some stocks has been reaching irreversible levels. Biodiversity is under serious threat. Immediate corrective action is needed. But also, we should ensure the survival of the fisheries sector. Yet, it should be clear which fisheries sector we are targeting as a priority.It is inconceivable that measures supposedly designed to protect and rebuild fish stocks cater in the first place to the requirements of industrial fishing concerns which, in reality, have been the main culprits in decimation of fish stocks. Meanwhile, they marginalised fishermen operating ‘artisanally’, as micro family enterprises, according to a traditional economic model. Yet around such a model whole communities have lived and still live as communities.In the process of seeking to preserve fish stocks, Mediterranean traditional fishermen who have throughout the centuries constituted a vital pillar of the social fabric in the region, must be equally protected. It is in line with this criterion that I will define my position in any future vote that comes before us on this issue.
The future of EU-US relations (A9-0250/2021 - Tonino Picula)
I have voted in favour of this report.Nevertheless, I here register my disagreement with certain provisions of the text.In pursuing and deepening transatlantic cooperation, I do not share the belief that the EU need be involved in defence matters or be committed to a defence union.Moreover, tax competences in European relations with the US should, in my view, remain subject to national competences.Therefore, my vote in favour of the report, which is a very good one, should not be taken to mean that I support the references and chapters which refer to defence and tax issues.
Implementation report on the EU Trust Funds and the Facility for Refugees in Turkey (A9-0255/2021 - Öilan Zver, György Hölvényi, Janusz Lewandowski)
I voted in favour of the implementation report on the EU Trust Funds and the Facility for Refugees in Turkey. I agree that these tools of EU external policy are essential to promote the EU’s soft power with its partner countries in ways that are mutually beneficial, meaningful and transparent.Regarding the facility for refugees in Turkey, it remains vital to directly assist Turkey in managing its migration crisis. For it is also a European migration crisis.The numbers of refugees and asylum seekers in Turkey are massive. In 2020 they amounted to almost 4 million individuals, mainly from Syria but also Iran, Iraq and Afghanistan.The short-term shifting Europe’s migration problem to our neighbours is welcomed by many but does not offer a permanent solution.Countries of origin, especially in Africa, need to be further assisted to develop and create substantive job openings.The EU trust fund for Africa should be supported and strengthened. But it must be backed by trade agreements that do not insist on reciprocity based on a purely free trade logic.A Marshall Plan for Africa, where public agencies take full charge and do not simply delegate initiative to the private sector, remains the solution which makes best sense.
General budget of the European Union for the financial year 2022 - all sections (A9-0281/2021 - Karlo Ressler, Damian Boeselager)
Next year’s annual budget for the European Union is being drafted with the knowledge that Europe needs crucial and well targeted funding to exit two years of sanitary and economic crisis.The EP’s position is on most points commendable.We’re asking for more money to be directed towards Europe’s social recovery with a focus on youth, employment, education, support for SMEs and funding for young farmers.I also fully agree that more funds are further dedicated to research on health as well as areas crucial for the development of our economy.However, I would like to repeat my reservations regarding EU funding directed to military and defence spending.I appreciate that the Parliament, in this Resolution on next year’s budget, included my amendment that asks for the status of neutrality of some of the Member States to be taken into consideration when framing the EU’s common security and defence policy.I truly hope that structured exceptions for the involvement of these countries can be created, be it from an operational aspect, or from the funding perspective.In the absence of such a pillar, my only option is to vote against the EU’s expansion into the defence sector.
Pandora Papers: implications on the efforts to combat money laundering, tax evasion and avoidance (B9-0527/2021, RC B9-0530/2021, B9-0530/2021, B9-0531/202)
I firmly support the objective of fostering transparency and integrity in the public sphere, which is a principal aim of this resolution.However, I had to abstain on the vote because another principle the resolution seeks to promote is the introduction of a minimum tax rate and the end of unanimity (within the EU) regarding tax matters. I disagree with this, as I believe in a healthy and transparent framework for tax competition that takes account of each country’s specific endowments.Nevertheless, the text offers a comprehensive assessment of the Pandora Papers and their political implications. Leaks of the Pandora type have become an effective tool to reveal chicanery at the highest levels of society on a vast scale. They have helped trigger political action. Over the past decade, the EU has adopted a wide-ranging series of legislative reforms to combat tax avoidance and evasion, as well as money laundering.There is still an ever-increasing need for better cooperation between law-enforcement authorities in the EU, and proactive initiatives are needed on an ongoing basis since tax-evaders will continue to find new ways of shielding assets.Europe cannot keep relying on periodic leaks (whose origin may be dubious) to keep them in check.
Situation in Tunisia (RC-B9-0523/2021, B9-0523/2021, B9-0524/2021, B9-0525/2021, B9-0526/2021, B9-0528/2021, B9-0529/2021)
. ‒ I abstained on the vote for this resolution.As happened on other occasions when this Parliament voted on the affairs of sovereign states – whether EU members or not – I am uncomfortable with the processes that deliver such resolutions. I very much doubt whether it is legitimate for us here to pronounce ourselves on other peoples’ affairs especially because our internal processes themselves, as they should be, are eminently political.Tunisia is a country which deserves the full support of European nations. It is facing enormous difficulties and challenges, not all of which have been developed in-house.Europe has rejoiced that in past years, the people of Tunisia embraced democratic forms of governance. But democratic progress has hardly anywhere been smooth and continuous, as our Tunisian friends have told us. Democratic institutions need time to develop and they will be subject to discontinuities.This being said, I share the concerns expressed about the concentration of powers, and the need to preserve the parliamentary framework in a context of institutional stability and the respect of fundamental rights and freedoms.Concerns arising from this at present, had best be expressed addressed privately to the Tunisian authorities, and away from any interference in Tunisian national affairs, whether from authoritarian or other sources.
Strengthening democracy, media freedom and pluralism in the EU (A9-0292/2021 - Tiemo Wölken, Roberta Metsola)
I have voted in favour of this report. The anti-SLAPP (strategic lawsuit against public participation) initiative at the level of the European Union constitutes a reasonably good step forward in the protection of journalists from abusive legal action across borders meant to chill their investigative work.The report, however, lacks a straightforward and up-to-date assessment of the journalistic milieu as well as of the nature of present-day journalism, not least with the interfaces between media houses and centres of elite influence and power in the political, economic, social and moral spheres.Though journalists exist in the mould of Woodward and Bernstein, not all of them are so.Journalism – or what is dressed up as journalism – can serve, as the Sebastian Kurz scandal revealed, to project misinformation and manipulate opinion.We remain without a proper compass for what is legitimate for journalists, lobbyists, publicists and issue campaigners to carry out, and what is not.Perhaps as a result, we also lack guidance on what redress should be permitted to people, groups or interests who genuinely feel that they are being wrongly or maliciously targeted by misinformation.In a world where the massive manipulation of issues is no longer a monopoly of state security apparata, such questions cannot be ignored.
Statute and funding of European political parties and foundations (A9-0294/2021 - Charles Goerens, Rainer Wieland)
I voted in favour of the report on the statute and funding of European political parties and European political foundations, themselves a relatively new phenomenon.The proposals being advanced to create a stronger and clearer framework for their status and funding (including associated political foundations) make sense.In particular, one cannot but endorse statements requesting that European political parties observe democratic and transparent procedures when selecting party leaders, candidates for elections, as well as when adopting internal rules and political programmes.However, I agree only with caution with the proposal to amend current rules to clarify that respect for EU fundamental values should apply to both European political parties and their member parties.Such a provision has to be interpreted with great care since it could be applied in a partisan manner by prevailing political majorities on contentious issues like migration, human rights, abortion, secession from national entities, and religious beliefs and customs.Finally, I have reservations regarding the point that the financing rules of European political parties and their foundations should be made compatible with pan-European constituency campaigns at the European elections.I do not agree with the introduction of such campaigns and anyway believe that this matter falls outside the scope of this resolution.
The first anniversary of the de facto abortion ban in Poland (B9-0543/2021, B9-0544/2021)
Regarding the present resolution for which I have voted in favour, my reasoning and motivation followed exactly from what I set out as my explanation of vote (though it could not be tabled for procedural reasons) on the resolution in a previous plenary about changes to the abortion laws in Texas, which reads as follows:‘On this resolution I have throughout voted with the S&D Group to which I belong, even though on abortion issues I am not completely aligned with the Group’s views and have voted differently in most instances. However, though I still hold nuanced views on this highly moral subject, I felt I needed to register my total abhorrence at what has happened in Texas: an issue that is most delicate has been instrumentalised for partisan reasons at the highest level of the state, trampling on the long, legally established rights of women, and thereby putting totally unfair burdens on lower-income and socially disadvantaged women and families. Where abortion has been acquired as a fully legal right in a democracy it cannot and should not be arbitrarily revoked.’
Draft amending budget No 5/2021: Humanitarian support to refugees in Turkey (A9-0327/2021 - Pierre Larrouturou)
The migration situation in Turkey continues to present an ongoing flashpoint.It is clear that Turkey cannot handle this crisis alone and needs further financial assistance.It is also clear that Europe’s interest is to assist Turkey in fulfilling its responsibilities towards asylum seekers under international law.The draft amending the EU budget for 2021 aims at bolstering the needed funding with the aim of continuing to deliver support to the most vulnerable refugees in Turkey.Currently, over 3.5 million Syrian refugees are present there.So, I fully agree with the European Parliament’s position to approve the amending budget, while stating that the budgetary ceiling for funding to the EU’s neighbourhood and the world appears to be too low to respond to major crisis needs.Further money is needed, especially as the ongoing refugee crisis in Turkey could easily morph, as in the past, into a major internal EU problem.This amending budget is a positive move.However we still need a comprehensive agreement for future budgets, covering increased European Union funding for the continued support to refugees in Turkey and the wider region.
Digital Markets Act (A9-0332/2021 - Andreas Schwab)
. ‒ I voted in favour of the Parliament’s first reading on the Digital Markets Act because I believe that the proposed actions point towards the right direction in order to ensure a fairer and a more open EU digital market.The present situation whereby a few companies have total control of the online market is dangerous and unacceptable.We have been led to believe that from many aspects, our economy is reaping the fruit of a digital market that thrives within an open market system. Yet, small businesses and consumers alike find themselves trapped inside a quasi-monopolistic scenario.More often than not, one or two gatekeepers set the rules of the game, dictate who enters and who exits the market, and what is on offer on this same market.Therefore, I support the move towards the opening of the market through interoperability as well as a structured system, intended to ensure a level playing field that keeps in check those actors that control the competitive aspect of the digital market in the EU.From a competition aspect, these would be positive initial steps. Now a debate on the possibility and feasibility of breaking up these monopolies should also take place.
Challenges and prospects for multilateral weapons of mass destruction arms control and disarmament regimes (A9-0324/2021 - Sven Mikser)
I voted in favour of this report essentially because it puts the issues of nuclear non-proliferation on the EU agenda. Nuclear weapons states – one is an EU member – committed themselves 53 years ago to convince non-nuclear countries to accept the Non-Proliferation Treaty. Meanwhile, they continued to modernise and develop new armament systems.There persists today a long-held sense of frustration at the lack of progress towards nuclear disarmament, which in part is attributable to the fundamental imbalance in the non-proliferation architecture. I welcome nevertheless the fact that this report relies on the principle of a meaningful control over weapon systems, no matter who owns them, as well as on the full respect of international humanitarian norms. It also accepts that the future development of nuclear energy should be restricted to peaceful purposes, though some member states would ban it.The upcoming French presidency of the Council will push for a military and defence union. Apart from other problems, this risks locking the EU into blindly following the minority interests of a few nuclear weapons states, instead of becoming a global mover for peace. I therefore regret the too-cautious position adopted in the report regarding the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, which is key to strengthening the NPT.
Assessment of the implementation of Article 50 TEU (A9-0357/2021 - Danuta Maria Hübner)
This report seeks to assess the implementation of the hotly debated Article 50 of the Treaty of the European Union, especially in the context of the UK’s withdrawal from the Union.The problem – as frequently happens with such reports – is that this one lacks the objectivity needed to understand events in the round, and not just from the perspective that happens to be dominant for a given time.Indeed, the Report shies away from making a clear and transparent self-audit on where things went wrong from the European Union side of things in the Brexit process.The needed critical focus on providing solutions aimed at fine-tuning the application of Article 50, allowing us to learn from past mistakes, is lacking.Finally, the report again regurgitates elements of the sterile blame game ongoing since the UK announced its withdrawal from the Union.So, the resolution laments that UK citizens never really had a clear picture of the relationship their country would have once the country left the EU. As if sadly, EU players do not indulge in a similar game when promoting campaigns they support.These fundamental flaws undermine the credibility of the report and I have abstained in the vote on it.
Implementation of the Sixth VAT Directive (A9-0355/2021 - Olivier Chastel)
Explanation of votes - Report on the implementation of the Sixth VAT Directive: what is the missing part to reduce the EU VAT gap?This report reflects on how to address the VAT gap: the difference between the amount of VAT actually collected and the total due to be paid.The gap arises because the still transitional VAT system is complex and patchy. Frauds – some systemic, like the cross-border carousel fraud – also result.The objective is here reaffirmed for a future VAT system that provides clarity for businesses and is fraud-proof. Solutions like efficient exchange of information mechanisms, adequate means for national authorities, high standards of VAT reporting are identified.Special attention is paid to SMEs, overburdened with compliance costs if they want to sell across the EU. A uniform VAT system could iron this out. Digitalisation can help as well cut costs and if it imposes a burden in the short term, SMEs should be financially supported in acquiring the latest technology and expertise.Finally, this report highlights environmental and social aspects. Member States should continue to implement reduced VAT rates with the specific aim of supporting lower-income households. Introduced gradually, VAT can also promote environmentally friendly consumption: hence the call for the phasing out of all zero-rates and reduced rates on harmful environmental goods and services in order to achieve the EU’s climate objectives.I voted for this report.
Foreign interference in all democratic processes in the EU (A9-0022/2022 - Sandra Kalniete)
. ‒ I voted in favour of this report. Raising awareness about the reality of foreign interference is essential. Transparently financed and independent news media are vital for media freedom and pluralism, helping to counter ongoing malicious attacks that could ultimately disturb democratic processes and elections. Media tools created by foreign donors have created concerns in this regard, especially as, in parallel, the incidence of cyberattacks attributable to hostile state actors have increased in recent years. Social media have also disrupted information sharing, often encouraging polarised opinions at the expense of fact-based information.This text presents concrete solutions: for the EU and Member States to boost resources for think tanks and fact-checkers, the creation of a permanent EU news media fund in the 2021-2027 Creative Europe programme, and an EU-wide database on incidents of foreign interference.All measures are commendable. Missing though is a self-critical approach that would take into account what the EU, its Member States, their secret services, plus auxiliary organisations also do to participate and / or intervene in the affairs of non-Member States and Member States. We need an objective framework within which to judge what is legitimate and what is not in this increasingly important domain of international relations.
Citizenship and residence by investment schemes (A9-0028/2022 - Sophia in 't Veld)
I voted against this report.Granting citizenship is part of the sovereign rights of Member States and an exclusive national competence.Citizenship by investment (CBI) and residency by investment (RBI), because they are formalised, have due diligence in their implementation, as opposed to the informal and arbitrary forms of conceding citizenship that currently operate in most Member States. If one wants to argue for restrictions on how citizenship is granted, then it should be done for all schemes and for all states.Indeed, this report claims it wants to defend EU values when condemning investment for citizenship schemes. But it also foresees the establishment of ‘a CBI and RBI adjustment mechanism’, where part of the proceeds from such schemes contribute to the Union budget. If they contradict EU values, should schemes be expected to share their revenues with the EU’s budget?The due diligence process enables the revocation of citizenship in cases of abuse and when sanctions apply against nationals of a third party state. The same cannot be said for other citizenship processes. Actually, though the report is long on claims that CBI and RBI lead to flagrant abuse, it presents no concrete evidence that this has happened to any significant extent. Now why is this?
European Semester for economic policy coordination: annual sustainable growth survey 2022 (A9-0034/2022 - Irene Tinagli)
I voted in favour of this year’s report on the ‘European Semester for economic policy coordination: annual sustainable growth survey’ because it represents a balanced approach towards the EU’s economic governance structure.The report puts a level of conditionality on ending the escape clause period. I agree. The European economy cannot afford to blindly follow a strict timeline without considering the socioeconomic situation in Member States.Meanwhile, however, some very fundamental matters remain missing. The current energy crisis, further worsened with the conflict in Ukraine, did not get the needed attention. The rise of energy prices for the last months was a major game-changer. Europe has experienced supply driven inflation due to this single but very central economic input. The issue must get due attention during the coordination process of the Semester.Also, despite the huge socioeconomic misery experienced during the COVID-19 pandemic, the relationship between the need to reverse the massive reduction on health spending in Europe over the years and the need to keep the European economy in shape that the Semester process is all about, has been generally ignored.Until the European public health sector is properly upgraded, health-related expenses should be exempted from the calculation of the structural balance.
Implementation of the 2021-2027 cohesion policy (B9-0173/2022)
I voted in favour of the resolution on the start of the implementation of the 2021—2027 Cohesion Policy period because the report rightly raises a number of issues related to the implementation of the current funding programme dedicated to the area.In particular, it raises the concern that with new arising funding priorities, cohesion is seemingly taking the backburner spot in many scenarios. This includes the prioritisation of Member States authorities when it comes to the absorption of EU funding.Furthermore, I agree with the view that the focus on achieving both the green transition and the digital transition need to go hand in hand with cohesion instruments. This also goes for the apparent prioritisation that EU authorities are giving to funds within the Recovery and Resilience Facility.The EU must not forget its original priorities, especially when it comes to achieving socio—economic convergence and further cohesion between its different Member States and regions. The risks of abandoning this fundamental goal is to face further divergence and possible eventual disintegration.
Medicinal products made available in the UK with respect to Northern Ireland, Cyprus, Ireland and Malta (C9-0475/2021 - Pascal Canfin) (vote)
. ‒ Brexit disrupted traditional trade flows that predate the UK membership of the EU but which became incorporated in the EU intra-trading system.The Brexit negotiations covering the British exit of the EU dealt with many of these problems but failed to provide acceptable arrangements or transitions for peripheral and small scale zones, like Malta, Cyprus and less so, Ireland. This happened for extremely sensitive products – medicines, where there had been reliance on an importation that basically treated these island situations like they were part of the British market.Unravelling this reliance and replacing it with a viable alternative was given very low priority, possibly because of the small market volumes involved.So, stocks of familiar and basic medicines came close to running out which would have created great hardship.I have thus supported this temporary exemption for Malta, Cyprus and Ireland, ensuring continued access to medicinal products.However, we still need to have a framework that takes into account the size, traditional trade flows and need for flexibility that access to medicines in small scale and peripheral zones must secure in order to safeguard the welfare of their populations.
Election of the Members of the European Parliament by direct universal suffrage (A9-0083/2022 - Domènec Ruiz Devesa)
I have voted throughout against the proposals carried in this resolution. It is a typical instance of a rush, perhaps well intentioned, to mend things when they are not broken.I disagree with:– the proposal to create transnational lists. It is an artificial construct, that will remain unintelligible to the ordinary voter. The details proposed supposedly to reassure smaller Member States are grotesque and reflect the syndrome of the Brussels bubble;– the proposal to create a new European electoral agency. It will only make for a duplication of roles and meaningless monitoring mechanisms that will anyway have to rely on nationally held resources;– the proposal to have one day established right throughout the Union for voting;– the proposal to have the candidate of the political party with most MEPs to be in line for the Presidency of the European Commission. The European Parliament should just retain consultative and approval functions over the President of the Commission as appointed by the European Council.The challenges facing Members of the European Parliament do not regard the ‘Europeanisation’ of their election, but how to make their work understood as immediately relevant to their concerns by ‘ordinary’ citizens. This is not the direction taken by the resolution.
Distortive foreign subsidies (A9-0135/2022 - Christophe Hansen)
The Commission proposal for a regulation on foreign subsidies distorting the internal market is on various counts fundamentally flawed. To start with, there is no identification of the real impact of foreign subsidies on the internal market. Moreover, the preferable route of achieving an international agreement on state-aid rules has been ignored. Instead, there is an attempt to impose EU state-aid rules on third countries. The likelihood of increased bureaucracy discouraging new investment into the EU has increased.Yet, policymakers are ignoring tit-for-tat considerations. Clearly, EU state actors have their own methods of aiding industry that do not necessarily combine with state aid rules in other countries; like for example, US allegations that euro area exchange rate policies amount to hidden subsidies to EU exporters and investors. Similarly, allegations might come out against major EU funding programmes.Finally, the Commission will be extending its reach quite heavily; national competition authorities have been almost completely sidelined over the issue. Meanwhile, the so-called ex-officio tool gives full discretion to the Commission to act how and when it wants over any deal without any margins or checks and balances over its actions.I therefore voted against the adoption of this Parliament report.
EU islands and cohesion policy (A9-0144/2022 - Younous Omarjee)
. ‒ This EP Report on islands and cohesion policy gives the right picture of the main issues at stake for the EU’s insular regions by recognizing their particular situation vis-à-vis mainland Europe.I fully endorse the Report’s conclusion when it ‘regrets the EU’s lack of vision for European islands and calls for a European island vision to be developed and for the islands’ strengths to be exploited’.As an MEP representing a constituency consisting of islands, along with others, I have been trying to convey this message, but it has not always received the attention it deserves. For instance, in the climate package, the European Commission has given little to no consideration to the special needs of islands. On air transport, with the measures that are being proposed, island risk losing competitivity in tourism while having to absorb greater inflationary pressures than on the mainland.It seems as if the general EU approach towards islands is one of not so benign neglect, when the need is for a tailor-made approach to policies that will apply to them. The time has come for the Commission to establish a fully-fledged Directorate-General that operates horizontally to propose and amend EU policies relating to the special needs of islands.
The EU’s Foreign, Security and Defence Policy after the Russian invasion of Ukraine (A9-0164/2022 - David McAllister, Nathalie Loiseau)
The unjustified military aggression by Russia against Ukraine has triggered moves towards greater EU unity on issues like energy independence; strategic autonomy; a pushback against outside interference in European democratic processes; defence and security policy. On the latter front especially misgivings arise.Forward moves are being accelerated towards a foreign policy plus a defence and military agenda that risk transforming the EU into a military alliance fast.There seems to be little respect for the sovereignty of Member States, such as neutrals like Malta, whose core security interests are not aligned with those of ‘mainstream’ larger members. Yet they acknowledge a comprehensive European response is desirable given the Europe-wide destabilisation provoked by Russia’s President. Their dilemma as neutrals is being disregarded by drafters of current Union defence ambitions: how will the neutrality of a Member State fit into a common European security and defence architecture?To make matters worse, this report introduces the principle of extending qualified majority voting to EU foreign policy. Such an extension would set the basis for a contestation of EU foreign policy approaches on the grounds that they breach national sovereignty. The coherence of any EU foreign policy approach would thereby be undermined. I have therefore abstained in the vote on this report.
The call for a Convention for the revision of the Treaties (B9-0305/2022, B9-0307/2022)
This resolution takes the findings of the Conference on the Future of Europe as basis for a proposal to summon a Convention that would revise existing EU treaties.No matter how worthy the members of the Conference are, they do not have the democratic legitimacy that would justify this approach.Their selection and work procedures were organised along lines that in reality were defined by self-selecting and pre-determined, possibly elitist criteria.Also, treaty reform via a convention is a bad idea. As an ex-member of the 2002 Convention on the European Constitution, which was a big fiasco, I have direct experience of how bad it can be.To make matters worse, the resolution sets as a priority for the Convention the further extension of qualified majority rules instead of unanimity, in order to prepare for wide-ranging federalist changes to how the EU operates, not least in defence and security matters.It is obvious that such approaches will only further the interests and views of the larger Member States and I totally disagree with them.In my view, at this stage, Europe should continue to develop as a Europe of the nations in the best sense of the Gaullist tradition.For these reasons and more, I voted against the resolution.
Implementation of the Recovery and Resilience Facility (A9-0171/2022 - Eider Gardiazabal Rubial, Siegfried Mureşan, Dragoş Pîslaru)
In evaluating the implementation of the RRF, a comprehensive view of what is at stake should be adopted.The RRF is an instrument created under unprecedented pressures caused by the global pandemic, which now seem to have lost urgency.The RRF attempted to counter that crisis by investing heavily in projects defined by the EU’s political priorities, mainly related to the climate warming and the digital targets.Since then, the geopolitical situation facing Europe has changed drastically.A supply-induced inflation is being amplified by an economic tug-of-war with Russia triggering socioeconomic consequences that were not considered when the Facility was drafted.Workers, big and small businesses, public administrations are struggling to cope.So, the current structure of the RRF might no longer be truly adapted to the present contours of the ongoing crisis.I am concerned that this report on the implementation of the RRF does not make sufficient allowance for the need to maintain full flexibility in RRF operations, politically, institutionally, economically and socially.Considering the very unstable situation we are facing, it is essential that national plans and their drivers remain open to the possible need of adaptation as needed.This has to be fully acknowledged.However I voted in favour of the report.
Objection pursuant to Rule 111(3): Amending the Taxonomy Climate Delegated Act and the Taxonomy Disclosures Delegated Act (B9-0338/2022)
After detailed consideration, I have voted against the motion to turn down the Taxonomy Climate and the Taxonomy Disclosure Delegated Acts.I agree that the European Commission has followed an abusive procedure to introduce them. Strictly speaking, on this basis, the delegated acts should be voted down.I agree that again, strictly speaking, nuclear and natural gas with which the delegated acts deal are not environmentally neutral.However, they offer reasonable transitional paths to environmentally neutral energy, and could become crucially important in keeping economies going as public authorities strive to achieve anti-global warming aims.Inclusion in the ‘green’ taxonomy of nuclear and gas covers this scenario in the clearest and most transparent manner.To be coherent with what I have been advocating for small and peripheral economies, where I argue in favour of special transitional approaches to preserve the competitiveness of such economies, I cannot now in logic vote against an equivalent approach for nuclear- and gas-bound economies.Also, in order to attain Green Deal targets, justified anxieties about security of energy supplies in a scenario of potential drastic scarcity and rising global inflation must first be allayed. This can only happen when access to sources of nuclear and natural gas energy is flexibly in place.
The EU and the defence of multilateralism (A9-0172/2022 - Javi López)
Global challenges such as those related to climate, health and conflict require a global solution.The end of the Cold War provided an opportunity for global coordination on major issues, including Third World development and the nuclear threat.Yet, multilateralism experienced huge setbacks following the second Bush administration and its interventions in the Middle East as well as US/European meddling in regions of interest, such as Libya.That major EU players support multilateralism as a way forward for international relations is therefore a welcome state of affairs.I fully agree with various points made in the Report, such as that the EU must defend multilateralism and avoid actions that undermine this objective.Indeed, one must ensure that steps towards the EU’s further integration maintain a global multilateral perspective by not creating overlapping structures that might contradict the idea of global governance, sectorally, vertically or horizontally.Though I voted for the report, I highlight my unwavering reservations to the Report’s support for Qualified Majority Voting in foreign and security policy, as well as the Report’s call for all Member States to join European security and defence initiatives. This takes no account of the geopolitical situation of different Member States, such as the neutrals, and is unacceptable.
Sustainable aviation fuels (ReFuelEU Aviation Initiative) (A9-0199/2022 - Søren Gade)
Measures are here being proposed to tackle climate change and ensure that the EU commits to a carbon neutral economy.Yet, as I have repeatedly pointed out, the revised taxation of energy products as proposed will not affect the whole of the EU in the same way.To create conditions that enable air transport to decarbonize, the proposal aims to scale up via structural changes in taxation ‘sustainable’ aviation fuels. They should take over from high CO2-intensive fuels in the short to medium term.However, a real energy transition must be smooth. In all fairness, it cannot simply remove operational flexibility and reduce connectivity – vital for islands, and peripheral and remote regions that depend a lot on air transport.The report does not take this into account. It foresees an abrupt increase in the share of sustainable aviation fuel within the transport mix. This will hit hard Member States whose economy depends on imports and visitors arriving by air.Moreover, the EP report ignores operational realities for remote airports in its anti-tinkering measures. The reality of an airport in the middle of the Mediterranean is not the same as that of Frankfort airport in terms of turnaround flexibility.For these reasons, I have voted against the report.
Financial activities of the European Investment Bank – annual report 2021 (A9-0165/2022 - David Cormand)
I voted in favour of the 2021 Annual Report on the financial activities of the European Investment Bank because it contains a balanced approach towards the need for transparency, governance and accountability.Furthermore, I agree with the focus that the report gives on the Bank’s work in relation to the EU’s climate strategy and, in this context, the calls on the EIB to strengthen its support towards people and regions facing socio-economic challenges deriving from the transition towards a carbon-neutral economy.As regards social and labour rights, the EP’s stance that the EIB shall ensure that labour rights are fully protected throughout the entire supply chain of financed projects is commendable. Such an approach should clearly also apply to the internal structures and mechanisms of the bank.Finally, I would like to raise my reservations as regards the report’s approach to taxation, especially in the context of the EIB’s role and modus operandi . The attempt in Paragraph 42 to amalgamate various tax—related wishes into one paragraph is somehow confusing and weakens the report’s say on the matter.
Interim report on the 2021 proposal for a revision of the Multiannual Financial Framework (A9-0227/2022 - Jan Olbrycht, Margarida Marques)
I have voted in favour of the EP’s Interim report on the 2021 proposal for a revision of the Multiannual Financial Framework because I agree with its main message that the current Financial Framework requires a broader revision.The trigger for this revision mainly ensues from the ongoing crises - especially the one related to energy prices - that are creating an abnormally high level of inflation.Clearly, the value of the current allocated funding and programmed investments has to be re-estimated accordingly.Yet, the EP has to remain conscious of the arising needs that many Member States are facing and that they would not necessarily agree to increase their contribution towards the EU budget.On the same point, any proposals for the introduction of new own resources should also be made with the different national sensitivities in mind. With many manufacturing and service industries struggling to survive, a new EU tax could be of great concern to whole economic sectors.
The new European Bauhaus (A9-0213/2022 - Christian Ehler, Marcos Ros Sempere)
The proposal to bring together design, architecture and the arts into one Europe wide project that would reorganize the spatial environment in which we live according to the new economic and social realities of the Green Deal is praiseworthy.Taking the post-World War I Bauhaus movement as a model is a good approach.However the ‘New European Bauhaus’ still needs definition and clarity, besides separate and transparent funding.The role of European, state, regional and local bureaucrats and politicians remains diffuse.How they will interface with architects, designers, urban planners, artists and educators is vaguely referenced.The bottom up approach being generally indicated seems commendable, but there will be a need for a real driving force behind the whole initiative.Assuming that this force will emerge automatically or that politicians and bureaucrats will best assume it is probably illusory.Moreover we need a more comprehensive view regarding how the NEB will affect or be affected by market forces.Yet, all things considered, the whole idea merits support, which is why I voted for this resolution.Perhaps a good question to ask is whether the original Bauhaus would have achieved the success it did, had it been organised on the lines that are being developed for the NEB.
Impact of new technologies on taxation: crypto and blockchain (A9-0204/2022 - Lídia Pereira)
It is necessary to promote and maintain an environment that, in the field of financial services, encourages innovation among SMEs and promotes start—ups in new technologies.However, this must be done in parallel with increasing transparency regarding crypto and blockchain transactions and operations.Among the risks to have emerged is the erosion of tax transparency. Since traditional financial intermediaries have no role, crypto often ends up exempt from tax reporting requirements. Such unequal treatment between new and old technologies is unfair, creates distortions and allows opacity and fraud.One solution is the collection and exchange of information on transactions in crypto—assets. The report rightly recognises the global effort of the OECD on a new reporting framework for crypto—assets, which the EU must continue to support.It is also necessary to equip tax administrations with the tools and skills to deal with these dynamic technologies. Rules applicable to non—crypto assets are mostly inapplicable to crypto—assets, which creates difficulties.Finally, this report argues for pooling of EU resources to develop common technologies for efficient tax collection and enforcement. That should boost the efficiency of tax administrations, especially in smaller Member States, which may struggle to cope with the arising problems.I have voted for this report.
The EU’s response to the increase in energy prices in Europe (RC-B9-0416/2022, B9-0416/2022, B9-0417/2022, B9-0418/2022, B9-0419/2022, B9-0420/2022, B9-0421/2022, B9-0422/2022)
. ‒ I voted in favour of this resolution, with reservations about the call for impromptu tax increases on various fronts.The disproportionate profits in energy markets must be corrected on the basis of sound, dispassionate assessments. Simultaneously, increased transparency and regulatory oversight of market-based and OTC gas trading and acquisition prices should be enforced.As the resolution proposes, priority should be given to relief for those subject to extreme energy poverty, vulnerable households, and SMEs. On the other hand, the proposed and desirable upgrade of the EU energy platform into a joint European procurer of energy sources to attain scale economies in purchasing power requires full, but still pending, political alignment among Member States.Just as importantly, preventive measures must be taken as of now to counter future crises when the EU has irreconcilable differences with countries that supply it with energy.The development of renewable energies is the major way forward to ensure energy autonomy and sustainability. In 2018, I promoted a pilot project that set up the Clean Energy for EU islands secretariat, designed to support islands in their efforts to become renewable energy communities and to promote related projects. Beyond the urgency, long-term goals should not be forgotten, at macro and micro levels.
General budget of the European Union for the financial year 2023 - all sections (A9-0241/2022 - Nicolae Ştefănuță, Niclas Herbst)
Standing by current forecasts, 2023 will be a tough year for the EU economy with repercussions likely to be felt in all parts of society.The European Parliament’s take on the EU budget for 2023 represents a balanced position in the context of the pressing needs which the Union is facing right now.Budgetary needs have increased immensely. Yet funding sources remain somehow static in volume and variety, due to the challenging financial situation which Member States are experiencing.I agree with most of the Resolution’s proposals and voted for it, with some reservations.In particular, the funding directed towards defence and military spending. One understands the urge of most Member States to centralise it. However, the role and scope of neutral Member States’ contribution within a budget dedicated to a pseudo-defence Union is questionable. They should be granted an opt-out.Finally, considering the most urgent needs the EU is facing, one wonders how the EP can give primacy for funding to the continuation of the ‘Future of Europe Conference’ – a mechanism that has been useful to generate discussion and ideas, not to legitimise treaty change.Now, we really have no option but to set our priorities right.
REPowerEU chapters in recovery and resilience plans (A9-0260/2022 - Eider Gardiazabal Rubial, Siegfried Mureşan, Dragoş Pîslaru)
The REPowerEU proposal aimed at countering the negative socioeconomic impact that the Ukraine war is having on European society is welcome. It is a timely proposal that needs an urgent conclusion. I have therefore voted for the fund it seeks to establish.Yet some reservations on the European Parliament proposal remain. In particular, the EP adds extra burdens on national administrations. It has been reported that the first country to have applied for RRF funding – Spain – is experiencing considerable problems in administering and funnelling the funding package already allocated. Is it wise to increase the burden on national administrations? Administrative and procedural burdens should be pared to a minimum in order to accelerate the process of activation and disbursement in line with the current emergency. In particular, there should be no requirements to repeat processes that have already been followed in the context of national recovery and resilience plans.Furthermore, as already emphasised through the amendments I tabled at committee level, we need special treatment for island regions. The approach to favour cross-border projects in continental Europe is indeed positive. Yet this should not further disadvantage insular regions which would have immense difficulties finding the right conditions to launch cross-border projects in the field.
Resilience of critical entities (A9-0289/2021 - Michal Šimečka)
I voted in favour of this set of rules, which will improve the protection of critical EU infrastructures.In the permacrisis that we are experiencing, with the climate crisis, the pandemic, the war in Ukraine, our critical infrastructures (like highways, communication networks or clean water, necessary to maintain normal life) are exposed to an increasing number of attacks and natural disasters. Cyberattacks, which are becoming more complex, are not the least.Critical infrastructures, increasingly interconnected, will be protected upstream, as the critical entities that operate services essential to the internal market will adopt common and harmonised procedures for identification and protection from threats.I particularly welcome the extension of the scope of the text to sectors like digital infrastructure, water, food and health.Finally, I would like to make the link with DORA, which promotes a similar objective for digital operational resilience in financial services: that of strengthening the integrity of the EU market.The greatest attention should also be given to refraining from adding to burdens while avoiding duplication with other resilience-building initiatives, so that critical actors are not faced with an unnecessary administrative load.One thus welcomes the alignment with the Network and Information Security Directive (NIS2), similarly to what has been done with DORA.
System of own resources of the European Union (A9-0266/2022 - Valérie Hayer, José Manuel Fernandes)
The EU is facing increasing budgetary needs to counter a series of emergencies related to the COVID-19 pandemic as well as the Russian invasion of Ukraine. There are also the looming financial requirements of the Green Deal. The latter are likely being underestimated.At present, the EU’s budgetary response to these emerging demands has been to borrow money. Eventually, such an approach must be sustained by a budgetary input that taps new resources. Parliament does well to search new venues in this regard. However, the new resources should be defined by the requirements that arise from the response needed to combat the continental crises being faced, as in the environmental challenge.The report gives the idea that the EU should move ahead on tax matters falling under the OECD Pillar 1, even without a multilateral global agreement on the area. I disagree. The report disregards the national interest of peripheral economies to attract foreign investment by differentiating their tax structures from those of the central, highly advanced European economies.Still, considering the exploratory approach of the report, its non—binding character and the real priority to ensure that the EU can self-finance its activities under closely defined parameters, I have voted for it, with the reservation expressed above.
Prospects for the two-State solution for Israel and Palestine (RC-B9-0552/2022, B9-0552/2022, B9-0553/2022, B9-0554/2022, B9-0555/2022, B9-0556/2022, B9-0557/2022)
Proposed almost fifty years ago in a United Nations resolution, the two-state solution with a sovereign Israel and a sovereign Palestine co-existing side by side remains the only long—term peaceful and ‘fair’ solution to the Palestinian conflict.Yet it has become increasingly distant because of: Palestinian acts of terrorism, fuelled by desperation; tough Israeli repression, at times barbaric; the rise of the religious right in Israel and the actions of illegal Israeli settlers; and the inability of the US to maintain a consistent Middle East policy – all factors that reinforce the stalemate.A two-state solution eventually requires a relationship of equality between the two sides, which is not the case now.Daily, Palestinians face state-backed violence. In 2022, more than 120 Palestinians were killed during clashes in the West Bank.EU players remain proponents of a two-state solution. Yet, their position is blunted by the value they attach to the EU-Israeli economic and military relationship. This is important, but not at the cost of disregarding the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people.The attainment of peace and stability in the region depends on tough but mutually acceptable solutions. Pushing the Palestinian population to desperation will only achieve the contrary.Such considerations guided my vote on the resolution.
Suspicions of corruption from Qatar and the broader need for transparency and accountability in the European institutions (B9-0580/2022, RC-B9-0581/2022, B9-0581/2022, B9-0582/2022, B9-0583/2022, B9-0584/2022, B9-0585/2022, B9-0587/2022)
I did not vote on this resolution; except positive for the whole text, only to make clear disgust and condemnation of the facts at issue.However, I disagree with how this matter is being dealt with.I agree: the Parliament needed fast to make its reaction clear.But proposing a wide-ranging resolution on ‘classic’ lines subject to horse trading and manoeuvring between the political groups is not the way.Especially when it prejudges what the real issues might be; implicitly limits them; and serves to project the view that the Parliament is under external attack, rather than that its own flaws have become deadly.Overall the resolution projects the idea that it’s business as usual, including the bland way by which ‘reforms’, formerly side-lined, have been uploaded into the text.We need a stringent definition of what our core tasks should be and how they should be conducted, without crass references to ‘values’ among other slogans.Following from this, we need a holistic game plan of reform, established independently of the cabals that run the Parliament’s administration.That cannot be provided in-house, but has to be done by an outside, universally honoured referee bound in double quick time, to provide a deep assessment of what should be done.
Upscaling the 2021-2027 Multiannual Financial Framework (A9-0281/2022 - Jan Olbrycht, Margarida Marques)
I voted in favour of the Report on upscaling the 2021-2027 Multiannual Financial Framework because I agree with its main message.When considering the major crisis we are going through, the EU needs to radically adapt its budgetary approach.Obviously, the Report is the result of hard negotiations between the major political factions.Still, the EU budget should focus harder on social issues.Both the COVID crisis and to a larger extent, the ongoing inflation plus energy shake-up are exposing the fragility of the social safety net, which was side-lined for years due to other priorities during a long period of practically zero inflation.Already by the end of 2021, 95.4 million EU citizens, equivalent to 21.7% of the EU population were at risk of poverty or social exclusion.Meanwhile, one fifth of the EU population was living in households where dependent children were at risk of poverty or social exclusion.Clearly, more EU investment must be directly funnelled towards programmed social projects in the Member States.Finally, I must again put on record my strongest reservations against the EU budgetary turn towards an EU defence union and for further EU funding to be directed towards defence spending.
Human rights and democracy in the world and the European Union’s policy on the matter - annual report 2022 (A9-0298/2022 - Isabel Wiseler-Lima)
I have voted in favour of the report because I agree with the main message behind the text that the EU is justified in seeking to strengthen its commitment to the promotion and protection of democracy and human rights worldwide on the basis of multilateralism and international law.The Report rightly emphasises the importance of placing this at the heart of the EU’s diplomatic relations.However, care needs to be taken not to position the EU in a role where it is perceived by outside powers as being hypocritical and applying double standards according to how the winds of its own special interests blow.That perception has been growing, not least in the wake of the energy crisis.Also I disagree with the Resolution’s call for qualified majority voting to replace unanimity on major policy issues.There has to be compromise in developing an EU position: QMV will likely disallow medium and small sized countries from having a meaningful say in the development of such compromises.Specifically therefore I voted against that part of the text which endorses QMV and confirm that I am totally against it.
Preparation of the EU-Ukraine Summit (RC-B9-0092/2023, B9-0092/2023, B9-0093/2023, B9-0094/2023, B9-0095/2023, B9-0096/2023)
The EU rightly supports the Ukraine in its fightback against the Russian invasion but is not a co-belligerent. This resolution sometimes seems to be fudging this distinction, which is a dangerous position to adopt. A better approach would have been to again make the EU’s opposition to the Russian stance crystal clear and to reiterate the determination to provide all necessary help short of becoming a co-belligerent to the Ukraine.Making ‘extreme’ claims – like accusing Russia of genocide – can only be counterproductive, since they can have little meaningful impact outside of propaganda, while limiting the scope for mediation and back channel initiatives to be exercised out of Europe. Indeed, the compromise formula followed by the EP when drafting its resolutions may be less than helpful in crafting a text that at a time of war, even if it is between third parties, sets out priorities for future action. In such a context, the less that detailed commitments are made – especially when they are unrealistic (such as regarding the Ukraine’s eventual membership of the EU) – the better.I voted for the resolution because it was the only way to demonstrate again condemnation of the Russian invasion, despite my serious reservations about parts of its content.
Energy performance of buildings (recast) (A9-0033/2023 - Ciarán Cuffe)
I voted against this report. In deciding about the energy performance of buildings – a very sensitive social issue – this House needed to go for a common denominator that could be proportionately applied by all, independently of national and regional differences. Instead, on the grounds of climate ambition, it has blithely attached the major costs for change to ordinary citizens.The aim of creating a building stock that is highly energy efficient and carbon-free is commendable and vital in the long run. The costly measures being proposed will nevertheless affect homeowners negatively in a tremendous way. Social consequences, according to the various home-owning cultures and structures in the EU, should be thoroughly considered. This has not been properly done.Negotiators tried to take into account the constraints and needs of vulnerable and single-parent households, social housing in general, and rural and remote areas. However, they ignored too many essential considerations for these exposed (and other) sectors.Obligations need to be realistic and achievable: those endorsed in this report are not. A more moderate position should focus on ensuring that residential building owners are incentivised to improve their property’s energy performance, rather than penalised. It should also focus on more realistic and incremental targets.
The implementation of civilian CSDP and other EU civilian security assistance (A9-0091/2023 - Alviina Alametsä)
As its name implies, the EU common security and defence policy is part and parcel of the EU’s developing defence policy in which clearly the intention is to continue ramping up the defence/military component. In my view, the policy is being developed with scant attention to, or respect for, the position of Member States (no matter how few) whose political status is that of neutrality. Yet under EU rules they participate fully in budgeting for this aspect of EU policies.The fact that the CDSP covers ‘only’ civilian aspects of EU external interventions does not screen the reality of an overlap – destined to become deeper – between military and civilian interventions. The text actually reflects this overlap, not least because of the deeper underpinnings of common defence/military aims it assumes to hold. As a state whose constitution prevents it from taking part in military alliances, unless under the aegis of the United Nations, Malta’s endorsement of the CDSP cannot but be problematic.Moreover, the text fails to consider that, in their approach to CDSP, certain Member States might have post-colonial legacies and interests to keep up with, when they should have been made transparent. For all these reasons, I abstained on this vote.
EU/Euratom/Ukraine Association Agreement: temporary trade liberalisation supplementing trade concessions applicable to Ukrainian products (A9-0165/2023 - Sandra Kalniete)
I am in favour of this proposal to renew for another year the so-called Autonomous Trade Measures, which provide for the suspension of import duties, quotas, and trade defence measures on Ukrainian exports to the EU, as support for the Ukrainian economy.In order to assist Ukraine against the challenges that producers and exporters are facing because of the ongoing war, the new measures include an advanced safeguard mechanism to be activated in case of need.The European Parliament should continue to back all EU economic and political support for the Ukraine through an agreement that lays the ground for a relationship based on a proportionate economic reciprocity.The Association Agreement between the two sides provides the correct framework for such cooperation. The measures being envisaged will help to maintain and enhance the current trade flows between Ukraine and the EU, which is Ukraine’s largest trading partner. Ensuring the continuity of Ukraine’s trade capacity and of living up to our commitments to sustain that country is crucial.However it should be made clear that in no way should this approach be considered as a privileged fast track towards Ukraine’s accession to the EU, which should under all scenarios follow the same path as for all other accession processes.
Act in Support of Ammunition Production (C9-0161/2023)
When the project to launch a European union was initialled, the aim was to establish such a union via economic and social convergence between its Member States, with separately a European defence union. The latter was given a negative by national parliaments. The convergence project continued successfully along political, economic, social, environmental and cultural dimensions.In recent years, security and defence issues have been hitched to this approach on the basis of ad hoc rationales and responses covering particular geostrategic situations. The relative commitments went beyond what new Member States, especially neutral ones, assumed on joining the EU.Justified on the grounds that they formed part of Member States’ target of achieving ever closer unity, and financed from the EU’s common budget, their legitimacy remains questionable.The proposal now to finance ammunition production via EU funds falls into this general picture and is completely unacceptable. Though one agrees with the overall aim of fully supporting Ukraine in repelling the Russian invasion, using this to divert EU resources towards the full blast production of ammunition is not an acceptable way forward.So I have not voted on all the component parts of this resolution and have voted against on it as a whole.
Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence (A9-0184/2023 - Lara Wolters)
The proposed directive on corporate sustainability due diligence represents a significant step towards promoting responsible business practices and sustainability within the European Union. It aims to address the social and environmental impacts of corporations, ensuring that they take responsibility for their actions throughout their value chains.Specific requirements are being set for companies in terms of risk assessment transparency, and remedial measures. Companies must assess and address the risks and impacts associated with their activities, and also assume responsibility for what their suppliers and subcontractors do.With the implementation of this directive, corporate accountability will be enhanced and sustainable practices encouraged, bringing fairness and liability in the globalised production process.However, the proposal also raises some concerns among businesses, particularly regarding the potential administrative burdens and costs associated with compliance. There is a need for an approach that balances carefully the interests of both business and the broader society.Overall, the proposal for a directive on corporate sustainability due diligence represents a significant development in aligning business practices with societal and environmental goals. It signals that ESG is here to stay. I have therefore voted for it.
Breaches of the Rule of law and fundamental rights in Hungary and frozen EU funds (B9-0257/2023)
Although I disagree strongly with how internal democratic processes related to the rule of law are being shaped in Hungary, I have abstained on all votes for this resolution including the final one.Monitoring rule of law issues in Member States is a delicate process that has become increasingly salient because the application of financial and other sanctions at EU level has been made contingent on evaluations carried out during the process.On the basis of how this has been carried out, about which I have direct experience, my belief is that it is still too subjective and too dependent on political positioning, if not manipulation.Furthermore, what makes the process of scrutiny even less satisfactory is that it remains subject to appreciations that take into account, in a non-transparent manner, the alignments of the governments whose performance is under scrutiny.The yardstick employed to measure breaches of the rule of law or what could be judged as such can vary according to the size of countries, the political stance of governments, and the impact of mainstream media or leading social media influencers.For this reason, I do not have full confidence in the mechanisms by which rule of law scrutiny in the EU is being conducted.
Investigation of the use of Pegasus and equivalent surveillance spyware (Recommendation) (B9-0664/2022, B9-0260/2023)
This draft report recommends measures to address the identified contraventions and maladministration in the application of Union law related to the use of Pegasus and equivalent surveillance spyware. Its proposals are praiseworthy.I voted in favour, because I believe it is necessary to update the relevant legal framework on a European basis: setting norms, limits and the scope for investigations of abuses; the issuance of sanctions; as well as the funding of research into surveillance systems and who runs them.However, the concern and care we are now showing about this sensitive subject risks appearing misplaced and the outcome ineffective.Most national security concerns are zone, regime and event related. Some areas of concern are national security related for some, and not for others.As in rule of law issues, the salience attached to the disregard of proper democratic safeguards by one or other of the governments of Member States remains dependent on the political slant of the government concerned.There is still no common and updated legal framework that defines how modern democracies should control the cyber surveillance carried out by their own secret services. It would be counter-productive if measures contemplated to face off the Pegasus issue were to be half-baked and inadequate. That risk remains present.
The electoral law, the investigative committee and the rule of law in Poland (B9-0318/2023, B9-0319/2023)
I have decided to abstain on all the votes regarding this resolution, as well as the final one.In Poland, the state of play of the electoral law and its democratic mechanisms are extremely disappointing. The recent electoral law represents a lack of respect for any democratic standards and a silencing of democratic opposition.However, I believe that the monitoring of such processes should be carried out through objective and accurate procedures, excluding any form of political influence. If the EU requires democratic and transparent elections, this should imply a democratic and apolitical monitoring of electoral procedures. In my view, the EU has not managed to stay objective.Assessing breaches of the rule of law may not always be so obvious. Democratic evaluations such as the election observation mission by ODIHR called out for in the resolution should take into account certain criteria before identifying the country’s place in the rule of law scrutiny, such as its size, media influence or where its government stands.Finally, I believe that the EU has still a long way to go to achieve objective and fair evaluations of democratic processes and rule of law assessments.
Implementation of ‘passerelle’ clauses in the EU Treaties (A9-0208/2023 - Giuliano Pisapia)
I voted against this report, as I disagree with passerelle clauses as mechanisms that modify the decision-making rules that affect acts of the Council of the Union, allowing a shift from unanimity to QMV.While QMV aims to enhance efficiency and promote collective decision-making, it presents challenges for small and medium-sized countries. The limited influence, loss of sovereignty, unequal impact on economies and potential democratic shortfalls are significant concerns. It is essential to recognise the importance of ensuring fair representation and accommodating the specific needs of smaller nations within decision-making mechanisms to foster inclusive and effective global governance.The report takes into account policy areas such as human rights and international agreements, taxation, as well as long-term policies such as the democratic functioning of the Union and electoral rights. I am against replacing unanimity with QMV on all major policy areas.The democratic principles that underpin EU cooperation become marginalised if decision-making processes lack democratic legitimacy, as the preferences of smaller countries become disregarded. It must be ensured that the use of passarelle clauses is aligned with such democratic values, with the respect of national sovereignty, and maintains the trust and consent of Member States and their citizens.
Economic coercion by third countries (A9-0246/2022 - Bernd Lange)
I voted for this report although I am not completely convinced that it will bring much value added to the EU in its conduct of economic and other relations with third parties. Whether on a bilateral or multilateral basis, relations develop following negotiations during which all sides try to influence the policy making of the other parties on a tit-for-tat basis. Such influence may take the form of measures in areas unrelated to the negotiations in course. If these measures apply disproportionately and/or are introduced arbitrarily, the party against which they are directed may take any measures it deems fit to respond. Do we really need a legal frame within which such responses should be structured? Though I doubt this, I have gone along with the current wisdom that in the absence of an Anti-Coercion Instrument within the EU, believes the Union would remain vulnerable to economic coercion from third countries. But the triggers for this instrument should be broadly defined and country-neutral, as so-called economic coercion can manifest itself in various forms. It should be made clear that the instrument is not an offensive but a defensive tool, meant to protect the Union’s legitimate policy space.
EU-Switzerland relations (A9-0248/2023 - Lukas Mandl)
I voted in favour of this report, given its compelling argument for the desirability of establishing a new EU-Switzerland partnership agreement.The report’s central message highlights the potential benefits of such an agreement: trust, stability, jobs and welfare for both regions. The proposal for an ambitious arrangement that modernises and consolidates all the strands of what has been achieved over the years in EU-Swiss relations within one partnership document is a step in the right direction. It reduces trade barriers and ensures a level playing field for EU and Swiss citizens and economic operators, crucial for encouraging economic growth and prosperity.The emphasis on protecting workers’ rights, consumers and the environment demonstrates a commitment to responsible governance. Switzerland is an important partner in addressing global challenges, including international peace and human rights. Its alignment with EU sanctions against Russia underlines the country’s commitment to our shared values.From a Maltese perspective too, I applaud the report. In the past, over many years preceding Malta’s EU membership, it was claimed in Malta that no partnership relationship was possible between the EU and another European country. This false claim, used to stampede the electorate towards EU accession, is again fully rebutted by the spirit and terms of the report.
Effectiveness of the EU sanctions on Russia (RC-B9-0453/2023, B9-0453/2023, B9-0454/2023, B9-0455/2023, B9-0456/2023, B9-0457/2023)
I have voted for this resolution. Russia’s aggression against Ukraine in February 2022 was in total violation of international law. It crossed a red line and was totally unacceptable. Since then, the EU has adopted multiple sanctions packages to weaken Russia’s ability to wage war. I fully support them.The EU’s call for increased coordination, transparency and enforcement of sanctions is essential. This includes measures like expanding export controls, reinforcing sanctions on Russian energy exports and scrutinizing companies that maintain business with Russia despite the sanctions. Unity on sanctions and on the conduct of strategic communication to counter disinformation is vital.All this having been said, the point remains that security concerns raised by Russia over Ukraine and over related NATO issues cannot just be brushed aside as they have been. I regret that as part of its diplomatic efforts, the EU has been – or is showing itself as – slack in trying to find the grounds on which an honourable and reasonable end to this war can be found before it is too late. Beyond trying to accelerate the process of Ukraine becoming a member of the EU, the EU needs to formulate a model for how EU-Russia relations should develop long-term.
Implementation of the principle of the primacy of EU law (A9-0341/2023 - Yana Toom, Cyrus Engerer)
I strongly disagree with enshrining the supremacy of EU law in the Treaties and voted against this report. Codifying in this way the primacy of EU law is not, as the rapporteurs claim, an effective solution to the ongoing ambiguities that define the interplay between EU competencies and the reach of Member States’ legal provisions, not least their constitutions. Indeed, the solution cannot be a one-decision-rule-fits-all provision, given the political complexities of defining EU competences and their relationship to national decision-making powers. Actually it could create new problems by eliminating the flexibility needed to navigate issues of deep national interest, such as neutrality, military cooperation, foreign policy, security, and taxation, thereby triggering avoidable but likely acute crises.Malta, in particular but not only, faces unique challenges that require a nuanced approach. The present situation should be maintained in order to allow for ongoing development through dialogue and experience of a flexible interface between EU law and national constitutional red lines. Such an approach would allow for the step by step and case by case clarification of dilemmas without undermining the formal and informal dynamics that contribute to the EU’s internal cohesion. Enshrining supremacy in the Treaties could end up provoking more, not fewer, internal disputes.
Proposals of the European Parliament for the amendment of the Treaties (A9-0337/2023 - Guy Verhofstadt, Sven Simon, Gabriele Bischoff, Daniel Freund, Helmut Scholz)
I have unequivocally voted against this report, only endorsing its social chapter. It lacks all prudence in the presentation of amendments to revise the Treaties. It manifests a total disregard for national sensibilities and the need for balance between central federalising requirements and the sovereignty of the smaller and medium-sized states in the Union.The push for qualified majority voting, changes in decision-making structures, plus the establishment of an EU Defence Union without clear safeguards and opt-outs are totally unacceptable. Co-rapporteur Helmut Scholz’s reservations regarding the proposed amendments to foreign, security, and defence policy are in line with these considerations.Furthermore, the lack of clarity on mitigating duplication of military capacity with NATO and the potential budgetary implications is revealing. Indeed, why should Member States which stay out of the common defence policy or which are neutral contribute to fund it through the EU budget? In this area, a comprehensive, non-military concept of security coupled with adherence to international law should precede any restructuring.My vote against this resolution follows from the conviction that the proposed amendments misunderstand the realities of Europe today. Actually, though they proclaim otherwise, they lack the necessary respect for crucial aspects of the European identity, making them unacceptable to the peoples of Europe.
Role of tax policy in times of crisis (A9-0336/2023 - Kira Marie Peter-Hansen)
The report addresses crucial tax issues stemming from the COVID-19 crisis, Russia’s war on Ukraine and the ensuing energy crisis. They align with the urgent need to promote a just and sustainable taxation system.However, tax strategy should remain a national prerogative since it needs to reflect priorities dictated by, among other things, size, geographical positioning, natural endowments and economic advances that describe the situation of any given EU Member State.Thus the centralisation of tax policies at EU level should be approached cautiously, which unfortunately this report does not do well, if indeed it really tries.Above all, one-size-fits-all policies will not work here. They will instead serve to further inequalities and to weaken social cohesion, internally and externally. In this context, as a case in point, the EU-wide prohibitive tax being proposed on private jets, while sounding politically sexy, needs further evaluation.The aims of the resolution are praiseworthy in that they are mostly intended to support the establishment at European level of a taxation perspective that addresses societal, environmental and security challenges, while urging careful consideration of proposals to ensure their effectiveness and fairness.However, I cannot endorse the resolution as it fails to satisfy the requirements outlined above.
EU-Japan relations (A9-0373/2023 - Reinhard Bütikofer)
I voted in favour of this report, with some reservations. Firstly, recognising the 50-year milestone of diplomatic ties between the EU and Japan gives witness to the enduring relationship between the two sides. Their shared goals, especially in addressing global challenges, highlight the necessity for an even closer partnership to counter growing tensions globally.The report rightly emphasises the mutual commitment to peace, security, environmental responsibility, and human rights. In particular, the condemnation of Russia’s aggression in Ukraine underscores the need for a strengthened understanding between allies of how to react to flagrant breaches of international law. Acknowledging Japan’s pivotal role in the Indo-Pacific region, both economically and strategically, aligns with the EU’s efforts to reinforce its own presence there.The report endorses joint actions on various fronts, from economic security to climate neutrality, recognising the interlinked security of Europe and the Indo-Pacific. By supporting continued dialogue, cooperation on global challenges, and advocating democratic values, the report fosters a comprehensive EU-Japan partnership.However, it errs by seeming to want to draw Japan and the EU into a military and security belt to confront China. That is not the way by which the complex geopolitical dynamics and tensions that have been growing in the region need to be addressed.
EU-US relations (A9-0372/2023 - Tonino Picula)
The EU and the US possess distinct institutional and political structures, each covering different competences, making their alliance inherently asymmetrical. In recent years, the asymmetry has been carried over to political stances on security, environmental and global competitive issues.Addressing carefully and delicately issues of trust and reliability is paramount. At times, this report fails to do so, probably to camouflage uncertainty as to whether the EU should unfailingly accept and follow US positions or whether it should assert a completely different stance. A case in point: the report’s treatment of relations with China where more nuance was indicated.Regarding NATO, while advocating enhanced transatlantic collaboration, I disagree that the EU should engage in defence affairs or commit to a defence union. So, I put brackets around the NATO-related content of the report to which I do not subscribe.By contrast, I strongly support the emphasis on EU and US shared values like freedom, democracy, and the need for collaboration in addressing global challenges. Such emphasis however needs increasingly to take into account why in many regions of the world, the proclamation of EU/US shared values is considered as hypocritical because values are then applied selectively. The report ignores this problem. My vote: ‘Yes, but ...’
Implementation of the 2018 Geo-blocking Regulation in the digital single market (A9-0335/2023 - Beata Mazurek)
The teport on the implementation of the 2018 Geo-blocking Regulation in the digital single market is a step in the right direction.It urges the European Commission to review the regulation by 2025 and to consider then that audio-visual services be excluded from geo-blocking. It should have set an earlier date. Imperatively, in a true digital single market, consumers have unrestricted cross-border access to digital content and services.Geo-blocking practices, preventing users from watching online content based on their location, are outdated and unnecessarily frustrating. The report rightly emphasizes the need to eliminate these practices. Its focus on the need to free audio-visual services from geo-blocking is well taken. Consumer interest in cross-border access to audiovisual content is evident. Citizens all over Europe want to access content from other countries.By removing geo-blocking, we can meet this demand, fostering cultural diversity and enabling consumers to explore content from various European cultures conveniently and legally.Indeed, the availability of affordable and available quality legal content online would be crucial in combating piracy in the audio-visual sector. Extending the scope of the geo-blocking regulation will not eliminate territoriality in the European online audio-visual market.Moreover, local adaptations will still be essential, ensuring content is accessible in multiple languages.
Debt-equity bias reduction allowance and limiting the deductibility of interest for corporate income tax purposes (A9-0387/2023 - Luděk Niedermayer)
I have abstained on this report because I am in fundamental disagreement with how progress towards a capital markets union is being piloted. The controversies surrounding this report illustrate the problem. The CMU project – deemed as essential by all big-time EU representatives and speakers – is being articulated through small step-by-step measures that have not achieved meaningful results.So, the proposal endorsed by this report, vital for CMU though it should be, seems not to have achieved sufficient political clarity or traction. Should the tax system serve to bolster bank lending by firms for investment purposes instead of financing investments via the issue of fresh equity? Should tax structures be changed to promote the latter?The upsides and downsides of debt-equity bias reduction vis-à-vis corporate income tax still requires adequate political resolution. But a coherent political will to implement a European capital markets union is absent. Consequently, it is futile to engineer small ‘forward’ steps, as with this resolution, that by their very cautious and tentative nature are inadequate and lack business credibility.
Banking Union – annual report 2023 (A9-0431/2023 - Ivars Ijabs)
I approve this report for 2023 on the Banking Union with reservations. The reservations arise because insufficient leeway is allowed for flexible implementation of ‘one size fits all’ policies. A case in point is the treatment regarding the rollback of the sovereign-bank nexus. Correct as the approach is overall, its application to small-scale, peripheral members of the EU could prove toxic.The report rightly emphasises the multifaceted benefits a fully developed Banking Union would bring, including stability, reduced systemic risk and lower costs for customers. It fails, however, to reflect sufficiently the implications of the need for the EU to develop globally competitive banking units that can compete with US and other behemoths, if it is to achieve strategic autonomy in the finance sector.In this process, would the absorption by larger conglomerates of most of Europe’s smaller banks, which have always had a local or regional vocation, be acceptable? Even so, the calls in the report for the completion of the Banking Union and urgent establishment of the European deposit insurance scheme (EDIS) resonate strongly.I fully support the completion of the Banking Union, with swift introduction of the EDIS, thereby reinforcing the commitment to a robust and resilient European banking system.
Role of the European Parliament and its parliamentary diplomacy in the EU’s foreign and security policy (A9-0405/2023 - Jordi Solé)
My abstention on this resolution has been defined by scepticism as to its real meaning and value. Given the structure and role of the EP, its parliamentary diplomacy cannot project a coherent political view about international affairs similar to that of a nation state.This holds even less regarding a European defence and security policy which is being fashioned on the hoof. The policy depends on the state of the relationship most EU Member States have with NATO, disregarding the interests of neutral Member States which – while being required to pay for it – cannot subscribe to a defence policy that contradicts their neutral status.In fact, by way of establishing meaningful diplomacy with parliaments across the world, the EP would be most effective if it served to transparently exchange information and viewpoints on defence issues held by nation states.Unfortunately, such an exercise could be undermined by the increasing perception outside Europe that EP representatives have double standards. While preaching, as this Parliament does, a respect for the rule of law, nationally and internationally, they show this respect in a differentiated manner. The principles they invoke against Russia in its war on the Ukraine, they then ignore for Israel in its war with Hamas.
European historical consciousness (A9-0402/2023 - Sabine Verheyen)
I voted in favour of this report because it recognises the multifaceted nature of Europe’s past, acknowledging its complex, conflict-ridden and contested history.It also addresses historical injustices rooted in gender, belief and ethnicity.The report emphasises the need to avoid relativizing, distorting, or falsifying history for political purposes, underscoring the significance of interdisciplinary approaches and contextualisation in history education.Furthermore, I support the report’s call for a broader and more holistic understanding of European history, including the historical experiences of underrepresented groups.It is crucially important to move towards a citizens-driven ‘culture of remembering’ based on common European principles, values and a critical reworking of the past.The stress laid on this issue is commendable.Overall, I endorse the report as I agree that it is necessary to foster a critical historical consciousness to enable Europeans to understand, confront and learn from their past.All this having been said, one could fault in the report’s overall approach on one aspect. Strangely, it does not seem be completely liberated from a euro-centric perspective, one which implicitly considers European history and the consciousness about it that needs to be promoted, as a basic measuring rod for the calibration of large-scale and small-scale historical experiences elsewhere.
Instant payments in euro (A9-0230/2023 - Michiel Hoogeveen)
I voted in favour of this proposal for several reasons. Firstly, the current framework laid out by Regulation (EU) No 260/2012 serves as the foundation for the single euro payments area. Updating this regulation to accommodate instant credit transfers in euro reflects the evolving nature of payment systems and promotes innovation, market development, and increased competition.Secondly, the proposal aims to address the low uptake of instant credit transfers in euro across the EU. By establishing uniform rules and technical requirements for instant credit transfers, including cross-border transactions, the regulation seeks to enhance efficiency, reduce market fragmentation, and provide benefits to both payment service users and providers.Additionally, the gradual introduction of obligations, such as offering instant credit transfer services and complying with EU sanctions, allows payment service providers sufficient time to adapt and implement necessary changes effectively. Harmonizing charges for instant credit transfers with charges for other types of credit transfers ensures fairness and encourages the adoption of instant payment methods.Overall, supporting this regulation aligns with the goal of creating a more integrated and efficient payments market within the EU while ensuring the security and accessibility of instant credit transfers for all stakeholders involved.
Rule of Law and media freedom in Greece (B9-0098/2024)
As with other similar rule of law resolutions, I have abstained on this resolution. This is because I am profoundly mistrustful of the approaches deployed in this House to review cases that are raised here about breaches of the rule of law in EU Member States.I have my own reservations and negative judgements regarding the current Greek Government’s treatment of media freedom. That, however, is not the point.Agreed, rule of law issues are central to the identity of the Union and will need to remain like so whether the it is widened, deepened or consolidated on its present basis. Consequently, such issues need to be considered clinically and to the greatest extent possible, objectively, which is far from being the case here.All too frequently rule of law matters are considered in a polarised manner that is equivalent to playing political football. Serious problems are trivialised while trivial concerns are blown out of proportion according to which government is under review. This has been a repeated experience in the case of Malta. Unless the review of rules of law cases by EU institutions is reformed from the ground up, it will remain a flawed and unconvincing process.
Establishing the Ukraine Facility (A9-0286/2023 - Michael Gahler, Eider Gardiazabal Rubial)
Support for Ukraine is a legitimate policy aim for the EU, given that the invasion of the country by Russia is a flagrant violation of international law within the European space. Such support needs to be well organised, efficient and subject to full accountability.The proposed regulation to establish the Ukraine facility is a good attempt to achieve these objectives and merits approval. It presents a crucial EU commitment to provide substantial financial backing of EUR 50 billion for Ukraine over the period 2024-2027. This addresses the immediate needs stemming from the ongoing conflict in that country and will facilitate long-term reconstruction and modernisation efforts.Including the entire EU support for Ukraine within a single instrument enhances efficiency and accountability. Important provisions are attached to ensure macroeconomic stability, leverage frozen Russian assets for reconstruction, and bolster the role of Ukrainian stakeholders in the planning and implementation processes. Social, gender, and climate parameters defining the regulation ensure that it reflects European shared values and priorities.Furthermore, it incorporates measures to combat corruption and promote transparency. The establishment of mechanisms for monitoring, scrutiny, and accountability underscores a commitment to responsible governance and effective oversight.I voted for the regulation.
Implementation of the common security and defence policy – annual report 2023 (A9-0403/2023 - Sven Mikser)
This report fails to account for the unique security and defence characteristics of individual Member States. Malta’s status as a neutral country prohibits participation in the projects of military alliances, unless they are backed by the UN. The report’s premises for EU action contradict this commitment.Moreover, I fundamentally disagree with the creation of a military dimension to the EU. This is not to deny that Member States have the right to create/participate in a European or other military alliance, if they so wish. Doing this, however, in the framework of the EU is not the right option. It will stamp the EU globally with the image of a military power bloc and it will inevitably override the interests of neutral Member States in the Union.A European military and defence policy, if decided, had better be pursued in the context of a European defence community with separate structures from those of the EU, even if operating in parallel with them. Therefore, I cannot agree with amendments to current rules that would confirm qualified majority voting for decisions on the CFSP and CSDP.Similarly, I disagree with the establishment of a European defence commissioner. So I voted against this resolution.
Financial activities of the European Investment Bank - annual report 2023 (A9-0031/2024 - David Cormand)
As the lending arm of the EU, the EIB remains a crucial financial instrument in support of the EU’s political priorities. It is worrying that the pressure to turn the bank into a defence bank persists. The weapons industry has clearly all interests in such a development. This is despite the fact that that the EIB already has a number of initiatives which are, in their nature, related to the defence industry. Actually, there is no evidence of a financing gap in this area.To further increase military funding and legitimise ammunition or military equipment under EIB financing would equate to a severe reduction in the financing of other core areas, including the Green Deal and digitalisation projects.Moreover, ‘militarising’ the EIB’s profile would negatively affect the ESG rating of the bank. The consequences of the loss of credibility with financial investors are difficult to quantify but are likely to be long lasting.Finally, as a ‘defence bank’ engaged in the financing of military projects, the EIB would politically undermine those Member States (shareholders) having a neutral status. Consequently, expanding EIB financing towards the military industry is and will remain for me a political red line. I have voted against this report.
Amending certain financial services and investment support Regulations as regards certain reporting requirements (A9-0026/2024 - Othmar Karas)
This proposal seeks to rationalise and simplify reporting requirements in the internal market – particularly the financial services sector, and the InvestEU programme – thereby reducing administrative burdens without compromising policy goals. The initiative aligns with the Commission’s emphasis, in current administrative jargon, on achieving objectives at ‘minimum cost, ensuring efficiency and facilitating evidence-informed policy-making’.The significance of reporting requirements in enforcing legislation is accepted, but as new regulations have been introduced, disproportionate burdens have been imposed, especially on smaller enterprises. The proposal aims to streamline reporting obligations by reducing duplication and enhancing data exchange between authorities, which is still deficient. Coupled with safeguards for data protection and business confidentiality, it is a step towards a more streamlined and effective regulatory framework.I voted for the proposal. Overall, it presents a balanced, proactive approach to regulatory reform. It is also a sad comment on the state of the Capital Markets Union, with special reference to financial services. Progress is incremental and conditioned by too many provisos. These lead to the administrative complications that proposals like this seek to revisit and lighten. Sometimes the process amounts to running on the spot – at best, a game of two steps forward, one step back.
European Semester for economic policy coordination 2024 (A9-0063/2024 - René Repasi)
There are relatively wide differences of views in this Parliament about the direction of economic policy. So, discussions within the European semester process tend to settle around compromises based on a common—denominator approach. This is vitiating whatever value—added the Parliament could bring to the semester process. The situation is carried over from year to year.Additionally this year, the discussion has been overshadowed by ongoing discussions on the Economic Governance Review that will qualify the political discourse on this process for the coming years. From the socialist side, the importance of the social dimension in the European Semester needs to be further emphasised, as has repeatedly been done over the years, coupled to the call for more public and private investment in the economy. Results obtained remain disappointing.Current rules allow, indeed encourage, governments to treat investment as the residual within their budgeting arrangements that can be adjusted downwards in order to satisfy SGP requirements. Meanwhile, growing disparities are being recorded in the standards of living of Europeans, from North to South and from West to East, while in most national contexts, social inequalities are on the rise. On both fronts, the contribution of this House has hardly been inspiring.
Guidelines for the 2025 Budget - Section III (A9-0068/2024 - Victor Negrescu)
I voted in favour of the 2025 budget guidelines because of the general approach it takes towards major priorities supported by the progressive side of the European Parliament, including support for societal cohesion, the green deal, and the digitalisation of the EU economy.It also embraces the idea of the EU budget as a European investment tool in line with the role of major EU funding programmes, such as InvestEU and the Recovery and Resilience Facility.Furthermore, I fully support the Parliament’s position on the continuation of EU aid to Palestine, and in this regard, funding for the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA). This position is not only important from a financial aspect, but it also provides a clear political message in the context of the War in Gaza. In this respect, Parliament should well consider cutting any EU financing collaboration with Israel.Finally, I must emphasise my total reservations on EU funding dedicated to defence. The EU budget should not serve to fund defence capabilities or weapons. This contradicts the neutrality status of some of its Member States as well as the idea of the EU project as a peace project.
Written questions (35)
Follow-up to my Written Question E-000222/2019 - Enforcement of anti-money laundering rules in Denmark and Estonia
Bluefin tuna input and farming
Review on lead used in terrestrial environments, in ammunition and in fishing tackle
Supporting Tunisia’s efforts in the fight against money laundering and terrorism financing
Commission communication on the European Green Deal and the Clean Energy for EU Islands initiative
The EU disability card
The Commission’s decision to award a contract to BlackRock to oversee the development of ESG factors in the EU banking sector and corporate investment policies
Reimbursement of cancelled flight tickets
European Banking Authority's guidelines on product oversight and governance arrangements for retail banking products
European Banking Authority’s guidelines on product oversight and governance arrangements for retail banking products
Follow-up to Written Question E-000781/2020 on the Commission communication on the European Green Deal and the Clean Energy for EU Islands initiative
Freelance interpreters
The protection of retail banking services in the EU
Follow-up to written question E-002413/2020 on the reimbursement of cancelled flight tickets – national authorities
Follow-up to written question E-002413/2020 on the reimbursement of cancelled flight tickets – airlines
Transparency of contracts for COVID-19 vaccines
SME IPO fund
Pandemic insurance
Conviction of the Palestinian human rights defender Issa Amro
Company takeovers and State aid allowed under the Temporary Framework to support the economy in the context of the coronavirus outbreak
Maintaining a level playing field: the temporary framework to support the economy in the context of the coronavirus outbreak
European Union Prize for Literature
Israel’s decision to designate six Palestinian human rights NGOs as terrorist organisations
Revision of target group of social housing
Anti-competitive behaviour of European Retail Alliances (ERAs)
Licencing, protection of intellectual property rights, connected cars and a level playing field for EU companies in foreign markets
Follow-up to Written Question E-000559/2022 on licencing, protection of intellectual property rights, connected cars and a level playing field for EU companies
EEAS - Libya
Important projects of common European interest (IPCEIs) involving semiconductors
Evaluation of the Consortia Block Exemption Regulation (CBER) post COVID-19
Exclusion of book tokens from the scope of the new anti-money laundering regulation
Foreign Subsidies Regulation and the US Inflation Reduction Act
Transfer of power advancing annexation of the West Bank by Israel
Ryanair petition – protecting flights and the EU single market during air traffic control strikes
Removing the minimum liver weight requirement for foie gras production
Amendments (2302)
Amendment 51 #
2023/2077(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Highlights the urgent need for European authorities to look into alternative methods to control inflations; calls in this regard on the Commission to evaluate and provide guidance on the application of price controls with pre- established sunset timeframes for targeted market areas where the competitive situation is opaque and is fuelling inflation in consumer prices;
Amendment 57 #
2023/2077(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Calls on the Commission to assess how EU competition principles have affected the supply of services of general economic interest (SGEI), also in light of the Covid crisis and increased costs of living; calls for a SGEI exemption for affordable housing; calls on the Commission to assess the position of social services of general interest;
Amendment 61 #
2023/2077(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Welcomes the Commission ‘Guidelines on the application of EU competition law to collective agreements’, clarifying that EU competition law does not prevent solo self-employed workers from engaging in collective bargaining; recalls that precarious working conditions of self-employed workers often stems from limited or no access to collective bargaining;
Amendment 69 #
2023/2077(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on the Commission to modernise public the procurement rules to help foster green and digital industry; calls on the Commission to take into account the sustainability and sovereignty criteria for public procurement rules in order to foster the produc; underlines that enforcing competition policy to the benefit of consumers should not only include considerations of goods ‘made in Europe’n price levels, but also sustainability considerations;
Amendment 81 #
2023/2077(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 b (new)
Paragraph 8 b (new)
8b. Notes that the three largest credit rating agencies hold a market share of over 90%; regrets the continued high degree of market concentration for credit rating agencies; concludes that existing measures to enhance competition in this market are insufficient; calls for the creation of a European public credit rating agency as an impartial and trusted alternative to existing agencies;
Amendment 83 #
2023/2077(INI)
8c. Points out that the audit market is one of the most concentrated markets in the Union, where the Big Four firms have a market share of over 90%; recalls that the high degree of market concentration in the audit market is a long acknowledged threat to financial market stability; recalls Commissioner McGuinness' commitment to reform the rules for auditors and the intention to present a legislative proposal at the end of 2022; notes that such legislative proposal is not presented; calls upon the Commission to present a legislative proposal on audit market reform which strengthens the supervision regime, addresses loopholes and Member State exceptions and introduces rules to avoid conflicts of interests; urges the Commission to take measures to avoid closeness between public institutions and audit firms, including its own operations;
Amendment 85 #
2023/2077(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 d (new)
Paragraph 8 d (new)
8d. Regrets the decision by Ernst & Young to stop its audit and advisory businesses separation process; notes that the combination of audit and advisory business can lead to conflicts of interest and can enhance the market dominance of each of the Big Four firms; calls upon the Commission to investigate the audit and advisory business combination and possibly present measures to prevent conflicts of interest and market dominance;
Amendment 98 #
2023/2077(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Amendment 146 #
2023/2077(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16a. Welcomes the Court of Justice of the European Union decision in the Meta vs Bundeskartellamt case that affirms the competence of national competition authorities to enforce data protection rules under antitrust laws; points out that the court affirms that the protection of personal data is an important consideration when examining an abuse of a dominant position and that it imposes requirements on the use of individuals’ personal data for targeted advertising; encourages competition authorities to investigate and sanction infringements of the GDPR;
Amendment 148 #
2023/2077(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 b (new)
Paragraph 16 b (new)
16b. Welcomes the conclusions of the proceedings of the Bundeskartellamt and Alphabet Inc. that gives Google users better choices as to how Google processes their data; asserts that EU consumers must have the choice whether they allow agglomeration and cross-service data processing of their personal data. Encourages the European Commission to pursue the coordination of enforcement activities and cooperate with national competition authorities in order to facilitate an effective interplay between competition law and the DMA; especially in the context of the DMA’s “further obligations”;
Amendment 149 #
2023/2077(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 c (new)
Paragraph 16 c (new)
16c. Welcomes the European Commission to block Booking Holdings acquisition of eTraveli; notes that Booking is a dominant online travel platform in Europe, which affects the daily operations of tens of thousands of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in the hotel sector; stresses that with this acquisition, Booking could cross-sell its different services and further strengthen its dominance in the hotel market; underlines that given Booking.com’s market power, hoteliers are under pressure to accept the platforms terms and conditions (e.g., regarding cancellation policy, special discounts) that hotels would otherwise voluntarily not offer; Reminds that's in July 2023, Booking declared that it did not yet qualify as a gatekeeper under the DMA thresholds mainly because of the various Covid19 lockdowns; calls on the European Commission to be vigilant and carefully assess if any future remedies offered safeguard fair competition and stop abuse of powers by such platform;
Amendment 79 #
2023/0363(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) Reporting requirements play a key role in ensuring proper monitoring and correct enforcement of legislation. However, it is important to streamline those requirements, in order to ensure that they fulfil their intended purpose and to limit the administrative burdenavoid undue duplication, not least for the regulatory and supervisory authorities of the smaller financial jurisdictions.
Amendment 81 #
2023/0363(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) Streamlining reporting obligations and reducing administrative burdenwithout undermining the policy objectives is therefore a priority, including as regards reporting requirements in the financial sector and as regards the frequency of reporting related to the InvestEU Programme established under Regulation (EU) 2021/523 of the European Parliament and of the Council3 . __________________ 3 Regulation (EU) 2021/523 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 March 2021 establishing the InvestEU Programme and amending Regulation (EU) 2015/1017 (OJ L 107, 26.3.2021, p. 30).
Amendment 83 #
2023/0363(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) Regulations (EU) No 1092/20104 , (EU) No 1093/20105 , (EU) No 1094/20106 , (EU) No 1095/20107 of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation (EU) 2021/523 contain a number of reporting requirements which should be simplified, in line with the Commission’s Communication on ‘Long- term compe. This is a qualitative, not a quantitativeness of the EU: looking beyond 2030’8 . exercise. __________________ 4 Regulation (EU) No 1092/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 November 2010 on European Union macro-prudential oversight of the financial system and establishing a European Systemic Risk Board (OJ L 331, 15.12.2010, p. 1). 5 Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 November 2010 establishing a European Supervisory Authority (European Banking Authority), amending Decision No 716/2009/EC and repealing Commission Decision 2009/78/EC (OJ L 331, 15.12.2010, p. 12). 6 Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 November 2010 establishing a European Supervisory Authority (European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority), amending Decision No 716/2009/EC and repealing Commission Decision 2009/79/EC (OJ L 331, 15.12.2010, p. 48). 7 Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 November 2010 establishing a European Supervisory Authority (European Securities and Markets Authority), amending Decision No 716/2009/EC and repealing Commission Decision 2009/77/EC (OJ L 331, 15.12.2010, p. 84). 8 COM(2023)168.
Amendment 84 #
2023/0363(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3 a (new)
Recital 3 a (new)
(3a) This exercise is not meant to undermine any of the EU policy achievements and, in particular, acknowledges the growing demand of data needed to fulfil the objectives of the legislative files pertaining to the sustainable finance agenda. Yet, consistency and standardization across legal frameworks, across jurisdictions and over time can make requirements more workable without affecting the actual content of the reporting standards.
Amendment 85 #
2023/0363(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3 b (new)
Recital 3 b (new)
(3b) Divergences of data between Member States should also be analysed in a qualitative way. In particular, some EU legislations are by virtue of their legal base meant to provide partial or minimum harmonisation. Furthermore, some reporting standards are voluntary or follow an opt-in regime. Also, Member States may develop best practices or be frontrunners in reporting requirements, as long as they adhere the requirements in Union legislation.
Amendment 86 #
2023/0363(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) Financial institutions and other entities active on financial markets are required to report a wide range of information to enable Union and national authorities overseeing the financial system to monitor risks, ensure financial stability and market integrity, and protect investors and consumers of financial services in the Union. The European Supervisory Authorities should regularly review the reporting requirements and propose, where appropriate, to streamline and remove redundant or obsolete requirements. TheyIndeed such work should be carried out on a standing basis, especially by peer reviews for which as necessary, more human and material resources should be allocated in order to ensure that duplication, redundancies and obsolete requirements are cleared out earliest and with the utmost speed. ESAs should coordinate this work via the Joint Committee of the European Supervisory Authorities. Facilitating the sharing and reuse of the information collected by authorities, while safeguarding data protection, professional secrecy and intellectual property, should reduce the burden on reporting entities and on authorities by avoiding duplicative requests, in line with the Strategy on supervisory data in EU financial services. Information sharing should also contribute to better coordination of supervisory activities and supervisory convergence.
Amendment 89 #
2023/0363(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5 a (new)
Recital 5 a (new)
(5a) The European Supervisory Authorities should assess policy options to further integrate the reporting processes from a procedural and content perspective. The Authority should duly assess opportunities arising from increasing the use of digital technology promoting effective and efficient formats embracing metrics, methods, and parameters, which will foster the competitiveness of the insurance, reinsurance and occupational retirement sectors.
Amendment 90 #
2023/0363(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6 a (new)
Recital 6 a (new)
(6a) Some data points that are needed by financial institutions from companies to comply with their reporting obligations, are still not reflected in the EU reporting framework and need to be added. Therefore, on top of the need to address redundant, duplicative or obsolete reporting requirements, regulatory gaps should be considered. This also makes it important to ensure consistency between financial and non-financial reporting requirements.
Amendment 91 #
2023/0363(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6 b (new)
Recital 6 b (new)
(6b) Where relevant, financial institutions should be able to rely on a sequential approach, meaning that they may refer to information which has already been published by companies in their value chain.
Amendment 92 #
2023/0363(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) Innovation cycles in the financial sector are accelerating, becoming more open and increasingly collaborative. To that end, authorities should be able to share information with financial institutions, researchers, and other entities for the purposes of research and innovation beyond the initial purpose for which the information was collected. The sharing of such information held by authorities should enhance its utility by expanding the information available for financial sector research and provide more opportunities to test products and business models as well as greater collaboration between various financial market participants, including fintech, start-ups and incumbent financial institutions. The re-use of data shared by competent authority is governed by the general framework for the re-use of data set out in Chapter II of Regulation (EU) 2022/868 of the European Parliament and of the Council9 . However, considering the sensitive nature of the data received for supervision purposes by the authorities in the financial sector, specific mandatory conditions should be introduced for the re- use of this data, including the anonymiszation of personal and non- personal data which would not allow the identification of individual financial institutions and the protection of confidential information. It follows that all procedures and steps in the collection, standardisation, anonymization, storage and sharing of data will continually be kept subject to the latest cyber security measures prescribed under Union law. __________________ 9 Regulation (EU) 2022/868 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2022 on European data governance and amending Regulation (EU) 2018/1724 (Data Governance Act) (OJ L 152, 3.6.2022, p. 1).
Amendment 93 #
2023/0363(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Regulation (EU) No 1092/2010
Article 15 – paragraph 8
Article 15 – paragraph 8
8. The ESRB shall share, on a case- by-case or regular basis, information it obtained from another authority referred to in paragraph 2 or another member authority of the ESFS in carrying out its duties, when requested by another of those authorities, or another competent authority as defined in Article 4, point (2), of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010, in Article 4, point (2), of Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010, or in Article 4, point (3) of Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010, or the authorities defined in Article 2, point (1), of Directive (EU) …/… of the European Parliament and of the Council10 , or the SSM as defined in Article 2, point (9), of Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013, or the SRB provided that the requesting authority has the power to obtain that same information from financial institutions or other competent authorities pursuant to Union law. __________________ 10 OP : please insert in the text the number of the Directive contained in document 2021/0250(COD) (proposal for 6th Anti- Money Laundering Directive – COM/2021/423 final) and insert the number, date, title and OJ reference of that Directive in the footnote.
Amendment 94 #
2023/0363(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Regulation (EU) No 1092/2010
Article 15 – paragraph 11
Article 15 – paragraph 11
11. For sharing information as referred to in paragraphs 8, 9 and 10, the authorities referred to in paragraph 8 may enter into memoranda of understanding to specify the modalities of the exchange of information. They may also specify arrangements for the sharing of resources for the collection and processing of such shared data. The memoranda of understanding shall by agreement between all the authorities concerned follow a standardised format, tailored when necessary to the special operating conditions that might apply to specific authorities.
Amendment 96 #
2023/0363(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Regulation (EU) No 1092/2010
Article 15 – paragraph 13
Article 15 – paragraph 13
13. Without prejudice to other obligations laid down in Union law for sharing information, the ESRB shall, upon justified request and on a case-by-case basis, share with the Commission or one of the authorities referred to in paragraph 8 information that other authorities have reported to it pursuant to their obligations under Union law. The ESRB shall transmit that information in a form that does not allow the identification of individual entities and does not contain personal data. The authorities which have submitted such information shall be duly informed of the sharing that has taken place.
Amendment 98 #
2023/0363(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Regulation (EU) No 1092/2010
Article 15 – paragraph 14 – subparagraph 2
Article 15 – paragraph 14 – subparagraph 2
Information received from another authority shall only be shared on this basis with the agreement of the authority that initially obtained the information.
Amendment 100 #
2023/0363(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Regulation (EU) No 1092/2010
Article 15 – paragraph 14 a (new)
Article 15 – paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. The ESRB is encouraged to draw up a report to the Commission with obstacles to data sharing. The report may also include non-material, obsolete, duplicative or otherwise irrelevant reporting requirements.
Amendment 102 #
2023/0363(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) reviewing the application of the relevant regulatory and implementing technical standards adopted by the Commission, and of the guidelines and recommendations issued by the Authority and proposing amendments where appropriate, including to address regulatory gaps, remove redundant, duplicative or obsolete reporting requirements, standardise such requirements and minimise costs;;
Amendment 105 #
2023/0363(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010
Article 30 – paragraph 3 – point e
Article 30 – paragraph 3 – point e
(e) the effectiveness of national reporting requirements and the degree of convergence of such requirements with the ones set out in Union law while taking into account the specific characteristics of national financial jurisdictions .;
Amendment 107 #
2023/0363(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation EU (No) 1093/2010
Article 35 – paragraph 4
Article 35 – paragraph 4
4. Before requesting information in accordance with this Article and in order to avoid theensure no duplication of reporting obligations, the Authority shall take account of information collected by other authorities referred to in Article 35a(1) and any relevant existing statistics produced and disseminated by the European Statistical System and the European System of Central Banks.;
Amendment 108 #
2023/0363(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010
Article 35 a – paragraph 1
Article 35 a – paragraph 1
1. The Authority and the competent authorities shall share with other authorities, on a case-by-case or regular basis, information they obtained from financial institutions or other competent authorities in carrying out their duties, when requested by the other European Supervisory Authorities, the ESRB or competent authorities as defined in Article 4, point (2), of this Regulation, in Article 4, point (2), of Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010 or in Article 4, point (3) of Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010, or the authorities defined in Article 2, point (1), of Directive (EU) …/… of the European Parliament and of the Council11 , or the SSM as defined in Article 2, point (9), of Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013, or the SRB, provided that the authority requesting that information is, pursuant to Union law, entitled to obtain that same information from financial institutions or other competent authorities. For the purposes of this Article, ‘financial institution’ means a ‘financial institution’ as defined in Article 2, point (a), of Regulation (EU) No 1092/2010. __________________ 11 OP: Please insert in the text the number of the Directive contained in document 2021/0250(COD) (proposal for 6th Anti- Money Laundering Directive - COM/2021/423 final) and insert the number, date, title and OJ reference of that Directive in the footnote.
Amendment 109 #
2023/0363(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010
Article 35 a – paragraph 4
Article 35 a – paragraph 4
4. For sharing information as referred to in paragraphs 1, 2 and 3, the authorities referred to in paragraph 1 may enter into memoranda of understanding to specify the modalities of the exchange of information. They may also specify arrangements for the sharing of resources for the collection and processing of such shared data. The memoranda of understanding shall by agreement between all the authorities concerned follow a standardised format, tailored when necessary to the special operating conditions that might apply to specific authorities.
Amendment 110 #
2023/0363(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010
Article 35 a – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 2
Article 35 a – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 2
Information received from another authority shall only be shared on this basis with the agreement of the authority that initially obtained the information.;
Amendment 111 #
2023/0363(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation EU (No) 1093/2010
Article 35 a – paragraph 7 a (new)
Article 35 a – paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. The Authority may draw up a report to the Commission with obstacles to data sharing. The report may also include non-material, obsolete, duplicative or otherwise irrelevant reporting requirements, and suggestions to ensure consistency between reporting requirements of financial and non- financial companies.
Amendment 115 #
2023/0363(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) reviewing the application of the relevant regulatory and implementing technical standards adopted by the Commission, and of the guidelines and recommendations issued by the Authority and proposing amendments where appropriate, including to address regulatory gaps, remove redundant, duplicative or obsolete reporting requirements, standardise such requirements and minimise costs;;
Amendment 116 #
2023/0363(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010
Article 30 – paragraph 3 – point e
Article 30 – paragraph 3 – point e
(e) the effectiveness of national reporting requirements and the degree of convergence of such requirements with the ones set out in Union law, while taking into account the specific characteristics of national insurance markets and jurisdictions.;
Amendment 117 #
2023/0363(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010
Article 35 a – paragraph 1
Article 35 a – paragraph 1
1. The Authority and the competent authorities shall share with other authorities, on a case-by-case or regular basis, information they obtained from financial institutions or other competent authorities in carrying out their duties, when requested by the other European Supervisory Authorities, the ESRB or competent authorities as defined in Article 4, point (2) of this Regulation, in Article 4, point (2), of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010 or in Article 4, point (3), of Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010, or the authorities defined in Article 2, point (1), of Directive (EU) …/… of the European Parliament and of the Council13 ,or the SSM as defined in Article 2, point (9), of Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013, or the SRB provided that the authority requesting the information is, pursuant to Union law, entitled to obtain that same information from financial institutions or other competent authorities. For the purposes of this Article, ‘financial institution’ means a ‘financial institution’ as defined in Article 2, point (a), of Regulation (EU) No 1092/2010. __________________ 13 OP: Please insert in the text the number of the Directive contained in document 2021/0250(COD) (proposal for 6th Anti- Money Laundering Directive - COM/2021/423 final) and insert the number, date, title and OJ reference of that Directive in the footnote.
Amendment 118 #
2023/0363(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010
Article 35 a – paragraph 4
Article 35 a – paragraph 4
4. For sharing information as referred to paragraphs 1, 2 and 3, the authorities referred to in paragraph 1 may enter into memoranda of understanding to specify the modalities of the exchange of information. They may also specify arrangements for the sharing of resources for the collection and processing of such shared data. The memoranda of understanding shall by agreement between all the authorities concerned follow a standardised format, tailored when necessary to the special operating conditions that might apply to specific authorities.
Amendment 119 #
2023/0363(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010
Article 35 a – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 2
Article 35 a – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 2
Information received from another authority shall only be shared on this basis with the agreement of the authority that initially obtained the information. ;
Amendment 121 #
2023/0363(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010
Article 35 a – paragraph 7 a (new)
Article 35 a – paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. The Authority may draw up a report to the Commission with obstacles to data sharing. The report may also include non-material, obsolete, duplicative or otherwise irrelevant reporting requirements, and suggestions to ensure consistency between reporting requirements of financial and non- financial companies.
Amendment 125 #
2023/0363(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) reviewing the application of the relevant regulatory and implementing technical standards adopted by the Commission, and of the guidelines and recommendations issued by the Authority and proposing amendments where appropriate, including to address regulatory gaps, remove redundant, duplicative or obsolete reporting requirements, standardise such requirements and minimise costs;;
Amendment 127 #
2023/0363(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010
Article 30 – paragraph 3 – point e
Article 30 – paragraph 3 – point e
(e) the effectiveness of national reporting requirements and the degree of convergence of such requirements with the ones set out in Union law, while not unnecessary limiting the discretion for national best practices in line with point (c) of this paragraph.;
Amendment 128 #
2023/0363(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010
Article 35 a – paragraph 1
Article 35 a – paragraph 1
1. The Authority and the competent authorities shall share with other authorities, on a case-by-case or regular basis, information they obtained from financial institutions or other competent authorities in carrying out their duties, when requested by the other European Supervisory Authorities, the ESRB or competent authorities as defined in Article 4, point (3) of this Regulation, in Article 4, point (2), of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010 or in Article 4, point (2), of Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010, or the authorities defined in Article 2, point (1), of Directive (EU) …/… of the European Parliament and of the Council15 , or the SSM as defined in Article 2, point (9), of Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013, or the SRB provided that the authority requesting that information is, pursuant to Union law, entitled to obtain that same information from financial institutions or other competent authorities. For the purposes of this Article, ‘financial institution’ means a ‘financial institution’ as defined in Article 2, point (a), of Regulation (EU) No 1092/2010. __________________ 15 OP: Please insert in the text the number of the Directive contained in document 2021/0250(COD) (proposal for 6th Anti- Money Laundering Directive - COM/2021/423 final) and insert the number, date, title and OJ reference of that Directive in the footnote.
Amendment 129 #
2023/0363(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010
Article 35 a – paragraph 4
Article 35 a – paragraph 4
4. For sharing information as referred to in paragraphs 1, 2 and 3, the authorities referred to in paragraph 1 may enter into memoranda of understanding to specify the modalities of the exchange of information. They may also specify arrangements for the sharing of resources for the collection and processing of such shared data. The memoranda of understanding shall by agreement between all the authorities concerned follow a standardised format, tailored when necessary to the special operating conditions that might apply to specific authorities.
Amendment 130 #
2023/0363(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010
Article 35 a – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 2
Article 35 a – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 2
Information received from another authority shall only be shared on this basis with the agreement of the authority that initially obtained the information.;
Amendment 132 #
2023/0363(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010
Article 35 a – paragraph 7 a (new)
Article 35 a – paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. The Authority may draw up a report to the Commission with obstacles to data sharing. The report may also include non-material, obsolete, duplicative or otherwise irrelevant reporting requirements, and suggestions to ensure consistency between reporting requirements of financial and non- financial companies.
Amendment 138 #
2023/0363(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point -1 (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point -1 (new)
Regulation (EU) No 2021/523
Article 8 – paragraph 6
Article 8 – paragraph 6
-1. Article 8(6) the introductory part is replaced by the following: ‘The Commission shall develop sustainability guidance that, in accordance with Union environmental and social objectives and standards and, taking appropriate account of the principle of ‘do no significant harm’, and considering differences between various types of infrastructure projects, allows for:’
Amendment 146 #
2023/0363(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph -1 b (new)
Article 5 – paragraph -1 b (new)
Regulation (EU) No 2021/523
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – point (h)
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – point (h)
Amendment 148 #
2023/0363(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Regulation (EU) No 2021/523
Article 28 – paragraph 4
Article 28 – paragraph 4
4. Once a year, each implementing partner shall submit a report to the Commission on the financing and investment operations covered by this Regulation, broken down by EU compartment and Member State compartment, as appropriate. Each implementing partner shall also submit information on the Member State compartment to the Member State whose compartment it implements. The report shall include an assessment of compliance with the requirements on the use of the EU guarantee and with the key performance indicators laid down in Annex III to this Regulation. The report shall also include operational, statistical, financial and accounting data, including the results of any available audits on each financing or investment operation and an estimation of expected cash flows, at the level of compartment, policy window and the InvestEU Fund. The report from the EIB Group and, where appropriate, from other implementing partners, shall also include information on barriers to investment encountered when carrying out financing and investment operations covered by this Regulation. The reports shall contain the information the implementing partners have to provide under point (a) of Article 155(1) of the Financial Regulation.
Amendment 392 #
2023/0212(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1
Article 16 – paragraph 1
1. For the purpose of Article 15(1), the European Central Bank shall develop instruments to limit the use of the digital euro as a store of value and shall decide on their parameters and use, in accordance with the framework set out in this Article. PSPs providing account servicing payment services within the meaning of Directive 2015/2366 to natural and legal persons referred to in Article 12(1) shall apply these limits to digital euro payment accounts as established.
Amendment 392 #
2023/0212(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1
Article 16 – paragraph 1
1. For the purpose of Article 15(1), the European Central Bank shall develop instruments to limit the use of the digital euro as a store of value and shall decide on their parameters and use, in accordance with the framework set out in this Article. PSPs providing account servicing payment services within the meaning of Directive 2015/2366 to natural and legal persons referred to in Article 12(1) shall apply these limits to digital euro payment accounts as established.
Amendment 444 #
2023/0212(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. For the purpose of Article 15(2), any merchant service charge or inter-PSP fee in relation to digital euro payment transactions shall comply with the principle of proportionality. Any merchant service charge or inter-PSP fee shall not exceed the lowest of the following fixed two amounts:
Amendment 444 #
2023/0212(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. For the purpose of Article 15(2), any merchant service charge or inter-PSP fee in relation to digital euro payment transactions shall comply with the principle of proportionality. Any merchant service charge or inter-PSP fee shall not exceed the lowest of the following fixed two amounts:
Amendment 526 #
2023/0212(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
Article 24 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(ba) adopt standards in order to allow the Digital Euro to be referenced on distributed ledgers or other technologies that may exist or come along in future.
Amendment 526 #
2023/0212(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
Article 24 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(ba) adopt standards in order to allow the Digital Euro to be referenced on distributed ledgers or other technologies that may exist or come along in future.
Amendment 611 #
2023/0212(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 35 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) supporting verification by payment service providers of whether a prospective user already has digital euro payment accounts with other payment service providers in order to prevent the circumvention of those limits in accordance withset in Article 16;
Amendment 611 #
2023/0212(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 35 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) supporting verification by payment service providers of whether a prospective user already has digital euro payment accounts with other payment service providers in order to prevent the circumvention of those limits in accordance withset in Article 16;
Amendment 190 #
2023/0205(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) The data use perimeter thus established in this Regulation and in the accompanying guidelines (‘the guidelines’)regulatory technical standards to be developed by the European Banking Authority (EBA) and the European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority (EIOPA) should provide a proportionate framework on how personal data related to a consumer that falls within the scope of this Regulation should be used. The data use perimeter ensures consistency between the scope of this Regulation, which excludes data that forms part of a creditworthiness assessment of a consumer as well as data related to life, health and sickness insurance of a consumer, and the scope of the guidelines,regulatory technical standards which set recommendations on how types of data originating from other areas of the financial sector that are in scope of this Regulation can be used to provide these products and services. The guideline The regulatory technical standards developed by the EBA should set out how other types of data that are in scope of this Regulation can be used to assess the credit score of a consumer. The guidelineregulatory technical standards developed by EIOPA should set out how data in scope of this Regulation can be used in products and services related to risk assessment and pricing in the case of life, health and sickness insurance products. The guidelineregulatory technical standards should be developed in a manner that is aligned to the needs of the consumer and proportionate to the provision of such products and services. The regulatory technical standards developed by EIOPA and the EBA should also elaborate on the limits for combining ‘customer data’ with other types of personal data, such as personal data obtained from third party sources, such as from social media networks or from data brokers.
Amendment 271 #
2023/0205(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 3
Article 2 – paragraph 3
3. This Regulation shall not apply to the entities referred to in Article 2(3), points (a) to (e), of Regulation (EU) 2022/2554. Any undertaking designated as a gatekeeper, pursuant to Article 3 of Regulation (EU) 2022/1925, shall not be an eligible data user for the purposes of this Regulation. .
Amendment 282 #
2023/0205(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 3 b (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 3 b (new)
3 b. This regulation shall not apply to collectively concluded products such as products resulted from social partners bargaining, trade unions or products procured by non-profit organisations on behalf of their members.
Amendment 327 #
2023/0205(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 7 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 7 a (new)
(7 a) ‘financial information service’ means an online service providing consolidated information on one or more financial services products listed under Article 2(1) of this Regulation with a view to providing a customer with an overall view of their financial situation immediately at any given moment;
Amendment 375 #
2023/0205(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 4 – point a a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 4 – point a a (new)
(a a) not transfer any customer data to any third party without the customer’s explicit permission;
Amendment 397 #
2023/0205(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2
Article 7 – paragraph 2
2. In accordance with Article 16 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010, tThe European Banking Authority (EBA) shall develop guidelinedraft regulatory technical standards on the implementation of paragraph 1 of this Article for products and services related to the credit score of the consumer, mortgage credit agreements, and payment services.
Amendment 403 #
2023/0205(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. For the purposes of paragraphs (2) and (3) of this article, regulatory technical standards should address: (a) the limits of the combination of ‘customer data’ obtained pursuant to the Proposal with other types of personal data; (b) the explainability, transparency and bias avoidance safeguards needed to be installed when Artificial Intelligence tools and algorithms are being deployed, used or trained for any of the purposes mentioned in paragraphs (2) and (3) of this article; (c) the information provision obligations for financial institutions when a customer is presented with a personalised offer that is based on profiling or other types of automated processing of personal data; (d) how the ‘right to be forgotten’ of cancer survivors shall be applicable in relation to non-credit related insurance policies, including life and health insurance, in line with article 124 of the 2020/2267 (INI) Report of the European Parliament. This shall also be extended to other chronic diseases and mental conditions.
Amendment 464 #
2023/0205(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a a (new)
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a a (new)
(a a) each of the parties listed in paragraph (a) above shall have fair and equal representation in the internal decision-making processes of the scheme as well as equal weight in any voting procedures; where a member is both a data holder and data user, its membership shall be counted equally towards both sides;
Amendment 471 #
2023/0205(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point g a (new)
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point g a (new)
(g a) a financial data sharing scheme shall also establish minimum technical and organisational measures to ensure an appropriate level of security for the exchange of personal data;
Amendment 2 #
2022/2172(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas, pursuant to Article 311 TFEU, the Union must provide itself with the means necessary to attain its politically agreed objectives and carry through its policies, and its budget, without prejudice to other revenue, is to be financed wholly from own resources; whereas Article 311 TFEU provides that Council must consult the European Parliament before adopting a decision on own resources;
Amendment 23 #
2022/2172(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses the crucial and growing importance of the EU budget in delivering on virtually all of themost EU’s key policy objectives, and all its flagship programmes and its crisis intervention; underlines the multiple challenges the EU is facing such as building up its strategic autonomy, ending its reliance upon Russian fossil fuels, completing the health union and the energy union and financing important common projects such as defence cooperation, civil protection and space; considers that all new EU policies and challenges must involve new financial means and extra resources; reiterates, in this regard, that robust, reliable and resilient financing of the EU budget requires a diversified and enlarged set of own resources; is convinced that there is huge potential in a well-designed reform of the EU own resources not only for strengthening the financing of its budgetary needs, but also for boosting its policy outputs, improving the fiscal equilibrium between the EU and Member States and adding value to overall public finance;
Amendment 30 #
2022/2172(INI)
5. Expresses its high expectations that, with the ETS- and CBAM-based own resources, the long-standing demand for a better linkage of the EU revenue side with environmental policies and the rationale of climate mainstreaming across expenditure and revenue policies will finally become operational; notes that the sectoral negotiations on the CBAM and the ETS have led to an agreement; welcomes the fact that the resulting legal texts in the ETS Directive and the CBAM Regulation remain fully compatible with the own resources proposals; calls for the EU institutions to thoroughly assess the implications regarding the revenue estimations; insists on not using such analyses as a pretext for blocking decision- making; is aware, furthermore, that in the very long run, as the process of decarbonisation continues as planned, the yields from the green own resources will diminish;
Amendment 38 #
2022/2172(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Considers that these new own resources are necessary to avoid the next generation of Europeans paying the price for the repayment of the principal and the interest of the funds borrowed under NGEU, either through an increased burden on taxpayers or via cuts in regular EU programmes directly affecting beneficiaries and project- holders; notes the legitimate demand by Europeans for more social and tax justice as well as for equivalent standards of living between the different regions of the EU; warns against any attempt to reduce funding for ordinary EU policies to make space for the repayment of EU debt, as this would endanger long-term EU goals, such as economic convergence, research and innovation or the green transition;
Amendment 59 #
2022/2172(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls on the Commission to consider, for its second basket of own resources, an EU-wide financial transaction tax based on its 2011 model, subject to its forming part of an OECD-led global tax deal, which should yield around EUR 41.5 billion per year;
Amendment 64 #
2022/2172(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls on the Commission to come forward with an own resource linked to either the upcoming ‘Business in Europe: Framework for Income Taxation’ proposal or to the proposal for a minimum tax directive1 implementing the OECD-led global tax deal, most in particular Pillar II; _________________ 1 Commission proposal for a Council directive on ensuring a global minimum level of taxation for multinational groups in the Union (COM(2021)0823).
Amendment 72 #
2022/2172(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Looks forward to and places high hopes, in this context, in the Commission’s upcoming Business in Europe: Framework for Income Taxation (BEFIT) initiative in the third quarter of 2023; agrees that a single corporate tax rulebook for the EU, based on the key features of a common tax base and the allocation of profits between Member States by using a formula or formulary apportionment, would constitute an excellent starting point for a new own resource in the spirit of the roadmap; expects the new approach to this corporate tax-based own resource to address issues of national differences in corporate taxation that have so far impeded an own resource in this realm and to allow for a broad scope capturing more companies active in the single market than only the few very biggest and most profitable multinationals that are subject to the OECD Pillar One Agreement;
Amendment 78 #
2022/2172(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Invites the Commission and the Member States to consider additional new own resources, such as an EU- wide aviationroad tax for intra- European commercial flightspassenger road travel or an own resource based on the revision of the Energy Taxation Directive2 targeted to the production of nuclear energy; _________________ 2 Commission proposal for a Council directive restructuring the Union framework for the taxation of energy products and electricity (COM(2021)0563).
Amendment 167 #
2022/2172(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
Paragraph 35
35. Reminds Member States that post- 2027 multilaterannual financial framework negotiations will be linked with own resources negotiations; stands ready to make use of all its budgetary powers to ensure that clear and effective progress is made in the area of own resources;
Amendment 6 #
2022/2150(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Underlines the exceptionally uncertain EU economic and social outlook resulting from the lasting impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and the consequences of the war against Ukraine;
Amendment 9 #
2022/2150(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the EU labour market has proved particularly resilient, with an additional two million people in employment, leading to a record low unemployment rate of 6.2 % in 2022; whereas according to the Commission’s autumn economic forecast the public sector was a key contributor to the increase in employment; whereas despite labour market tightness wage growth has remained moderate and has failed to keep up with inflation, implying real wage losses of, on average, 8% between Q4 2020 and Q2 2022 in the Euro Area according to ECB research13a; whereas the unemployment rate is expected to increase slightly in 2023 (6.5 %), before marginally coming down again in 2024 (6.2 %); _________________ 13a https://www.ecb.europa.eu/press/blog/date /2022/html/ecb.blog221125~d34babdf3e.e n.html
Amendment 10 #
2022/2150(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Welcomes the robustness of the labour market; highlights the stabilising effect of national short-time work schemes supported by the European instrument for temporary support to mitigate unemployment risks in an emergency (SURE); welcomes the fact that the recovery and resilience facility is mitigating those consequences and contributing to the Union’s competitive sustainabilitya sustainable and resilient Union; stresses that its successful implementation requires the completion of milestones and targets, in particular compliance with the rule of law and the general regime of conditionality, to be monitored transparently and thoroughly; stresses that large parts of the success of the RRF are due to the mobilisation of financial support for reforms and investments undertaken by Member States; welcomes the Commission’s proposal to include a REPowerEU chapter in the national recovery and resilience plans; insists that the financing of REPowerEU must not divert resources away from other agreed EU priorities;
Amendment 15 #
2022/2150(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Welcomes however the European Commission’s call on Member States to deliver targeted measures to offset the impact of high energy prices on vulnerable households and companies; agrees with the European Commission in stressing that such measures should maintain incentives for energy savings; recalls that Member States find themselves in significantly diverging positions regarding the fiscal space available to them; notes that this situation entails the risk of furthering divergence between Member States and of potential distortions of the Single Market as the energy crisis continues and progresses.
Amendment 19 #
2022/2150(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
C a. whereas inflation has a differentiated impact across income groups, with low-income groups suffering proportionally more especially as inflation is mainly driven by price developments in essential goods that cannot be substituted and make up a relatively larger share of the consumption basket of low-income households; whereas such differentiated impacts cause a veritable cost-of-living crisis for parts of the population that poses challenges to social cohesion;
Amendment 21 #
2022/2150(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses that the Union budget primarily supports strategic, targeted and growth-enhancing investment and entails a lower risk of inflationary pressure compared to untargeted and extensive national; believes that RRF provides a solid foundation for discussions on how to allow sufficient public investment under the fiscal stimrulues; calls on the Commission and the Member States, in the revision of the EU economic governance framework, to treat gross national income- based contributions to the Union budget in the same way as the national investment commitment; under the European Fund for Strategic Investments in the context of the Commission communication on flexibility .
Amendment 24 #
2022/2150(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Stresses that the European Parliament should be fully involved in the reform of the economic governance framework as well as the future conduct of economic governance in the EU, including in the establishment and management of fiscal instruments.
Amendment 26 #
2022/2150(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
D a. whereas inflation and economic forecasts are operating under the conditions of heightened uncertainty, with key risks, especially to growth, continuing to be pitched to the downside; whereas such uncertainty compels the EU and Member State governments to remain vigilant and to take rapid action if risks materialise;
Amendment 29 #
2022/2150(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Is concerned at the economic impact of the aforementioned crises on the Union and on national budgets; stresswelcomes that crisis response has led Member States to adopt extensivenecessary economic and social measures; highlights the positive long-term impact of these measures on economic sustainability, but considers that it should be possible to return to a state of economic discipline in the long run; is also concerned at the Union’s increasing debt repayment obligations if not appropriately handled; stresses that Union borrowing should not increase further as long as there are nowell-targeted measures and public investments on economic growth, social inclusion and environmental sustainability that will contribute to increase potential growth and fiscal sustainability in the long run; considers that the Union’s debt should be accompanied by the introduction of new own resources to cater for debt repayment obligations.
Amendment 32 #
2022/2150(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Believes that future reforms of the European Semester should draw on the lessons learned on the Next Generation EU, the RRF and the Support to mitigate Unemployment Risks in an Emergency (SURE) instrument, especially as regards more transparent and democratic processes as well as policy coordination and collaborative approaches to the definition of reforms and investment priorities and projects;
Amendment 40 #
2022/2150(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4 b. Considers that all options to incentivise Member State investments to tackle the long-term challenges should be on the table, specifically the revision of the Stability and Growth Pact to promote a future-oriented economy and the extension of lending and borrowing capacities at EU level, building on Next Generation EU;
Amendment 44 #
2022/2150(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 c (new)
Paragraph 4 c (new)
4 c. Considers that an adequately- designed permanent fiscal capacity at EU level could play a crucial role in maintaining sufficiently high levels of strategic investment and ensuring an appropriate fiscal stance at the aggregate level;
Amendment 45 #
2022/2150(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 d (new)
Paragraph 4 d (new)
Amendment 46 #
2022/2150(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Notes that the European Systemic Risk Board has issued a warning on 22 September 2022 calling for heightened awareness with regards to financial stability risks resulting from sharply falling asset prices; is concerned that rising mortgage rates and the deterioration in debt servicing capacity due to a decline in real household income may cause further distress for families and for financial markets;
Amendment 50 #
2022/2150(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Recognises that the EU finds itself in a critical juncture with both external and internal negative pressures forcing the European economy into a continuous adaptation mode;
Amendment 51 #
2022/2150(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1 b. Welcomes the positive projections in the Commission’s Annual Sustainable Growth Survey 2023 as regards inflation and real GDP growth from the year 2024 onwards; stresses that it remains essential for EU economic policy to have in place the needed tools for an adverse scenario in order to cushion European enterprises and households from further difficulties;
Amendment 52 #
2022/2150(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 c (new)
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1 c. Is concerned that both the COVID crisis and to a larger extent, the ongoing inflation plus energy shake-up are exposing the fragility of the social safety net, which was side-lined for years due to other priorities during a long period of practically zero inflation; points out that already by the end of 2021, 95.4 million EU citizens, equivalent to 21.7 % of the EU population were at risk of poverty or social exclusion with one fifth of the EU population living in households where dependent children were at risk of poverty or social exclusion;
Amendment 53 #
2022/2150(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 d (new)
Paragraph 1 d (new)
1 d. Stresses the urgent need to have more EU investment directly funnelled towards programmed social projects in the Member States and that EU actors must push towards EU and national budgetary policies that embrace such approach;
Amendment 60 #
2022/2150(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses that while the primary objective of the European Central Bank (ECB) is to maintain price stability, the primary objective of the Union as a whole should be to minimise the impact of current turbulences on the real economy, thereby defending the wellbeing of its citizens and preserving its production structure and the international competitiveness of its companies; underlines, in this regard, the importance of adequate and coordinated fiscal, structural and regulatory policies that complement the ECB’s monetary policy actions, which are also capable of supporting household incomes and providing targeted support to companies suffering from supply bottlenecks and high energy costs; notes that further increases of the ECB’s key policy rate or quantitative tightening may further contract economic activity;
Amendment 64 #
2022/2150(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Welcomes the European Commission’s call on Member States to deliver targeted measures to offset the impact of high energy prices on vulnerable households and companies; agrees with the European Commission in stressing that such measures should maintain incentives for energy savings; recalls that Member States find themselves in starkly diverging positions regarding the fiscal space available to them; notes that this situation entails the risk of furthering divergence between Member States as the energy crisis continues;
Amendment 67 #
2022/2150(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2 b. Notes the increased need for fiscal space in most Member States; underlines that in periods of increasing interest rates, Member States should also consider raising more revenues on higher earners or on industries and firms that are highly profitable; notes how a healthy balance between government revenues and expenditures is also necessary to reduce legacy debt and to build up buffers in times of economic recovery;
Amendment 69 #
2022/2150(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 c (new)
Paragraph 2 c (new)
2 c. Calls for the general escape clause under the Stability and Growth (SGP) pact to remain activated as long as Member States are recovering from the crises caused by the pandemic and the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine; notes that the policy leeway created by the general escape clause is necessary to allow Member States to strengthen their competitiveness as well as their economic and social resilience under the current circumstances and within the constraints of the SGP in its current form;
Amendment 89 #
2022/2150(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Notes that through the years, the Semester process has lacked ownership by national and regional entities as well as the European public;
Amendment 97 #
2022/2150(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Insists that NRRPs must respect the principle of subsidiarity and should not hamper the Member States’ autonomy to manage sectors which fall outside EU competence;
Amendment 114 #
2022/2150(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 – point a
Paragraph 7 – point a
(a) the six-pillar structure, ensuringwhich was developed as part of the ordinary legislative procedure and hence under the full involvement of the European Parliament and that ensures that Member States give adequate consideration in their reform and investment agendas to all the relevant dimensions for making EU economies and societies more prosperous, sustainable, inclusive, competitive and resilient;
Amendment 131 #
2022/2150(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Amendment 132 #
2022/2150(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 b (new)
Paragraph 8 b (new)
8 b. Believes that future reforms of the European Semester should draw on the lessons learned as part of Next Generation EU and the RRF, especially as regards more transparent and democratic processes relating to the definition of policy objectives, the conduct of policy coordination as well as in relation to the collaborative approaches to the definition of reforms and investment projects that were pioneered between the European Commission and Member States; considers that such reforms should also incorporate lessons learned from the temporary establishment of the Support to mitigate Unemployment Risks in an Emergency (SURE) instrument;
Amendment 148 #
2022/2150(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Agrees with the Commission’s orientations as regard the simplification of the framework, differences in Member States’ debt reduction paths, the use of a comprehensive debt sustainability analysis and the general escape clauses; retains its inclination towards a simplified approach to determine debt sustainability challenges;
Amendment 155 #
2022/2150(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10 a. Awaits for further clarifications from the European Commission as regards the technicalities of the tool and the way it will be assessed; points out that the automaticity of the debt sustainability analysis process in the fiscal coordination process needs further political and technical discussion;
Amendment 160 #
2022/2150(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Notes the aim to stimulate investment and reforms by allowing Member States to have different debt reduction paths, provided that these enhance growth, improve debt sustainability and are in line with the EU’s objectives, in particular those of the green and digital transition and social resilience; requires that such paths maintain a level of flexibility on the basis of possible errors in established forecasts arising from potential rapid structural changes; notes the elastic nature of small transition economies which leaves them more prone to such rapid changes as compared to larger European economies;
Amendment 167 #
2022/2150(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11 a. Stresses that the revised regulatory framework must ensure that Member States have sufficient leeway to deliver decisive crisis-resolution measures when they are needed; is of the opinion that implementation of such measures should not require the suspension of regulatory provisions by means of escape clauses; notes that, in the future, the activation of escape clauses should remain a measure of last resort;
Amendment 168 #
2022/2150(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 b (new)
Paragraph 11 b (new)
11 b. Highlights the need for common criteria that ensure, despite more country- specific flexibility in debt reduction, that all Member States are assessed according to the same standards, are treated equally, and that policy outcomes are predictable; notes that such common criteria should include criteria for the definition of Member States’ debt reduction paths; stresses that debt reduction should be delivered in a growth-friendly way and that underlying regulatory criteria should be defined in relation to Member States’ output and expenditure growth;
Amendment 169 #
2022/2150(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 c (new)
Paragraph 11 c (new)
Amendment 170 #
2022/2150(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 d (new)
Paragraph 11 d (new)
11 d. Notes that the Commission's Communication puts debt sustainability analyses (DSAs) at the centre of the fiscal rules and suggests using them to determine multi-year fiscal-structural plans; expresses concerns that DSAs would not be able to project future debt developments with certainty; underlines that the usage of DSAs still requires estimating unobservable variables, thereby undermining transparency and hampering ownership and predictability, and thus leaving space for discretion; stresses that the result of a DSA may create self-fulfilling prophecies, by encouraging investors to buy/sell bonds of the respective Member States, thereby influencing outcomes; observes that since there is not one unique set of assumptions, they should be aligned with the objectives of the EU-Treaties as regards growth and convergence, and they should be agreed upon in a political process, ideally by the European Parliament and the European Council;
Amendment 193 #
2022/2150(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12 a. Notes that the Commission's communication acknowledges the potential inconsistencies between the application of the fiscal rules and the recommendations under the Macroeconomic Imbalance Procedure (MIP), and provides for the inclusion of reforms and investments required to correct the imbalances under the MIP in the national plans; regrets that the Communication does not encompass any instrument that allows for the correction of such inconsistencies;
Amendment 207 #
2022/2150(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13 a. Stresses that large parts of the success of the RRF are due to the mobilisation of financial support for reforms and investments undertaken by Member States; notes that the European Commission’s proposals for a revised EU economic governance framework seek to incentivise compliance by way of sanctions that apply automatically in the case of non-compliance;
Amendment 208 #
2022/2150(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 b (new)
Paragraph 13 b (new)
13 b. Recalls that the RRF is expected to end in late 2026; recalls that there is a near-undisputed consensus on the need for a degree of fiscal centralisation for currency unions, such as the Economic and Monetary Union, to be viable in the long-run, which was most recently reiterated by the International Monetary Fund13d; _________________ 13d International Monetary Fund, DP/2022/014, Reforming the EU Fiscal Framework - Strengthening the Fiscal Rules and Institutions
Amendment 209 #
2022/2150(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 c (new)
Paragraph 13 c (new)
13 c. Considers that a permanent fiscal capacity at EU level could, if designed appropriately, play a crucial role in maintaining sufficiently high levels of strategic investment, resolving the inconsistencies between the application of the fiscal rules and the MIP, and ensuring an appropriate fiscal stance at the aggregate level; calls for the timely establishment of a permanent instrument of a significant volume to succeed the RRF prior to its expiration at the end of 2026; considers that such an instrument should comprise both an investment and a stabilisation function;
Amendment 211 #
2022/2150(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13 a. Emphasises the need to strengthen national ownership of the process and in this regard to maintain the utmost level of transparency as well as fair and equal treatment towards all Member States;
Amendment 212 #
2022/2150(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 b (new)
Paragraph 13 b (new)
13 b. Takes into consideration the systemic weakening of healthcare systems in many Member States of the EU also due to a reduction of public spending in the sector; proposes a separate treatment for health related expenses until a suitable upgrade of the European public health sector is achieved;
Amendment 214 #
2022/2150(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 d (new)
Paragraph 13 d (new)
13 d. Considers that such an instrument should support national reform and investment initiatives towards common EU priorities, especially in the context of the social-ecological transformation and with regard to MIP-related measures for which Member States lack the fiscal space at national level under the applicable fiscal framework;
Amendment 215 #
2022/2150(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 e (new)
Paragraph 13 e (new)
Amendment 216 #
2022/2150(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Recalls that the better law-making agreement reiterates that the European Parliament and the Council are to exercise their powers as co-legislators on an equal footing and that the Commission therefore needs to treat them equally; stresses that the European Parliament should therefore be fully involved in the reform of the economic governance framework as well as the future conduct of economic governance in the EU, including in the establishment and management of fiscal instruments; stresses the role and responsibility of national parliaments;
Amendment 221 #
2022/2150(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14 a. Recognises the need for sufficient public revenue to ensure the sustainability of public finances in times of pressing investment needs and frequent economic shocks; highlights the various observations made by the European Commission as part of the European Semester on the tax mix; considers as necessary a shift from labour and consumption taxation towards the taxation of environmentally harmful practices, speculative behaviours, the windfall and/or excess profits of multinational corporations, and capital; stresses that further action to counter tax avoidance and evasion in the EU and in global fora is a necessary complement to the reform of the EU economic governance framework;
Amendment 16 #
2022/2080(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B b (new)
Recital B b (new)
B b. whereas the practices described in the Pandora Papers further entrench social and economic inequalities in our societies, and strongly erode citizens’ trust in the rule of law and in our economic and democratic system; whereas fostering social and economic justice is ever more important in the crisis that the EU currently faces, following the war of aggression against Ukraine and the cost of living crisis that ensued;
Amendment 52 #
2022/2080(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 c (new)
Paragraph 3 c (new)
3 c. Welcomes the proposed Anti- Money Laundering legislative package; stresses the importance of increasing the coordination between national legal frameworks to address loopholes, and the improvement to supervision provided by establishing a European Anti-Money Laundering Authority (AMLA) with adequate resources and competences;
Amendment 67 #
2022/2080(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to recognise and address the risks of conflicts of interest stemming from the provision of legal advice, tax advice and auditing services when advising both corporate clients and public authorities; reiterates its call on the Commission to propose measures to clearlythe separateion of accountancying firms fromand financial or tax service providers as well as on all advisory services; welcomes the recently announced division of activities of one of the Big 4 major accounting firms into separate audit and advisory businesses, demonstrating that such separation is achievable11a; _________________ 11a https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 22/sep/08/ernst-young-splits-into- separate-audit-and-advisory-businesses
Amendment 129 #
2022/2080(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15 a. Notes that despites the implementation of European and national legislation on exchange of information and transparency, the quality of data exchanged as well as the quality of data in different public registers remains low, poor, incomplete or not sufficiently updated; urges Member States to dedicate the appropriate resources, including sufficient staff and technology, to process and make full use of the data; calls on the Commission to issue guidance or provide support to Member State and reporting entities to guarantee the quality of data sent; requests that the Commission provides an overall assessment of the quality of data provided in the context of exchange of information between Member States as well as the quality of data in compulsory public registers;
Amendment 132 #
2022/2080(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 b (new)
Paragraph 15 b (new)
15 b. Recalls the importance of transparency of beneficial ownership information (BOI) across the world the EU’s leading role in this domain; regrets, however, the delay in the setting-up of the Beneficial Ownership Registers Interconnection System (BORIS) in the EU due to technical difficulties; highlights that access to adequate, accurate and up-to-date BOI and control of legal persons is a valuable tool in the fight against tax evasion and avoidance;
Amendment 133 #
2022/2080(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 c (new)
Paragraph 15 c (new)
15 c. Stresses that the 5th AMLD requires Member States to set up registers of the beneficial owners of all legal entities established in the EU, including trusts, and grants public access to basic beneficial ownership information about companies; regrets the delays of implementation of these requirements in many Member States;
Amendment 134 #
2022/2080(INI)
15 d. Notes with concern that Member States have adopted BO registers in very divergent ways, with different access conditions, different search functions and different mechanisms for data verification, if any; stresses that, as a result, there has been a delay delay in the setting-up of the Beneficial Ownership Registers Interconnection System (BORIS) due to technical difficulties;
Amendment 135 #
2022/2080(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 e (new)
Paragraph 15 e (new)
15 e. Reminds the Commission and the Member States that it is absolutely essential that beneficial ownership information is accessible for financial intelligence units (FIUs), law enforcement, obliged entities and the general public; deplores the fact that delays in Member States and the overall lack of coordination in the implementation process are undermining the effectiveness of an functioning interconnection system, and calls on all actors to address this delay as a matter of urgency;
Amendment 136 #
2022/2080(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 f (new)
Paragraph 15 f (new)
15 f. Welcomes the revision of the Recommendation 24 by the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), which requires countries to prevent the misuse of legal persons for money laundering or terrorist financing; highlights that henceforth countries will have to require beneficial ownership information to be held by a public authority or body functioning as beneficial ownership registry or an alternative mechanism as efficient;
Amendment 137 #
2022/2080(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 g (new)
Paragraph 15 g (new)
15 g. Stresses that progress in tackling the use of anonymous companies can only be possible if information about beneficial owners is easily and available in a timely manner in all jurisdictions, and if authorities are able to make use of that information and cross-check data for investigative purposes;
Amendment 138 #
2022/2080(INI)
15 h. Welcomes further that the FATF is conducting a review of Recommendation 25 on the transparency and BOI of legal arrangements; considers, in this regard, that, similarly to what already is prescribed in EU law, the standard should determine that trusts or other similar legal arrangements be registered, that multi-pronged approach to trust ownership transparency should be required, including a trust register as a required component and that access to BO information on trusts be at least as comprehensive as it is currently determined by EU law;
Amendment 151 #
2022/2080(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16 a. Calls for the creation of an EU Asset Register to provide public authorities with centralised access to information on the ownership of high value assets and goods throughout the EU and thereby effectively curb efforts to circumvent financial targeted sanctions, and fight money laundering and tax evasion and avoidance;
Amendment 13 #
2022/2062(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C c (new)
Recital C c (new)
C c. whereas current estimates show that the EU must invest an extra EUR 350 billion a year to achieve its 2030 climate targets;
Amendment 18 #
2022/2062(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
C a. whereas the prices of energy commodities, food, and other raw materials have reached unprecedented high levels and continue to be the source of economic instability in the EU’s economy;
Amendment 19 #
2022/2062(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C b (new)
Recital C b (new)
Amendment 20 #
2022/2062(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C d (new)
Recital C d (new)
C d. whereas a more integrated Capital Markets Union would ease the work of the EIB to unlock investment, boosting and diversifying investments in the real economy, in particular in SMEs, and triggering further cross-border equity investment and trade;
Amendment 22 #
2022/2062(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Appreciates the way the EIB is constantly ready to adapt and reinvent itself in line with the constantly changing EU policy requirements while respecting its long-term goals;
Amendment 23 #
2022/2062(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1 b. Notes the persistent investment gap in the EU and the increased need of countercyclical investment as the EU enters its fourth year of crisis through the pandemic and the subsequent Russian invasion of Ukraine; in this regard, welcomes the EIB’s crucial role as a main tool in the EU’s investment policy to act where private financing is missing; calls on the EIB to assure the maximum level of additionality in real economy investment with the aim of fostering sustainable growth as well as social and regional cohesion when deciding over future financing;
Amendment 24 #
2022/2062(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Welcomes the EIB’s investment of EUR 72.4 billion of financing in 2022 and the bank’s focus on the EU’s long-term challenges of competiveness, productivity, climate change, a just transition that leaves nobody behind, sustainability, social cohesion and digital transformation;
Amendment 28 #
2022/2062(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Welcomes the new Cohesion Orientation noting that the EIB should devote the majority of its resources to the promotion of economic, social and territorial convergence and that cohesion should be the overarching priority of its investment strategy; stresses the importance of the EIB’s advisory services role in preparing and implementing projects for clients with low administrative capacity; and in this context to help firms adapt towards changing EU policy goals especially those related to climate and digitalisation;
Amendment 29 #
2022/2062(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Notes the EIB's affirmation that challenges with access to finance for mid- caps in cohesion regions “are more structural”; calls on the EIB to address these structural barriers by adapting its approach so that SMEs and mid-caps in cohesion regions can also fully benefit from EIB financing;
Amendment 30 #
2022/2062(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4 b. Believes that the EIB needs to do more to adapt towards the very different social and economic scenarios in the diverse regions of the EU in order to increase the attractiveness of its funds comprehensively; in particular, expects the EIB to do more to address systemic deficiencies thus allowing all EU regions to benefit from EIB financial assistance;
Amendment 31 #
2022/2062(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 c (new)
Paragraph 4 c (new)
4 c. Reaffirms its position that the EIB needs to assure a broader geographical and sectoral allocation of its investments and to focus on adapting its methods for the areas where it is failing to do so by especially, intensifying its dialogue with local, social, economic and governmental actors when establishing regional and sectoral strategies;
Amendment 32 #
2022/2062(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 d (new)
Paragraph 4 d (new)
Amendment 44 #
2022/2062(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 b (new)
Paragraph 8 b (new)
8 b. Stresses that public budgets and public banks will not be able to bridge the investment gap in the energy sector alone especially when considering the deplorable fact that large EU banks are still exposed to EUR 223 billion in fossil fuel assets, and that the EU is still lagging behind its established climate goals;
Amendment 45 #
2022/2062(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8 a. Notes the ongoing levels of high inflation and in this regard asks the EIB to assess the possible increased financial needs of ongoing projects;
Amendment 50 #
2022/2062(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 c (new)
Paragraph 8 c (new)
8 c. Reiterates the remarks by EIB Vice President Kris Peeters that commercial banks across the EU will be prone to court cases due to failing due diligence processes and climate transition plans; calls for a level playing field and legal certainty on EU due diligence requirements through the swift adoption of the corporate sustainability due diligence directive; calls on the EIB to commit to incorporating due diligence standards to address and mitigate adverse impacts of its investment decisions on human rights and the environment;
Amendment 72 #
2022/2062(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Highlights the fact that support to SMEs and mid-caps must be increased further from current levels, particularly in the context of high energy prices and, rising raw material costs and growing borrowing costs; stresses that SMEs often have limited administrative resources and so benefit from having financing channels that are easy to access;
Amendment 73 #
2022/2062(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Reiterates its call on the EIB to complement efforts to build a data-driven society, with a particular focus on SMEs’ competitiveness and to focus its investment in this field towards bridging digital divides both within the EU, as well as between the EU and other technologically more advanced world regions;
Amendment 74 #
2022/2062(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16 a. Notes that the EIB’s approach vis- à-vis small businesses needs a revision because of its customary reluctance to fund projects with a significant risk component or to deploy mechanisms that would compensate for this problem;
Amendment 77 #
2022/2062(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Stresses the need for the EIB to have a strong focus on start-ups and projects directed at tackling the growing problem of youth unemployment in the context of creating secure and high- quality jobs;
Amendment 83 #
2022/2062(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18 a. Notes the Commission’s proposal to work with the European Investment Bank and other InvestEU implementing partners to seek ways to scale up support to investment in the net-zero industry supply chain, including via the setting up of blending operations;
Amendment 86 #
2022/2062(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Encourages the EIB to use its operations to facilitate the implementation of the goals of the Green Deal, particularly becauseaiming at an inclusive and fair climate transition; furthermore calls for these goals to be combined with the affordability and security of food which has deteriorated worldwide in the context of the ongoing war in Ukraine;
Amendment 97 #
2022/2062(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)
Paragraph 22 a (new)
22 a. Notes the role that the EIB can play when it comes to investment in deep offshore renewables, specifically towards the design of instruments that could help get such projects closer to the market; in this background, welcomes the investment done in offshore floating wind farms in the French ‘Port-la-Nouvelle’ harbour and hopes that this investment can serve as a model for the rest of the Mediterranean region;
Amendment 103 #
2022/2062(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Welcomes the introduction of the EIB’s new transport lending policy in July 2022 and calls for its swift implementation; recalls the need for a higher level of investment towards the decarbonisation of the maritime and aviation system;
Amendment 105 #
2022/2062(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)
Paragraph 23 a (new)
23 a. Asks the EIB to give particular attention when it comes to funding decisions relevant to insular and peripheral regions in view of their struggle to comply with requirements relevant to the green deal while simultaneously maintaining and increasing their connectivity with the rest of the EU;
Amendment 107 #
Amendment 108 #
2022/2062(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 b (new)
Paragraph 23 b (new)
23 b. In line with the principles established in the European Pillar of Social Rights, and in view of the current EU housing crisis, expects an increase in EIB financed operations in the area of social housing; furthermore asks the EIB to keep up its focus on women economic empowerment and gender equality when targeting new financing;
Amendment 109 #
2022/2062(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 c (new)
Paragraph 23 c (new)
23 c. Notes the shortage in specialised labour in most of the EU and in this vein believes that the areas of education and skills are not provided the needed priority;
Amendment 110 #
2022/2062(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 d (new)
Paragraph 23 d (new)
23 d. Is concerned about the systemic weakening of healthcare systems in many Member States of the EU and the ongoing medicine shortage in the EU which includes basic medicine such as paracetamol and antibiotics; further recalls the general scarcity of medicine products and medical equipment experienced during the COVID pandemic; in this context calls on the EIB to evaluate the possibilities to further invest in this sector with the aim to tackle the structural European deficiency in the health sector;
Amendment 111 #
2022/2062(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 e (new)
Paragraph 23 e (new)
23 e. Applauds the financing dedicated to assistance towards refugees in reception centres or temporary education under the Ukraine solidarity package; requests that a similar priority is provided to refugees escaping from conflicts in other neighbouring regions of the EU;
Amendment 112 #
2022/2062(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Welcomes the fact that EIB Global supported EUR 9.1 billion in global investment outside the EU in 2022; expects EIB investments in non-EU countries to be fully aligned with EU and EU external action policies particularly when it comes to due diligence requirements related to environmental, social and corporate governance and the achievement of Sustainable Development Goals; specifically calls on the EIB to strengthen further its procedures and practices in respect to human rights and good governance violations emanating through projects it finances, directly or through intermediaries, and to prioritise on the protection of local communities and their environment; questions the EIB’s actions in light of recent reports in the media that the EIB is failing to act on evidence of fraud and corruption in a €48mn worth of investments the EIB made into a now bankrupt Kenyan construction company, and calls on the EIB to clarify how it evaluates financial and reputational risk when deciding whether to launch an investigation;
Amendment 127 #
2022/2062(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Underlines that enhancing local presence and increasing cooperation with the EU delegations was a key driver in the establishment of EIB Global; reiterates its calls for additional staff on the ground, particularly in view of contracting more employees from the countries where the financing is taking place; supports the EIB’s approach to open regional offices in Africa and employ local applicants in these offices with the aim of adapting its requirements to local needs;
Amendment 128 #
2022/2062(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)
Paragraph 26 a (new)
26 a. Asks the EIB to evaluate better its effectiveness when it comes to financing for SMEs and mid-caps in Africa whereby the relatively small size of projects seems to be often a hurdle towards access to finance; calls for an evaluation of a possible design of instruments that facilitate investment by EU SMEs in third countries, and increase their access to finance, including with respect to smaller projects; notes the importance of the EIB’s role in creating a level playing field for SMEs based in Member States whose national development banks do not have the capacity to promote investment in third countries;
Amendment 132 #
2022/2062(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 a (new)
Paragraph 27 a (new)
27 a. Points out to the essential role of direct financing in countries from where the bulk of irregular migration into Europe originates in the perspective of slowing down forced economic immigration from these regions and of contributing further to the development and economic empowerment of these communities;
Amendment 134 #
2022/2062(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Stresses the importance of consistency and efficiency in development finance and calls on the EIB to place greater emphasis on mobilising domestic resources and for a general increase of its commitment in less developed countries;
Amendment 136 #
2022/2062(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Welcomes the launch of the Development Finance Institutions Transparency Index in 2023 and that fact that the associated report ranks the EIB at a similar level to peer development finance institutions in a number of areas, including financial intermediaries and environmental, social and governance and accountability to communities; calls for clear and comprehensive information to be shared with other EU institutions, the European Parliament in particular;
Amendment 137 #
2022/2062(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
30. Regrets the fact that women remain underrepresented in senior positions and in the core areas of activity at the EIB; recalls its position that more needs to be done to improve both its gender and geographical balance in this context;
Amendment 140 #
2022/2062(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31 a (new)
Paragraph 31 a (new)
31 a. Queries whether the EIB has the needed human resources in light of the ongoing expansion of its functions and responsibilities;
Amendment 141 #
2022/2062(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
32. Expresses once more its serious concerns about allegations regarding harassment, the working environment and working conditions at the EIB; notes the March 2022 ruling by the General Court on a harassment case in the EIB [KF vs EIB (T-299/20)] in which the decision of the EIB President that no harassment took place was annulled; recognises that efforts have been made by the EIB to address these and other relevant staff issues; urges the EIB to ensure that a policy of zero-tolerance towards all types of harassment is effectively implemented, including preventive and protective measures and proper and reliable complaint and victim support mechanisms; urges the EIB’s management to engage in genuine dialogue with staff representatives in order to address their concerns; deplores the fact that no trade union is recognised at the EIB and that the staff delegation has no power to act in the case of negotiations; calls on the EIB management to observe at the very least core ILO values such as freedom of association and the right to collective bargaining; is concerned that the apparent dysfunctional relationship between the EIB’s management and its staff might have a negative impact on the Bank’s operations;
Amendment 143 #
2022/2062(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
Paragraph 33
33. Takes note of the EIB’s new anti- fraud policy and underlines the importance of inclusive cooperation when developing key anti-fraud policy tools; notwelcomes that the EIB has adopted and published the EIB Group Policy towards weakly regulated, non-transparent and non-cooperative jurisdictions and tax good governance, which is complimentary to the EIB Group Anti-Money Laundering and Combatting the Financing of Terrorism Policy;
Amendment 144 #
2022/2062(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 a (new)
Paragraph 33 a (new)
33 a. Requests that an outside review of the cost effectiveness of the EIB’s investment efforts during the last ten years be carried out, not least from the perspective of whether and how the EIB’s operations created significant value added that was directly relevant to the European Union’s growth and consolidation policies;
Amendment 1 #
2022/2061(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 7 a (new)
Citation 7 a (new)
— having regard to the Commission proposal of 24 November 2015 for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) No 806/2014 in order to establish a European Deposit Insurance Scheme (COM(2015)0586),
Amendment 17 #
2022/2061(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 30 a (new)
Citation 30 a (new)
— having regard to its resolution of 25 March 2021 on strengthening the international role of the euro,
Amendment 24 #
2022/2061(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the Banking Union (BU) currently consists of the Single Supervisory Mechanism (SSM) and the Single Resolution Mechanism (SRM); whereas although the Deposit Guarantee Schemes Directive4 (DGSD) sets out high minimum standards in the area of deposit protection, the BU remains unfinished because thewhile lacking the establishment of its third pillar – the European deposit insurance scheme (EDIS) – has not yet been establishexposing the financial sector to risks that could be avoided; _________________ 4 Directive 2014/49/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 April 2014 on deposit guarantee schemes (OJ L 173, 12.6.2014, p. 149).
Amendment 56 #
2022/2061(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas the digitalisation of finance provides extensive opportunities for the banking sector, but also poses challenges, including with regard to cyber risks; whereas the Digital Operational Resilience Act, that will enter into force in 2025, will provide a robust and sector- specific framework for banks to prepare and deal with cyber threats;
Amendment 59 #
2022/2061(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas the finalisation of the anti- money laundering (AML) package should strengthen AML rules, establish a European supervisory authority for AML purposes and ensure a consistent and effective implementation of these rules;
Amendment 68 #
2022/2061(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I a (new)
Recital I a (new)
Amendment 69 #
2022/2061(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I b (new)
Recital I b (new)
I b. whereas the European banking sector largely remains the main provider of financing of companies, in contrast with other jurisdictions, where capital markets account for a considerable share of financing to companies;
Amendment 83 #
2022/2061(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital J a (new)
Recital J a (new)
J a. whereas the Transmission Protection Instrument (TPI) established by the ECB can mitigate risks of fragmentation and financial instability;
Amendment 97 #
2022/2061(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that the banking sector, in conjunction with public support measures, haspublic support measures coupled with the ECB's monetary policy decisions and regulatory adjustments - which allowed for loan repayment moratoria and credit renegotiation - acted as a shock absorber for the economic crisis triggered by the COVID- 19 pandemic; acknowledges that strengthening the prudential requirements implemented after 2008 has improved the EU banking sector’s resilience;
Amendment 153 #
2022/2061(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. Highlights the role of the banking system in supporting the transition to a carbon-neutral economy; considers that the new geopolitical environment increases the urgency of this transition, most notably on clean energy production; underlines the utmost importance of making a socially just transition; reminds that the costs of this transition will be lower than the cost of inaction, as acknowledged by the ECB; encourages the ECB to assess the possibility of a differentiated rate for sustainable investments that contribute most to reducing inflationary pressures, such as those in energy efficiency and renewable energy production;
Amendment 157 #
2022/2061(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Encourages banks to take advantage of the opportunities offered by the digitalisation of the economy, while maintaining a high level of consumer and investor protection; notes in this regard that customers are receptive to digital services, and banks have used this to their advantage by accelerating their digital transformation, at the expense of retail branch networks; stresses that, while these changes may help banks ensure the sustainability of their business models, utmost attention should be given to rising inequalities between users that are digitally literate and others that can only make a limited use at best and that have no access to digital means in the worst cases;
Amendment 166 #
2022/2061(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 b (new)
Paragraph 8 b (new)
8 b. Restates the importance of a European safe asset in the euro area as a way to help stabilise financial markets and allow banks to reduce the exposure of their balance sheets to national sovereign debt; considers that NextGeneration EU provides high-quality, low-risk European assets, allowing for a rebalancing of sovereign bonds on banks’ balance sheets; highlights the importance of preserving the availability of safe assets in a permanent manner;
Amendment 168 #
2022/2061(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 c (new)
Paragraph 8 c (new)
8 c. Welcomes the recent approval of the directive on improving the gender balance among directors of companies listed on stock exchanges, and related measures, following several years without progress; encourages all EU financial institutions to comply with the objectives of this legislation as soon as possible, thus contributing to gender balance in this sector;
Amendment 180 #
2022/2061(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Notes that the banking sector’s profitability has increased over the past year; stresses that bank profitability is driven by many factors that have to be weighed and considered such as bank- specific factors but also market structure factors and macro-financial factors, which differ as indicated from bank to bank and from national and regional markets to others as well;
Amendment 183 #
2022/2061(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10 a. Notes that in the case of small banks there has been, although necessary, increasing regulatory pressures to combat money laundering and negative interest rates, which had eroded their profit margins, and stricter credit risk policy, which has reduced their risk appetite; with the implementation of additional legislations, not least cybersecurity requirements, warns about the impact on the costs and fees applied to customers; in this regard, and given the upcoming retail investors’ strategy, calls for the inclusion and awareness about such concerns on financial services customer fees in future legislations;
Amendment 220 #
2022/2061(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14 a. Notes that the ongoing and future AML rules, to be implemented effectively, necessitate significant human resources adjustments; stresses in this respect that due diligence processes, records and documentation as well as enhanced monitoring of customer relationships require extensive targeted training for bank employees and the recruitment of additional already trained staff, putting significant pressure on the operations of small and middle sized banks with limited resources; highlights the need to integrate 'traditional' SME banks, and their equivalent, within the AML system in ways that make them active players without endangering further their sustainability;
Amendment 226 #
2022/2061(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Stresses the risks stemming from banks’ exposures to the shadow-banking sector; underlines the systemic risks resulting from interconnections and complexity, underpinning the ‘too big to fail problem’; calls on the Commission to assess the need to better regulate the shadow-banking sector and to put forward, where appropriate, legislative proposals;
Amendment 254 #
2022/2061(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Takes note of the SRB’s work programme for 2023; emphasises that the Single Resolution Fund (SRF) should be fully filled up and that all banks should be fully resolvable by the end of 2023; highlights the SRF’s crucial role in preventing bank bailouts by tax payers; notes that further progress is needed by all banks;
Amendment 301 #
2022/2061(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Points out that any EDIS should take into account clear rules for the participation of non-euro-area Member States; encourages the Eurogroup to work in inclusive format to finalise on a consensual basis a time-bound and action driven work plan on the way towards its completion;
Amendment 22 #
2022/2060(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas direct state intervention in the form of support to businesses and workers across the EU has been crucial to avoid the worst scenarios of an economic crisis during the last years of pandemic and war;
Amendment 29 #
2022/2060(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B b (new)
Recital B b (new)
Bb. whereas energy commodity prices have reached unprecedented high levels in Europe and continue to be the source of economic instability in the Union;
Amendment 51 #
2022/2060(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Reiterates that competition policy cannot be pursued in isolation, as an end in itself, without reference to the legal, international, economic, political and social context;
Amendment 76 #
2022/2060(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 2
Subheading 2
Amendment 78 #
2022/2060(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Welcomes the quick adoption of the Temporary Crisis Framework for State Aid measures to support the economy following the aggression against Ukraine by Russia, and the subsequent prolongations thereof; asks the Commission to consider including also the exceptional surge in prices of raw materials and transport costs as well as to increase the aid thresholds in line with the economic needs of the different EU regions and rising inflation;
Amendment 84 #
2022/2060(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Notes that insular regions of the EU are facing an increased cost in doing business as well as to assure the necessary delivery of goods and services, due to major factors including the disruption of global and regional supply chains, higher transport costs, limited transport options, as well as a small market size; calls in this context higher thresholds of State aid;
Amendment 85 #
2022/2060(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Repeats its calls that allowing State aid in the context of services of general economic interest (SGEI) remains essential for the survival of several communities across Europe especially in the context of state support dedicated to isolated, remote or peripheral regions as well as islands in the Union;
Amendment 91 #
2022/2060(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. CWhile noting that in response to European submissions about the US Inflation Reduction Act, American high representatives have retorted that the EU could apply measures similar to those being introduced in the US; calls on the Commission to safeguard the integrity of the internal market and is deeply concerned about the risk of increasing fragmentation within the internal market due to excessive use of subsidies in response to the US Inflation Reduction Act; understands the need for additional public investments; considers the introduction of dedicated permanent, if necessary debt-financed, European investment funds to be a better policy response;
Amendment 107 #
2022/2060(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Stresses the importance of a structured global dialogue and cooperation on competition policy enforcement particularly with regard to State aid issues, not least with reference to issues raised by the Foreign Subsidies Regulation;
Amendment 130 #
2022/2060(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Appeals for a revision of EU State aid rules that also reflects the current situation as regards health and social services within the EU, taking into consideration the renewed needs ensuing the COVID-19 pandemic as well as in the spirit of guaranteeing the provision of essential health and social services for EU citizens;
Amendment 132 #
2022/2060(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6b. Welcomes the Commission’s intention to increase the de minimis Regulation; notes that the rate of inflation is one of the main drivers behind this review and asks whether it could be the case to have an inbuilt automatic inflationary mechanism; believes, however, that other than the inflation factor, the Commission should prioritise on the socioeconomic realities of the various EU regions and also that the proposed EUR 275.000 is too low;
Amendment 151 #
2022/2060(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Calls for the quantitative jurisdictional thresholds in the EC Merger Regulation to be reviewed and lowered; calls for the introduction of a rebuttable presumption that effective competition is significantly impeded by any concentration leading to a dominant position in a relevant market or any concentration involving a very large market operator or a gatekeeper; calls for matters of public interest, such as climate protection, sustainability, public health requirements and the rule of law, to be taken into account when examining the impact of a concentration on the internal market; calls for the inclusion of review clauses in decisions approving a concentration with a view to introducing more stringent conditions;
Amendment 216 #
2022/2060(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Welcomes the Commission’s intention to launch a public consultation on the future of connectivity and infrastructure; in this context believes that the Commission should explore ways on how those private entities that make most use of online traffic - large traffic generators - should be required to add their financial contribution to the already existing public investment aimed at the EU’s digital transition, especially in view of guaranteeing competition in digital markets as well as effective high performance connectivity for all citizens within the EU;
Amendment 240 #
2022/2060(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20a. Notes that when it comes to State aid notification assessment for Important Projects of Common European Interest (IPCEI), the pre-notification and notification process may take several months, sometimes over a year; believes that the time required for the IPCEI process must be reduced significantly with an established time-limit and likewise, the process allowing SMEs to participate in such projects should be made easier; in this context calls for Commission guidance on how to address ‘First Industrial Deployment’ projects through the General Block Exemption Regulation in order to reduce the pressure on the IPCEI procedure;
Amendment 264 #
2022/2060(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21a. Enquires whether the Commission’s Directorate-General for Competition has the needed staff to comply in a timely manner with the cases that fall under its jurisdiction; concurrently, asks for a clearer and more structured division of roles within the Directorate-General, especially when it comes to defined positions between those drafting the rules, those enforcing them, and those taking key decisions on the basis of the same rules;
Amendment 15 #
2022/2051(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Supports an economic governance framework that ensures stability, full employment, strategic and sustainable investments, democratic accountability and ownership, and fiscal policies and instruments to counteract shocks; Notes that the Conference on the Future of Europe discussions highlighted the strong demand of a deep review of EU's economic governance and the European Semester, in order to ensure that the green and digital transitions, social justice and social progress go hand in-hand with economic competitiveness; reminds that the Parliament3a agreed to an urgent reform of the Union’s economic governance architecture, including simpler and clearer fiscal rules and a framework more conducive to long-term economic growth; _________________ 3a European Parliament INI report of 8 July 2021 on the review of the macroeconomic legislative framework for a better impact on Europe’s real economy and improved transparency of decision- making and democratic accountability (2020/2075(INI))
Amendment 25 #
2022/2051(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Stresses the importance of the EU economic governance framework to enable governments to promote public investment and ensure debt sustainability; recalls that the Economic and Monetary Union cannot function smoothly without a fiscal capacity at European level capable of providing a counter-cyclical stabilisation function and timely and adequate support in the event of economic shocks, calls for further consideration to common borrowing at EU level, with a view to creating more favourable borrowing conditions, while maintaining responsible fiscal policies at Member State; calls to transform the SGP into a Sustainable Development Pact, imbedded in a Sustainable Development cycle and enable the just, green and digital transition; calls for the development and completion of the Capital Markets Union and Banking Union, including a fully- fledged European Deposit Insurance Scheme (EDIS);
Amendment 26 #
2022/2051(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2 b. Calls for an assessment on the Maastricht criteria, including the deficit and public debt targets, benefiting from the experience accumulated over these last two decades of the single currency, namely on economic growth and public investment, and from the lessons learned from previous and current crisis, namely the most disruptive ones, such as the financial and sovereign crisis from early 2010´s, COVID pandemic and the War in Ukraine;
Amendment 42 #
2022/2051(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Highlights the positive impact and record of accomplishment of new EU instruments such as SURE and the design and operating model of the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF), that made it possible to maintain jobs and business and support the relaunch of the EU economy; calls for an assessment on the creation of a common permanent instrument, focused on investment and convergence, which can also act with a counter cyclical purpose, and based on a contractual basis for reforms; suggests the Treaties changes to be inspired by the SURE model for short term and targeted interventions and the RRF for long-term investment capacity to support structural strategic investments in Europe;
Amendment 103 #
2022/2051(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Indicates the need for new provisions in the Treaties to define better the legislative, regulatory and executive powers of the European Commission and relevant Union bodies in order to ensure that decisions in the regulatory sectors for which the Union is responsible are taken transparently and free of all suspicion of conflict of interests while being subject to the least possible administrative discretion;
Amendment 52 #
2022/2046(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Underscores that there is a clear consensus among the institutions that, in the wake of the unprovoked and unjustified invasion of Ukraine, the EU should provide the strongest possible social, economic and financial assistance to Ukraine, while addressingcushioning in all possible ways the economic and social consequences of the crisis within the Union and delivering the necessary support to its citizens and businesses; underlines, in this context, the shared Union goals of delivering on the European Green Deal and the digital transition, scaling up defence cooperation and coordination as appropriate while fully respecting the stance of neutrality adopted by certain Member States of the Union as established in their constitutions, improving its strategic autonomy and energy independence and security, ensuring global food security, and addressing the challenges caused by high inflation;
Amendment 131 #
2022/2046(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Underlines that the unanimity requirement for adoption of the MFF Regulation impedcreates the necessary decisions in the revision process; calls, in that regard, on the European Counciled for full consultation in order to activathieve the passerelle clause set out in Article 312(2) TFEU to allow for adoption of the MFF Regulation by qualified majoritynecessary compromise towards the revision process;
Amendment 151 #
2022/2046(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Reaffirms its long-standing position that while respecting the concept of long- term budgetary planning, new political initiatives must be financed with additional fresh money and not to the detriment of well-established, pre-existing Union programmes or policies;
Amendment 190 #
2022/2046(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
Amendment 212 #
2022/2046(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Underlines that Heading 7 spending must be set at a level that guarantees that the EU has an effective and efficient administration; calls for the swift adoption of the targeted revision of the Financial Regulation proposed by the Commission in relation to the handling of default interest for the late repayment of cancelled or reduced competition fines, so as to avoid pressure on spending under Heading 7 while at the same time urging utmost prudence of all institutions;
Amendment 221 #
2022/2046(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Recalls that payment appropriations flow directly from commitments and recalls, therefore, that any increase in the ceilings for commitments per heading will have to be accompanied by a corresponding increase in the ceiling for payments for the same or subsequent years as appropriate;
Amendment 18 #
2022/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 13 b (new)
Citation 13 b (new)
— having regard the European Pillar of Social Rights,
Amendment 56 #
2022/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Is deeply concerned by the unprovoked Russian invasion of Ukraine and by its repercussions for the European economyserious, long-lasting and unpredictable repercussions for the European economy and society, especially for the most exposed and vulnerable groups, such as lower-income households and SMEs;
Amendment 59 #
2022/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Understands the current challenges, uncertainty and complex environment to drive the monetary policy. Notes that ECB has limited tools or influence to address an high inflation trend that is mainly supply driven. Welcomes the assurance by the ECB and its members to be ready to take the actions needed to safeguard financial stability;
Amendment 61 #
2022/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1 b. Calls for ECB to make full use of the current policy tools at its disposal and consider all unconventional monetary policy instruments and flexibility within its mandate to ensure financial and macroeconomic stability and provide enough liquidity to serve the real economy and financial system;
Amendment 86 #
2022/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4 b. Stresses that sustainable growth, resilience and price stability cannot be achieved by monetary policy alone and that supportive and discretionary fiscal policy and socially balanced and productivity-enhancing reforms and investments are also necessary;
Amendment 98 #
2022/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5 b. Recalls on the lessons learned and success of new EU instruments such as SURE and the design and operating model of the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF), that are currently on EU´s toolbox. Underlines the role of SURE model for short term and targeted interventions and the RRF as a long-term investment capacity to support structural strategic investments in Europe;
Amendment 99 #
2022/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 c (new)
Paragraph 5 c (new)
5 c. Calls for support to develop and complete the unfinished infrastructure for the common currency, namely to deepen and complete the Economic and Monetary Union (EMU), the Banking Union and the Capital Markets Union (CMU). Given the uncertain impact of a deeper economic downturn with spillovers to the banking system, is concerned about the risks caused by the serious delay in completing the third pillar of the banking union and repeats its calls for its swift completion; welcomes the ECB’s long- standing support of the establishment of a fully-fledged European Deposit Insurance Scheme (EDIS);
Amendment 154 #
2022/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Recalls that the ECB strategy review reconfirmed the medium-term orientation of inflation targeting; calls on the ECB to faithfully target this medium- term horizon; Calls on the ECB to monitor attentively price developments and its consequences. Highlights the need to inform about where neutral interest rate is setting;
Amendment 188 #
2022/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13 a. Calls on the lessons learned from the ongoing and previous crises to prepare for the upcoming assessment of monetary policy strategy in 2025. Calls for an earlier assessment, if possible, given the extraordinary impact of the current crisis on the future of monetary policy making and ECB mandate. Reflects on the commitment to symmetry, if price stability is best maintained by aiming for 2% inflation over the medium term and the challenges of monetary policy when disruptive supply side driven inflation is at stake;
Amendment 221 #
2022/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16 a. Highlights that investments needed to enhance EU´s autonomy in strategic sectors should be supported by the monetary policy and are key to protect EU from external shocks and reduce the risks for price stability from supply-side shocks;
Amendment 222 #
2022/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 b (new)
Paragraph 16 b (new)
16 b. Recalls for the important role of ECB in supporting the implementation of the European Pillar of Social Rights;
Amendment 227 #
2022/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Underlines the pivotal role of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in the EU’s economy and economic and social convergence and employment and for the implementation of the twin transitions (digital and climate);
Amendment 290 #
2022/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Is concerned about the implications of higher interest rates for greenstrategic and sustainable investments; calls on the ECB to assess the possibility of applying differentiated rates to support green investments and disincentivise brown investmentthat contribute most to reducing inflationary pressures, such as those in energy efficiency and renewables;
Amendment 305 #
2022/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Stresses the need to further enhance the ECB’s accountability and transparency arrangements; Recognises the steps taken by the ECB; Calls for the relaunch of negotiations on a formal Inter- Institutional agreement, whilst ensuring the ECB’s independence which goes hand in hand with its accountability;
Amendment 324 #
2022/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
Paragraph 31
31. Welcomes the ECB’s progress on the digital euro project, as well as the dialogue with Parliament in this regard; looks forward to the Governing Council reaching a decision on launching the digital euro; Calls on the ECB to effectively address the expectations and concerns on a digital euro which include concerns for privacy, security, usability, low cost and accessibility. Calls on the ECB to step up its monitoring of the development of crypto-currencies and the related risks in terms of cybersecurity, money laundering, terrorism financing and other criminal activities related with the anonymity provided by crypto-assets;
Amendment 333 #
2022/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31 a (new)
Paragraph 31 a (new)
31 a. Calls for Enhancement of the ECB’s internal whistleblowing framework;
Amendment 339 #
2022/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31 c (new)
Paragraph 31 c (new)
31 c. Welcomes the new communications policy, with more accessible ways to explains and presents ECB policy decision to general public and stakeholders. Given the current negative impact of tightening of the monetary policy on household budgets and companies investment plans, suggests reinforcement of ECB´s communication on financial advices on how families and business could better manage and prepare for an higher interest rates environment;
Amendment 3 #
2022/2024(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital -A (new)
Recital -A (new)
-A. whereas the purpose of the annual report on the outcome of the Committee on Petitions' deliberation is to present an analysis of the petitions received in 2021 and of relations with other institutions, and to present an accurate picture of the objectives achieved in 2021;
Amendment 12 #
2022/2024(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas, however, the overall number of petitions remains modest in relation to the total population of the EU, revealing that efforts still need to be stepped up to increase citizens’ awareness about their right to petition, or of its possible usefulness as a means of drawing the attention of the EU institutions and the Member States to matters that affect and concern them directly; whereas, in exercising the right to petition, citizens expect that the EU institutions will provide added value in finding a solution to their problems;
Amendment 17 #
2022/2024(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas, of the 1 392 petitions submitted in 2021, 368 were declared inadmissible and 17 were withdrawn; whereas the relatively high percentage (26.5 %) of inadmissible petitions in 2021 demonstrates that there is still a widespread lack of clarity about the scope of the Union’s areas of responsibility; whereas to remedy this situation, communication with citizens needs to be encouraged and improved;
Amendment 20 #
2022/2024(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)
Recital G a (new)
G a. whereas each petition is considered and examined carefully, efficiently and transparently;
Amendment 21 #
2022/2024(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G b (new)
Recital G b (new)
G b. whereas petitioners tend to be citizens engaged in safeguarding fundamental rights and in the improvement and future wellbeing of our societies; whereas the experience of those citizens in regard to the processing of their petitions is very influential in determine their perception of the EU institutions and respect for the right to petition contained in EU law;
Amendment 23 #
2022/2024(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas the right to petition the European Parliament is one of the fundamental rights of EU citizens; whereas the right to petition provides EU citizens and residents with an open, democratic and transparent mechanism to address their elected representatives directly and is therefore essential to enable citizens to participate actively and effectively in the life of the Union; whereas, through petitions, EU citizens can complain about failures to implement EU law and help detect breaches of EU law;
Amendment 26 #
2022/2024(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
Recital I
I. whereas the European Parliament is the only EU institution directly elected by EU citizens; whereas the right to petition offers Parliament the opportunity to enhance its responsiveness to complaints and concerns relating to the respect for EU fundamental rights and compliance with EU legislation in the Member States; whereas petitions are therefore a useful source of information on instances of misapplication or breaches of EU law and, thus, enable Parliament and other EU institutions to assess the transposition and application of EU law and its impact on the rights of EU citizens and residents;
Amendment 29 #
2022/2024(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital J a (new)
Recital J a (new)
J a. whereas the Committee on Petitions is best able to show citizens what the European Union does for them and what solutions it can provide at European, national or local level;
Amendment 30 #
2022/2024(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital J b (new)
Recital J b (new)
J b. whereas the partisan use of the Committee on Petitions can lead to its inappropriate use and, therefore, to the deterioration of citizens' trust in this body and in the rest of the European institutions; whereas the discussions of the Committee on Petitions are sometimes used to address national or regional issues outside the scope of competence attributed by the Treaties and that the study of petitions is exclusively conditioned by criteria of majorities, ignoring the minorities and thus preventing serious debates or complaints;
Amendment 35 #
2022/2024(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital L
Recital L
Amendment 36 #
2022/2024(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital N
Recital N
N. whereas the main subjects of concern raised in petitions submitted in 2021 related to fundamental rights (in particular the impact of COVID-19 emergency measures on the rule of law and democracy, as well on the freedom of movement and the right to work, as well as a large number of petitions related to LGBTQ+ rights in the Union), health (notably questions on the public health crisis resulting from the persistence of the pandemic, ranging from the protection of citizens’ health, including vaccination policy, to the use, implementation and application of the EU Digital COVID Certificate in the Member States and the alleged discrimination between vaccinated and non-vaccinated persons), the environment (mostly concerning mining activities and their impact on the environment, nuclear safety, air pollution and the deterioration of natural ecosystems), minority rights and discrimination (including the rights of national or linguistic minorities), education (in particular questions related to discriminatory access to education or contested national reforms of the law on education), the situation of EU students in the UK after the UK’s withdrawal from Erasmus+, and employment (in particular questions relating to national treatment of work contracts), in addition to many other areas of activity;
Amendment 41 #
2022/2024(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital R a (new)
Recital R a (new)
R a. whereas the European Commission has an essential role in the Committee on Petitions as guardian of the Treaties and the information provided by the petitioners is useful to discover possible breaches or misapplications of the European law;
Amendment 48 #
2022/2024(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point a (new)
Paragraph 1 – point a (new)
(a) Recalls that, in 2021, there were considerable differences in number of petitions submitted to the Committee on Petitions from the 27 EU Member States, with most of the petitions concerning Spain (17%),followed by Germany (9,7%), Italy (9,2%), Greece (5,9%), Romania (4,1%), Poland(4,0%) and France (2,6%); the number of petitions concerning the remaining Member States was less than 2% per Member State;
Amendment 50 #
2022/2024(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Is of the opinion that the Committee on Petitions is equally available to citizens and residents in all 27 Member States and that the treatment of petitions should be geographically balanced and proportionate to the size of each Member State; believes in this respect that the European Parliament should increase the efforts to promote the role and work of its Committee on Petitions and raise all EU citizens’ awareness of the possibility to address a petition to the European Parliament;
Amendment 52 #
2022/2024(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1 b. Warns of the risk of potential reputational damage to the Committee on Petitions and the European Parliament as a whole if the treatment of petitions were politicised or used for domestic party- political objectives; recalls in this context the very European dimension of the Committee on Petitions whose role it is, in accordance with Article 227 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, to treat petitions on matters which come within the European Union's fields of activity;
Amendment 53 #
2022/2024(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 c (new)
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1 c. Recalls the agreements between the political groups represented in the Committee on Petitions are essential to provide a balanced and understandable response to the petitioners; regrets the lack of agreement experienced in the last year; expresses concern about the problems caused by partisan use of the Committee on Petitions;
Amendment 55 #
2022/2024(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Reiterates the importance of a continuous public debate on the Union’s field of activity in order to ensure that citizens are correctly informed about the scope of the Union’s competences and the different levels of decision-making; calls, in this regard, for broader awareness raising campaigns, through the active involvement of communications services, to help increase citizens’ knowledge about their right to petition, as well as the scope of the Union’s responsibilities and the competences of the Committee on Petitions, with a view to reducing the number of inadmissible petitions and better responding to citizens’ concerns;
Amendment 66 #
2022/2024(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Recalls that petitions contribute considerably to the Commission’s role as guardian of the Treaties; stresses that reinforced cooperation between the Committee on Petitions and the Commission through timely and detailed answers from the Commission, which are based on thorough examination of the issues raised in petitions, are essential to ensure the successful treatment of petitions: reiterates its cCalls on the Commission forto regularly update the Committee on Petitions on developments in infringement proceedings and forto ensure that the Committee on Petitions gets access to relevant Commission documents on infringements and EU Pilot procedures which have been closed;
Amendment 68 #
2022/2024(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Reminds that the e-Peti database is an important internal tool that allows the Members of the Committee on Petitions to access all necessary information in order to follow up on the state of play of each individual petition and to being able to make informed decisions when it comes to the petitions’ ongoing treatment or possible closure; to this end, thee-Peti database should be regularly updated and, if possible, linked to the European Commissions’ list of infringements;
Amendment 70 #
2022/2024(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4 b. Finds it worrying that the European Commission does not provide updated information on petitions under infringement procedures and on their state of play; deplores in this regard the lack of systematic follow-up in the communication with the Committee on Petitions; therefore, calls on the Commission to provide the Committee on Petitions with regular and updated information on infringement procedures which were launched based on the petitions received;
Amendment 75 #
2022/2024(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Encourages the European Parliament and the European Commission to develop a joint one-stop- shop IT tool which would include all the available information on the Commission’s follow-up actions taken on petitions, including the infringement procedures and other legislative or non- legislative actions;
Amendment 97 #
2022/2024(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16 a. Considers that a binding inter- institutional agreement between the European Parliament and the European Commission on treatment of petitions would be the best way forward in order to ensure a transparent and efficient process and thus to strengthen the citizens’ rights to address a petition to the European Parliament on a matter which comes within the Union's fields of activity, as enshrined in the Article 227 of the EU Treaty;
Amendment 3 #
2022/2006(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 14 a (new)
Citation 14 a (new)
— having regard to the Commission Communication of 27 May 2020 entitled ‘Europe’s moment: Repair and Prepare for the Next Generation’ (COM(2020)456),
Amendment 4 #
2022/2006(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 15 a (new)
Citation 15 a (new)
— having regard to the Commission Communication of 4 March 2021 entitled ‘The European Pillar of Social Rights Action Plan’ (COM(2021)102),
Amendment 5 #
2022/2006(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 15 b (new)
Citation 15 b (new)
— having regard to the Porto Social Commitment of 7 May 2021 of the Council, the Commission, the Parliament and social partners,
Amendment 7 #
2022/2006(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 17 a (new)
Citation 17 a (new)
— having regard to the Commission Staff Working Document of 27 May 2020 ‘Identifying Europe’s recovery needs’,
Amendment 8 #
2022/2006(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 19 a (new)
Citation 19 a (new)
— having regard to its resolution of 6 June 2021 entitled ‘European Parliament’s Scrutiny on the ongoing assessment by the Commission and the Council of the national recovery and resilience plans’,
Amendment 10 #
2022/2006(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the European Semester plays an important role in coordinating economic, employment, social and budgetary policies in the Member States, thereby safeguarding the macroeconomic stability of the Economic and Monetary Union; whereas the Semester has been expanded to include, among other aspects, issues related to the financial sector and taxation, as well as objectives of the UN SDGs;
Amendment 18 #
2022/2006(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas according to the Commission’s autumn economic forecast, the GDP growth rate for 2022 is expected to be 4.3 % of GDP per capita for both the euro area and the EU-27, but is expected to fall to 2.4 % and 2.5 % respectively in 2023;
Amendment 27 #
2022/2006(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas the crisis caused by the COVID-19 pandemic led to an increase in social, territorial, economic and gender- based inequalities and unemployment, affecting vulnerable groups in particular;
Amendment 31 #
2022/2006(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas a determined, coordinated and solidarity-based European economic policy approach remains essential to foster EU economic integration and to mitigate the negative economic and social consequences of the crisis, the fragmentation of the internal market and the further deepening of macroeconomic divergence and structural polarisation between regions and countries;
Amendment 32 #
2022/2006(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas the levels of poverty in Europe, particularly amongst pensioners and children, and those of unemployment especially in Southern euro countries, were already worrying before the commencement of the COVID-19 economic crisis;
Amendment 34 #
2022/2006(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D b (new)
Recital D b (new)
Db. whereas direct state intervention in the form of support to businesses and workers across the EU has been crucial to avoid the worst scenarios of an economic crisis during the last two years of pandemic;
Amendment 35 #
2022/2006(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D c (new)
Recital D c (new)
Dc. whereas energy commodity prices have reached unprecedented high levels in Europe with gas prices during the autumn of 2021 becoming 400% more expensive than spring of the same year;
Amendment 37 #
2022/2006(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas according to the Commission’s autumn economic forecast, the average rate of unemployment fell to 7.9 % in the euro area and 7.1 % in the EU- 27 in 2021, with further decreases to 7.5 % and 6.7 % expected in 2022; whereas young people have experienced the sharpest increase in unemployment;
Amendment 38 #
2022/2006(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Recital E a (new)
Ea. whereas according to the Commission’s autumn economic forecast, general government deficit narrowed slightly in 2021 to 7.1 % of GDP in the euro area and 6.6 % in the EU-27 on the back of the still high and necessary level of support provided to households and firms; whereas it is forecasted to decrease to 3.9% and 3.6% respectively in 2022, thanks to the unwinding of the emergency support measures and the rebound in revenues;
Amendment 39 #
2022/2006(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Recital E a (new)
Ea. whereas the European recovery is being robust and strong but supply disruptions, labour shortages, pandemic- related closures, rising energy and commodity prices and a scarcity of some key materials risk of holding back growth and adding to cost pressures;
Amendment 41 #
2022/2006(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E b (new)
Recital E b (new)
Eb. whereas the EU is estimated to lose between €160 and €190 billion each year due to corporate tax avoidance10a; __________________ 10a https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/ etudes/STUD/2016/558776/EPRS_STU(2 016)558776_EN.pdf
Amendment 47 #
2022/2006(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)
Recital F a (new)
Fa. whereas during the Porto Social Summit held on 7 and 8 May 2021, the EU’s leaders recognised the European Pillar of Social Rights as a fundamental element of the recovery; whereas in the Porto declaration they underlined their determination to continue deepening its implementation at EU and national level;
Amendment 48 #
2022/2006(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)
Recital F a (new)
Fa. whereas the efforts of a transition to a neutral carbon economy demand significant public and private investment and may bring negative supply shocks, thereby demanding that the Union is equipped with the necessary tools to be able to deal with challenges of the green transition;
Amendment 52 #
2022/2006(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F b (new)
Recital F b (new)
Fb. whereas the EU and its Member States have committed to the Treaty-based fundamental values, the implementation of the UN 2030 Agenda, the European Pillar of Social Rights and the Paris Climate Agreement;
Amendment 55 #
2022/2006(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F c (new)
Recital F c (new)
Fc. whereas the ECB predicted that a lack of action on climate change and an insufficiently orderly climate transition could result in falls of up to 20% in global GDP by the end of the century10b; __________________ 10b https://www.ecb.europa.eu/pub/pdf/other/ ecb.climateriskfinancialstability202107~8 7822fae81.en.pdf
Amendment 65 #
2022/2006(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes that the European economy is recovering faster than expected from the devastating impact of the ongoing global pandemic; underlines the crucial importance that timely policy interventions have played and will continue to play in mitigating the impact of the pandemic on the European economy;
Amendment 69 #
2022/2006(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Is concerned about emerging new variants, localised pandemic lockdowns, increased energy prices, inflationary pressures, supply-side disruptions and emerging labour shortages; notes that these risks create a significant level of uncertainty and could hamper economic growth prospects in the coming months and delay the transition to a more sustainable and future-proof economy;
Amendment 76 #
2022/2006(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Stresses that both public and private sector investment were already clearly insufficient before the crisis, and that the projections reveal the need for additional annual public investment in the three digit billion rang to address the challenges of digital transformation, green and just transition and social recovery; underlines that an increased level of investment must be stabilised and upward convergence in the EU enhanced for many years to come;
Amendment 77 #
2022/2006(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Is specifically worried about the increased energy prices and the ripple effect it could have on the European economy, its external competitiveness, as well as the socioeconomic impact the rise of prices of energy bills and final goods could have on European citizens;
Amendment 78 #
2022/2006(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Points out that restoring the growth potential will be a key element for the structural transformations needed to adapt to current and future challenges and to achieve the EU’s policy objectives;
Amendment 82 #
2022/2006(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Is alerted by the fact that the speed of the recovery varies across Member States and regions, with significant differences and a disparity of between 2.7 % and 14.6 % betweenin GDP growth among the Member States in 2021, according to the Commission’s autumn economic forecast;
Amendment 88 #
2022/2006(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Recognises that the crisis triggered by the COVID-19 pandemic has been especially severe for enterprises, mostly small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), in tourism, hospitality and culture, not least those based in EU island regions; recognises the notion of European solidarity underpinning the establishment of the RRF;
Amendment 93 #
2022/2006(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Believes that the ongoing COVID 19 pandemic coupled with the energy crisis is widening the socioeconomic rift between EU member states and their regions; therefore emphasizes that this is particularly not the time for one-size-fits- all strategies as regards structural reforms and state aid policies;
Amendment 95 #
2022/2006(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Points out that the successful roll- out of the RRF will help to make EU economies and societies more sustainable, inclusive, resilient and better prepared for the green and digital transitions; considers that, in light of the success of the RRF and the existing needs for massive investments in the ecological and social transition, the European Commission should propose a new investment plan to continue the transformation of our societies towards a greener and more inclusive model;
Amendment 98 #
2022/2006(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Points out that the successful roll- out of the RRF will help to make EU economies and societies more sustainable, inclusive, resilient and better prepared for the just, green and digital transitions; as well as to foster economic, social and territorial cohesion, bring convergence and help the Member States to mitigate the economic and social impact of the crisis;
Amendment 104 #
2022/2006(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Points out that the successful roll- out of the RRF willshould help to make EU economies and societies more sustainable, inclusive, resilient and better prepared for the green and digital transitions;
Amendment 107 #
Amendment 110 #
2022/2006(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Notes that the general escape clause of the Stability and Growth Pact will continue to be applied in 2022 and is expected to be deactivated as of 2023; expects that it will remain activated as long as the underlying justification of the activation exists in order to support the efforts of the Member States to recover from the pandemic crisis and strengthen their competitiveness, as well as economic and social resilience;
Amendment 117 #
2022/2006(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Insists that the call by some for a quick return to the old economic regulations regime has no real-life logic to back it and is just based on dogma;
Amendment 118 #
2022/2006(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Believes that the review of the EU’s economic governance framework is necessary; agrees with the European Fiscal Board on the importance of having a clear pathway towards a reviewed fiscal framework, preferably prior to the deactivation of the general escape clause; recalls the scientific consensus that climate change and the deterioration of biodiversity will, with a significant probability, trigger disruptive events, unknown until now, with major and irreversible economic and social consequences; stresses that the tax base, the stability of financial markets are closely linked to the ecological and social sustainability of the economy and its resilience Considers that, there view and reform of the budgetary framework should aim for a sustainable increase in investment in the social and ecological transition, with an emphasis on health and education;
Amendment 120 #
2022/2006(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Believes that the review of the EU’s economic governance framework is necessary and should be done taking into account the Report on the review of the macroeconomic legislative framework for a better impact on Europe’s real economy and improved transparency of decision- making and democratic accountability; agrees with the European Fiscal Board on the importance of having a clear pathway towards a reviewed fiscal framework, preferably prior to the deactivation of the general escape clause;
Amendment 138 #
2022/2006(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Is convinced that the coordination of national fiscal policies remains crucial in underpinning the recovery; notes that the overall fiscal stance, taking into account national budgets and the RRFexpected acceleration in spending financed by RRF grants, is projected to remain supportive in 2022 to sustain the recovery and should remain supportive as long as necessary; agrees with the Commission that Member States with low or medium levels of debt should pursue or maintain a supportive fiscal stance, and that Member States with high levels of debt should use the RRF to finance additional investment to support the recovery, while pursuing a prudent fiscalresponsible fiscal and sustainable policyies; agrees with the Commission that all Member States should preserve or broadly preserve their national financed investment and ensure a socially just recovery;
Amendment 144 #
2022/2006(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Recalls that public funding is key to achieving the 2030 climate objectives and addressing other social and economic challenges; considers that all options to incentivise Member State investments to tackle those challenges should be on the table, notably the revision of the Stability and Growth Pact to promote a future- oriented economy and the extension of lending and borrowing capacities at Union level, building on NGEU;
Amendment 145 #
2022/2006(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Underlines that sustainable public revenues are essential to guarantee fiscal sustainability; supports governments’ efforts to increase revenues through the closing of loopholes for tax avoidance, addressing harmful tax practices and the increasing of capital-gains, wealth and corporate income taxes;
Amendment 149 #
2022/2006(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 b (new)
Paragraph 8 b (new)
8b. Recalls that the European Semester cycle is a well-established framework for EU Member States to coordinate their budgetary, economic, social and employment policies, and after the COVID-19 crisis, a functioning European Semester will be needed more than ever to coordinate these policies across the European Union; but also notes that the Semester, since the inception, has been expanded to include, among other aspects, issues related to the financial sector and taxation, as well as objectives of the European Pillar of Social Rights and the UN SDGs, giving due consideration to the people of our planet in our economic policy;
Amendment 151 #
2022/2006(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 c (new)
Paragraph 8 c (new)
8c. Calls on the Commission to improve the European Semester process in order to create a governance framework that enables inclusive and sustainable growth, structural changes for a sustainable economy, integrating the principles of well-being and sustainability, and reflecting actual economic and budgetary realities of Member States;
Amendment 152 #
2022/2006(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 3
Subheading 3
Growth-enhancing, socially-balanced, inclusive and sustainable structural reforms and investment
Amendment 161 #
2022/2006(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Considers that it is crucial to coordinate national reform and investment efforts and the exchange of best practices in order to increase the convergence and resilience of our economies, promote sustainable and inclusive growth, and improve institutional frameworks; Recalls that the European Union, committed to fulfilling the Paris agreements, should adopt new social and environmental indicators to assess its public policies and make sure they respect the social floor and environmental ceiling;
Amendment 163 #
2022/2006(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Considers that it is crucial to coordinate national reform and investment efforts and the exchange of best practices in order to increase the convergence and resilience of our economies, promote sustainable and inclusive growth, and improve institutional frameworks; in order to further strengthen economic and social resilience the EU must deliver on the principles of the European Pillar of Social Rights, the Sustainable Development Goals and the European Green Deal;
Amendment 173 #
2022/2006(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Considers it however equally important to allow these efforts to take place into a tailor-made manner in order to reflect the specific needs of the different economies in the Union;
Amendment 182 #
2022/2006(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Highlights that the RRF presents an unprecedented and unique opportunity for all Member States to address key structural challenges and investment needs andwhile embracing the just, green and digital transitions; insists that all recovery and resilience plans address all requirements of the RRF Regulation, in particular the six pillars, namely: green transition; digital transformation; smart, sustainable and inclusive growth; social and territorial cohesion; health, economic, social and institutional resilience; and policies for the next generation, children and the youth; highlights the interplay between the European Semester and the RRF; calls on the Member States to make the most of this opportunity and to use it to transform their economies and make them sustainable, more competitive and more resilient to future shocks; highlights the role of the European Parliament in the implementation of the RRF, as enshrined in the RRF Regulation;
Amendment 189 #
2022/2006(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Invites the Commission and the Member States to draw conclusions from the RRF exercise and improve the mechanisms driving the economic governance framework especially when it comes to establishing a more transparent and democratic coordination process, defining underlying political guidelines, cooperation between the institutions and increased ownership of the Member States, developing the national reform programmes and implementing socially- balanced structural reforms;
Amendment 201 #
2022/2006(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 b (new)
Paragraph 10 b (new)
10b. Is concerned that, without a coordinated effort to invest in the transition to a sustainable economy, European economies will suffer long- lasting damage, undermining any efforts to promote sustainable fiscal policies;
Amendment 205 #
2022/2006(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Highlights that the COVID-19 pandemic has had a significant negative impact on women both in paid and unpaid work with far reaching consequences; emphasises the importance of increasing women’s participation in the economy, including inclusive participation in the digital economy and transformation, and ensuring more inclusive growth, ensuring equal pay for equal work and reducing the poverty gap as part of the solution to the post-pandemic recovery, which will help to increase jobs, economic prosperity and competitiveness across the EU; calls therefore on the Commission and the Council to ensure that gender equality and equal opportunities for all, and the mainstreaming of those objectives, are addressed effectively in the country- specific recommendations and promoted in the implementation of investment and reforms;
Amendment 211 #
2022/2006(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Takes into consideration the systemic weakening of healthcare systems in many Member States also due to a reduction of public spending in the sector; proposes to exclude health related expenses from the calculation of the structural balance until a suitable upgrade of the European public health sector is achieved;
Amendment 213 #
2022/2006(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Underlines that the recovery must be based on upward social and economic convergence, social dialogue and improved social rights and working conditions for workers, employees and the self-employed;
Amendment 215 #
2022/2006(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Notes that many Member States are having to contend with old and new structural challenges that are hindering their growth potential; highlights, therefore, that tackling structural challenges in a socioeconomic sensitive manner, is crucial for a sustainable recovery and continued growth; takes the view that implementing reforms to address old and new structural vulnerabilities is key not only to improving the ability to withstand and cope with existing challenges, but also to accomplishing the twin transitions in a sustainable, fair and inclusive manner and to reducing social and economic inequalities; points to the lack of national ownership as one of the main weaknesses in enacting reforms aimed at addressing structural deficiencies;
Amendment 228 #
2022/2006(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Is concerned that the Commission identified macroeconomic vulnerabilities related to imbalances and excessive imbalances in 12 Member States; is worried that the nature and source of Member States’ imbalances remain largely the same as before the pandemic and that the pandemic could also be exacerbating imbalances and economic divergences; calls on the Member States to take advantage of the unprecedented opportunity provided by the RRF to significantly reduce existing macroeconomic imbalances, in particular by including ambitious reform measures in the national plans of all Member States; stresses that sound execution is essential to make full use of this opportunity;
Amendment 231 #
2022/2006(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Is concerned that the Commission identified macroeconomic vulnerabilities related to imbalances and excessive imbalances in 12 Member States; is worried that the nature and source of Member States’ imbalances remain largely the same as before the pandemic and that the pandemic could also be exacerbating imbalances and economic divergences; calls on the Member States to take advantage of the unprecedented opportunity provided by the RRF to significantly reduce existing macroeconomic imbalances, in particular by including ambitious reform measures in the national plans of all Member States; stresses that sound execution is essential to make full use of this opportunity;
Amendment 247 #
2022/2006(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Invites the Commission to revamp the comprehensive economic policy response to the COVID-19 pandemic and to take the principles of NGEU as a basis for a modernisation of the common European fiscal architecture;
Amendment 248 #
2022/2006(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 b (new)
Paragraph 14 b (new)
14b. Reiterates the European Parliament’s call for strengthening its democratic role in the economic governance framework;
Amendment 249 #
2022/2006(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 c (new)
Paragraph 14 c (new)
14c. Calls for committed coordination with social partners and other relevant stakeholders at both national and European level, with a view to strengthening democratic accountability, transparency and enhancing social dialogue;
Amendment 120 #
2022/0411(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) Due to the growing importance of sustainability considerations in investment decisions, investors are increasingly considering information on environmental, social and governance (ESG) matters when taking informed investment decisions. It is therefore necessary to prevent greenwashing, by establishing ESG-related information to be provided, where relevant, in the prospectus for equity or non-equity securities offered to the public or admitted to trading on a regulated market. That requirement should, however, not overlap with the requirement laid down in other Union law to provide that information. Companies that offer equity securities to the public or seek the admission to trading of equity securities on a regulated market should therefore incorporate by reference in the prospectus, for the periods covered by the historical financial information, the management and consolidated management reports, which include the sustainability reporting, as required by Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council54 . Moreover, the Commission should be empowered to set out a schedule specifying the ESG-related information to be included in prospectuses for non-equity securities that are advertised as taking into account ESG factors or pursuing ESG objectives. For bonds advertised as taking into account ESG factors or pursuing ESG objectives, the Commission should ensure consistency between the format of the sustainability disclosures under Directive 2013/34/EU and those under the opt-in templates drafted pursuant to Article 13g of Regulation (EU) .../... of the European Parliament and the Council54a [the European Green Bonds Regulation]. __________________ 54 Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on the annual financial statements, consolidated financial statements and related reports of certain types of undertakings, amending Directive 2006/43/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directives 78/660/EEC and 83/349/EEC (OJ L 182, 29.6.2013, p. 19). 54a Regulation (EU) .../... of the European Parliament and the Council on European green bonds (2021/0191(COD))
Amendment 127 #
2022/0411(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40 a (new)
Recital 40 a (new)
(40 a) In order to clarify the duration of processes for book-building during an IPO and various other processes relative to the management of share issues and transfers, it is appropriate to express all such periods in terms of business days (which includes Saturdays), instead of working days (which excludes Saturdays).
Amendment 151 #
2022/0411(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b – point i
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b – point i
Regulation (EU) 2017/1129
Article 1 – paragraph 4 – point da
Article 1 – paragraph 4 – point da
(da) an offer of securities to be admitted to trading on a regulated market or an SME growth market and that are fungible with securities already admitted to trading on the same market, provided that they represent, over a period of 12 months, less than 430 % of the number of securities already admitted to trading on the same market;: (i) the issuer is not an issuer with a complex financial history as referred to in Article 18 of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2019/980; (ii) the issuer has not made a significant financial commitment; (iii) the issuer is not under an insolvency or restructuring procedure, as defined in Directive (EU) 2019/1023 on restructuring and insolvency; (iv) at the time of the offer, the issuer is not delaying the disclosure of inside information pursuant to Article 17(4) of Regulation (EU) No 596/2014, or is not using the exemption set out in Article 17(1), first subparagraph, in relation to intermediate steps in a protracted process.’
Amendment 159 #
2022/0411(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point c – point i – point 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point c – point i – point 1
Regulation (EU) 2017/1129
Article 1 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 1 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) securities fungible with securities already admitted to trading on the same regulated market, provided that they represent, over a period of 12 months, less than 430 % of the number of securities already admitted to trading on the same regulated market;
Amendment 162 #
2022/0411(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point c – point i – point 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point c – point i – point 1
Regulation (EU) 2017/1129
Article 1 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point b
(b) shares resulting from the conversion or exchange of other securities or from the exercise of the rights conferred by other securities, where the resulting shares are of the same class as the shares already admitted to trading on the same regulated market, provided that the resulting shares represent, over a period of 12 months, less than 430 % of the number of shares of the same class already admitted to trading on the same regulated market, subject to the third subparagraph;;
Amendment 165 #
2022/0411(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b – point iv
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b – point iv
Regulation (EU) 2017/1129
Article 1 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 3
Article 1 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 3
Amendment 168 #
2022/0411(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point b a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point b a (new)
Regulation (EU) 2017/1129
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point z b (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point z b (new)
Amendment 184 #
2022/0411(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point c – point ii a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point c – point ii a (new)
(ii a) in the second subparagraph, the following points are added: ' (fa) where the issuer has not published a plan to ensure that its business model and strategy are compatible with the transition to a sustainable economy pursuant to Article 19a of Directive 2013/34/EU, that company issuing the product is not compatible with the limiting of global warming to 1.5C in line with the Paris Agreement; (fb) where the issuer has exposures to fossil fuels that, the product is exposed to coal, oil or gas-related activities that are at a heightened risk of becoming stranded assets; '
Amendment 190 #
2022/0411(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point e – point i a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point e – point i a (new)
Regulation (EU) 2017/1129
Article 7 – paragraph 7 – point a – points vi a and vi b (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 7 – point a – points vi a and vi b (new)
(i a) in point a, the following points are added: ‘(vi a) the proportion of EU taxonomy- aligned activities financed by the financial instruments to the EU Taxonomy; (vi b) the proportion of the investment that is used to finance exposures to fossil fuels;’
Amendment 196 #
2022/0411(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point h
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point h
Regulation (EU) 2017/1129
Article 7 – paragraph 12b – subparagraph 3 – point c – point iv a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 12b – subparagraph 3 – point c – point iv a (new)
(iv a) key information on any issuer requirements to provide sustainability reporting and any information related to the securities being advertised as taking into account ESG factors or pursuing ESG objectives in accordance with Article 13 of this Regulation;
Amendment 205 #
2022/0411(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10 – point a – point ii a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10 – point a – point ii a (new)
Regulation (EU) 2017/1129
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 4 a (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 4 a (new)
(ii a) the following subparagraph is added: ' For the purposes of point (g) of the second subparagraph, the Commission shall coordinate any ESG disclosure requirements with the provisions included in Regulation (EU) .../... of the European Parliament and of the Council on European Green Bonds (2021/0191 (COD)). '
Amendment 279 #
2022/0411(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point e
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point e
Regulation (EU) No 596/2014
Article 18 – paragraph 9
Article 18 – paragraph 9
Amendment 331 #
2022/0411(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I
Annex I
Regulation (EU) 2017/1129
Annex IV – Title VII a
Annex IV – Title VII a
VII a. Profit forecasts and estimates Provide information on any profit forecast or any profit estimate previously published by the issuer and that is still outstanding, indicating whether or not it is still valid and, if not, why. The issuer may also choose to include a new profit forecast or a new profit estimate accompanied by the principal assumptions attached to it.
Amendment 336 #
2022/0411(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II
Annex II
Regulation (EU) 2017/1129
Annex VII – Title V – point 3 a (new)
Annex VII – Title V – point 3 a (new)
3 a. Profit forecasts and estimates Provide information on any profit forecast or any profit estimate previously published by the issuer and that is still outstanding, indicating whether or not it is still valid and, if not, why. The issuer may also choose to include a new profit forecast or a new profit estimate accompanied by the principal assumptions attached to it.
Amendment 338 #
Amendment 69 #
2022/0406(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 11 a (new)
Recital 11 a (new)
(11 a) Even though multiple-vote shares can create risks for stakeholders of a company, by giving a stronger voice to founders and long-term shareholders, multiple-vote shares can also protect a company from an excessive focus on short-term interests and thereby help stimulate its long-term sustainable growth in line with the interests of stakeholders and the environment. To ensure multiple- vote shares are used in this positive way, companies issuing multiple-vote shares should publish a report detailing how their share structure helps promote the interests of all their stakeholders as well as the environment.
Amendment 106 #
2022/0406(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
(a a) ensure that companies issuing multiple-vote shares publish a justification outlining how the share structure will help guarantee the long- term interests of the company, its stakeholders including employees, and help the company contribute to environmental objectives as defined in Regulation (EU) 2020/852.
Amendment 132 #
2022/0406(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(b a) ensure that the enhanced voting rights cannot be used to block the adoption of decisions by the general shareholders’ meeting aiming at preventing, reducing or eliminating adverse impacts on human rights and the environment related to the company’s operations.
Amendment 53 #
2022/0405(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c b (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c b (new)
Directive 2014/65/EU
Article 33 – paragraph 7
Article 33 – paragraph 7
(c b) paragraph 7 is replaced by the following: ‘7. Member States shall require that where a financial instrument of an issuer which is admitted to trading on onean SME growth market, the financial instrument may also be traded on another SME growth markettrading venue only whereif the issuer has been informed and has not objected. In such a case however, the issuer shall not be subject to any obligation relating to corporate governance or initial, ongoing or ad hoc disclosure with regard to the latter SME growth markegiven its consent.’
Amendment 43 #
2022/0341(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) Security of instant credit transfers in euro is fundamental for increasing PSUs’ confidence in such services and ensuring their use. Payers intending to send a credit transfer to a given payee may, as a result of fraud or error, provide a payment account identifier which does not correspond to an account held by that payee. Under Directive (EU) 2015/2366 of the European Parliament and of the Council37 , the only determinant of the correct execution of the transaction with respect to the payee is the unique identifier, and PSPs are not required to verify the name of the payee. In the case of instant credit transfers, there is not enough time for the payer to realise the occurrence of a fraud or error and to try to recover the funds before they are credited to the payee’s account. PSPs should therefore, without charging the PSUs any additional charges or fees, verify whether there is any discrepancy between the unique identifier of the payee and the name of the payee provided by the payer, and notify the payer. In case any discrepancies are detected, the payer should be notified before placing a payment order for an instant credit transfer in euro about any such discrepancies detected. To avoid undue frictions or delays in the processing of the transaction instantly, the payer’s PSP should provide such notification within no more than a few seconds from the moment the payer provided the payee information. To allow the payer to decide whether to proceed with the intended transaction, the payer’s PSP should provide such notification before the payer authorises the transaction. However, taking into account the comfort of the PSU and the costs for the PSP, such a check of a match between the unique identifier of the payee and the name of the payee can be avoided if it had been already conducted within the last three months and the payee is saved amongst the trusted beneficiaries of the payer. __________________ 37 Directive (EU) 2015/2366 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2015 on payment services in the internal market, amending Directives 2002/65/EC, 2009/110/EC and 2013/36/EU and Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010, and repealing Directive 2007/64/EC (OJ L 337, 23.12.2015, p. 35).
Amendment 84 #
2022/0341(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) Under Article 3 of Regulation (EU) 2021/1230 of the European Parliament and of the Council38 , charges applied by a PSP located in a Member State whose currency is not the euro in respect of cross-border credit transfers in euro are to be the same as charges applied by that PSP in respect of national credit transfers in the national currency of that Member State. In situations where such a PSP applies higher charges for national instant credit transfers in the national currency than for national non-instant credit transfers in the national currency, and therefore also higher charges than for cross-border non-instant credit transfers in euro, the level of charges that such a PSP would be required to apply under Article 3 of Regulation (EU) 2021/1230 in respect of cross-border instant credit transfers in euro would be higher than charges for cross-border non- instant credit transfers in euro. In such situations, to avoid conflicting requirements and taking into account the key objective of steering PSUs towards instant credit transfers in euro, it is appropriate to require that charges applied to payers and payees for cross-border instant credit transfers in euro do not exceed the charges applied for cross-border non-instant credit transfers in euro. Member States, whose currency is not euro, should be able to apply this Regulation internally in their own, non- euro currency, accordingly. __________________ 38 Regulation (EU) 2021/1230 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 July 2021 on cross-border payments in the Union (OJ L 274, 30.7.2021, p. 20).
Amendment 246 #
2022/0341(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Regulation (EU) No 260/2012
Article 5c – paragraph 6a (new)
Article 5c – paragraph 6a (new)
Amendment 248 #
2022/0341(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive (EU) No 260/2012
Article 5d – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 5d – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
PSPs executoffering instant credit transfers shall verify whether any of their PSUs are listed persons or entities.
Amendment 252 #
2022/0341(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Regulation (EU) No 260/2012
Article 5d – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 5d – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
PSPs shall carry out such verifications immediately afteras soon as possible after the publication in the Official Journal of the European Union, before the entry into force of any new or amended restrictive measures adopted in accordance with Article 215 TFEU providing for asset freeze or prohibition of making funds or economic resources available , and at least once every calendar day.
Amendment 276 #
2022/0341(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new)
Amendment 25 #
2022/0212(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
Amendment 34 #
2022/0212(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. RWhile taking into consideration the arising needs that many Member States are facing, regrets the Council’s position on the DB, which cuts EUR 1,64 billion in commitment appropriations and EUR 530 million in payment appropriations for the MFF headings compared to the Commission’s proposal; considers that the cuts proposed by the Council are not driven by an objective assessment of either implementation trends or absorption capacities and run counter to core shared policy priorities; considers that the Council should not target programmes that benefit from the adjustment provided for in Article 5 of the MFF regulation for “rebalancing and stabilisation”, since that would contradict the objective of that MFF provision, which was to strengthen specific political priorities; recalls in particular that Article 5 of the MFF regulation does not provide “top ups”, as suggested by the Council; concludes that the Council’s position is far from Parliament’s expectations; decides therefore, as a general rule, to restore appropriations on lines cut by the Council to the level of the DB, for both operational and administrative expenditure, and to take the DB as the starting point for Parliament’s position;
Amendment 78 #
2022/0212(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Underlines the pivotal role of cohesion policy as an essential Union investment policy and convergence instrument especially in the context of growing socioeconomic disparities between and within regions of the EU; anticipates that, after a delayed start to the programming process in the first two years of the 2021-2027 MFF, implementation will gather pace in 2022; calls on the Member States to accelerate the process of programming in order to allow 2023 to be the start of the implementation of the cohesion funds, that will help boost our economy; help the public and private sectors, SMEs, and citizens during these difficult times;
Amendment 131 #
2022/0212(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39
Paragraph 39
39. Underlines the importance of enhancing European cooperation in defence matters taking into account the Russian war of aggression in Ukraine and the highly unstable international environment while fully respecting the stance of neutrality adopted by certain Member States of the Union as established in their constitutions; considers that such cooperation not only makes Europe and its citizens safer but also leads to greater efficiency and potential savings; calls in that connection for increased funding for the capability development strand of the European Defence Fund in order to foster an innovative and competitive defence industrial base that will contribute to the strategic autonomy of the Union;
Amendment 139 #
2022/0212(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42
Paragraph 42
42. Notes with deep concern that the Russian aggression against Ukraine and its worldwide effects have dramatically increased humanitarian assistance needs, which were already under pressure because of funding gaps and the multiplication of crises in the world including ongoing conflicts on the EU’s southern neighbourhood; asks to significantly increase humanitarian aid to address the unprecedented gap between needs and available resources; deplores the fact that Heading 6 has no margin and is therefore not fit for the current situation; regrets that the DB is not able to at least sustain the current level of response while humanitarian needs and emergencies are steeply increasing around the globe, notably worsening food insecurity on account of the impact of the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine, increasingly severe climate-induced disasters and newly emerging conflicts; recalls that, even with the increases proposed by Parliament, there would be insufficient resources to address the humanitarian aid needs in 2023;
Amendment 10 #
2022/0179(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Considers that despite fulfilling all the convergence criteria, the recent deterioration of several key indicators, due to the current circumstances, used in the convergence reports, demands a reflection on how the full implementation of the current framework and criteria for accession during extraordinary crisis, like COVID-19 pandemic or the Russian invasion of Ukraine, or future crisis with large asymmetric shocks still applies;
Amendment 12 #
2022/0179(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Underlines that, notwithstanding the difficult socio-economic situation generated by the health crisis and the most recent increase in energy prices, Croatia’s introduction of the euro and the fulfilment of the necessary criteria represent a strong political signal of the viability and attractiveness of the single currency of the Union; welcomes therefore the sustained efforts undertaken by the Croatian Government in this regard;
Amendment 16 #
2022/0179(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Welcomes Croatian government’s work on strengthening Croatia’s institutional capacity, efforts to improve the business environment, and the effective and efficient implementation of structural reforms that contribute to economic growthsustainable and inclusive economic growth. Calls on Croatian authorities to continue strengthening the institutional framework to ensure regulatory quality, support the social welfare sector and prevent corruption;
Amendment 20 #
2022/0179(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Calls for the swift and effective implementation of reforms and investments of Croatia´s Recovery and Resilience Plan to boost sustainable and inclusive growth, to contribute to economic and social cohesion, and to tackle key socio-economic and institutional challenges;
Amendment 50 #
2022/0164(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5 a (new)
Recital 5 a (new)
(5 a) Administrative and procedural burdens should be kept to a minimum to accelerate the process in line with the current emergency situation that the EU is facing. Especially, there should be no requirements to repeat processes that have already taken place within established national recovery and resilience plans.
Amendment 88 #
2022/0164(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13 a (new)
Recital 13 a (new)
(13 a) The REPowerEU chapter should where geographically possible include projects that are of a cross-border nature.
Amendment 92 #
2022/0164(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) Further incentives should be provided for Member States to request loans, through the clarification of the loan allocation procedure. In accordance with Regulation (EU) 2021/241, Member States may request loans until 31 August 2023. An intention to submit a loan request should be communicated to the Commission 360 days after the entry into force of this Regulation so that the redistribution of the remaining funds can be conducted in an orderly manner.
Amendment 136 #
2022/0164(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point c
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point c
Regulation (EU) 2021/241
Article 14 – paragraph 6
Article 14 – paragraph 6
6. By derogation from paragraph 5, subject to the availability of resources, in exceptional circumstances the amount of the loan support may be increased, considering the needs of the requesting Member State, as well as requests for loan support already submitted or planned to be submitted by other Member States, while applying the principles of equal treatment, solidarity, proportionality and transparency. To facilitate the application of these principles, Member States shall communicate to the Commission within 360 days after [the entry into force of this amending Regulation], whether they intend to request loan support.
Amendment 150 #
2022/0164(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EU) 2021/241
Article 18 – paragraph 4 – point q
Article 18 – paragraph 4 – point q
(q) for the preparation and, where available, for the implementation of the recovery and resilience plaof significant amendments and/or additions to the original recovery and resilience plans and where available, for the implementation, a summary of the consultation process, conducted in accordance with the national legal framework, of local and regional authorities, social partners, civil society organisations, youth organisations and other relevant stakeholders, and how the input of the stakeholders is reflected in the recovery and resilience plan; in particular, the summary of the consultation process shall explain the outcome of the consultations with local and regional authorities and other relevant stakeholders on reforms and investments included in the REPowerEU chapter and outline how the input received was reflected in the REPowerEU chapter;
Amendment 192 #
2022/0164(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Regulation (EU) 2021/241
Article 21a – paragraph 2
Article 21a – paragraph 2
(2) The share of the resources referred to in paragraph 1 available for each Member State shall be calculated on the basis of the indicators defined for the maximum financial contribuMember States’ population, as inverset out in the methodology in Annex II for f the GDP per capita (capped at a maximum of 170 % of the amount and methodology set out in Annex III for 30% of the amountUnion average) and share of fossil fuels in gross inland energy consumption.
Amendment 259 #
2022/0164(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Regulation (EU) 2021/241
Article 21c – paragraph 3
Article 21c – paragraph 3
(3) The estimated costs of the reforms and investments of the REPowerEU chapter under paragraph 1 shall not be taken into account for the calculation of the plan’s total allocation under Article 18(4), point (f) and Article 19(3), point (f). Where appropriate, and in particular taking into account the geographical position of the specific Member State, a proportionate number of the measures included in the RepowerEU chapters should have a cross- border or multi-country dimension or effect and shall contribute to the objectives outlined in Article 21c(1).
Amendment 149 #
2022/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) It is necessary to take measures to build capacity and strengthen the Union’s semiconductor sector in line with Article 173(3) of the Treaty. These measures do not entail the harmonisation of national laws and regulations. In this regard, the Union should reinforce its strategic autonomy by enhancing the competitiveness and resilience of the semiconductor technological and industrial base, whilst strengthening the innovation capacity of its semiconductor sector, reducing dependence on a limited number of third country companies and geographies, and strengthening its capacity to design and produce advanced components. The Chips for Europe Initiative (the ‘Initiative’) should support these aims by bridging the gap between Europe’s advanced research and innovation capabilities and their sustainable industrial exploitation. It should promote capacity building to enable design, production and systems integration in next generation semiconductor technologies, enhance collaboration among key players across the Union, strengthening Europe's semiconductor supply and value chains, serving key industrial sectorand support the reinforcement and development of skills and a qualified workforce, serving key societal objectives and creating new markets.
Amendment 152 #
2022/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) In order to achieve its general objective, and address both the supply and demand side challenges of the current semiconductor ecosystem, the Initiative should include five main components. First, to reinforce Europe’s design capacity, the Initiative should support actions to build a virtual platform that is available across the Union. The platform should connect the communities of design houses, SMEs and start-ups, intellectual property and tool suppliers, with research and technology organisations to provide virtual prototype solutions based on co- development of technology. Second, in order to strengthen the security and resilience of supply and reducing the Union’s dependency on third country production, the Initiative should support development and access to pilot lines. The pilot lines should provide for the industry a facility to test, experiment and validate semiconductor technologies and system design concepts at the higher technology readiness levels beyond level 3 but under level 8 while reducing environmental impacts as much as possible. Union investments along Member States investment and with the private sector in pilot lines is necessary to address the existing structural challenge and market failure where such facilities are not available in the Union hindering innovation potential and global competitiveness of the Union. Third, in order to enable investments in alternative technologies, such as quantum technologies, conducive to the development of the semiconductors sector, the Initiative should support actions including on design libraries for quantum chips, pilot lines for building quantum chips and testing and experimentation facilities for quantum components. Fourth, in order to promote the use of the semiconductor technologies, to provide access to design and pilot line facilities, and to address skills gaps across the Union, the Initiative should support establishment of the competence centres on semiconductors in each Member State. These competence centres should provide a range of services to semiconductor stakeholders, with a particular focus on start-ups and SMEs, and represent an important vector for the development of skills. Access to publicly funded infrastructure, such as pilot and testing facilities, and to the competence network, should be open to a wide range of users and must be granted on a transparent and non-discriminatory basis and on market terms (or cost plus reasonable margin basis) for large undertakings, while SMEs can benefit from preferential access or reduced prices. Such access, including for international research and commercial partners, can lead to broader cross- fertilisation and gains in know-how and excellence, while contributing to cost recovery. Each competence centre should be an entry point to connect to other competence centres of the network. Synergies with existing structures with similar objectives, such as European Digital Innovation Hubs, should be encouraged. Fifth, The Commission should set-up a dedicated semiconductor investment facility support (as part of the investment facilitation activities described collectively as the ‘Chips Fund’) proposing both equity and debt solutions, including a blending facility under the InvestEU Fund established by Regulation (EU) 2021/523 of the European Parliament and Council53 , in close cooperation with the European Investment Bank Group and together with other implementing partners such as national promotional banks and institutions. The ‘Chips Fund’ activities should support the development of a dynamic and resilient semiconductor ecosystem by providing opportunities for increased availability of funds to support the growth of start-ups and SMEs as well as investments across the value chain, including for other companies in the semiconductor value chains. In this context, the European Innovation Council will provide further dedicated support through grants and equity investments to high risk, market creating innovators. While the Initiative is established for the duration of the MFF 2021-2027, due consideration should be given to supporting the EU’s semiconductor ecosystem in the future as the strengthening of the EU’s semiconductor ecosystem will require a long-term and sustained effort. _________________ 53 Regulation (EU) 2021/523 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 March 2021 establishing the InvestEU Programme and amending Regulation (EU) 2015/1017 (OJ L 107, 26.3.2021, p. 30).
Amendment 153 #
2022/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12 a (new)
Recital 12 a (new)
(12 a) To foster the emergence of a qualified workforce necessary to support a strengthened European semiconductor ecosystem in all its dimensions, programmes and initiatives to mobilise and attract new talent, including from third countries, as well as to reskill and upskill the existing working force, should be promoted, all while keeping in mind the gender gap in European industries and ensuring decent working conditions. The steps needed to strengthen the connection between the industrial ecosystem, Research & Innovation and the educational system, as well as the educational needs, could be explored jointly with the Alliance on Microprocessors and Semiconductors.
Amendment 155 #
2022/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) With a view to accelerating implementation of the actions of the Initiative, it is necessary to provide an option of implementing some of the Initiative actions, in particular on pilot lines, through a new legal instrument, the European Chips Infrastructure Consortium (ECIC). The ECIC should have legal personality. This means that when applying for the actions to be funded by the Initiative, the ECIC itself, and not individual entities forming the ECIC, can be the applicant. The main aim of the ECIC should be to encourage effective and structural collaboration between legal entities, including Research and Technology Organizations. For this reason, the ECIC has to involve the participation of at least three legal entities from three Member States and be operated as a public- private sector consortium for a specific action. The setting up of ECIC should not involve the actual setting up of a new Union body and should not be targeted at one specific action under the Initiative. It should address the gap in the Union’s toolbox to combine funding from Member States, the Union budget and private investment for the purposes of implementing actions of the Initiative. In particular, strong synergies can be attained through combined development of the different pilot lines in an ECIC, pooling the Union’s contribution with the collective resources of the Member States and other participants. The budget of the ECIC that would be made available by Member States and private sector participants over its projected period of operation should respect the timeframes of the actions implemented under this Initiative. The Commission should not be directly a party in the Consortium. With a view to ensure better involvement of all industrial players in these private-public partnerships, ECICs should seek to have a diverse composition, including the participation of small and medium sized companies.
Amendment 169 #
2022/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 35
Recital 35
(35) As part of the monitoring, national competent authorities should also do a mapping of key undertakings operating in the Union along the semiconductor supply chain established in their national territory and notify this information to the Commission.
Amendment 186 #
2022/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) setting the criteria to recognise and to support first-of-a-kind Integrated Production Facilities and Open EU Foundries that foster the security of supply of semiconductors and the deployment of novel and innovative semiconductor technologies in the Union;
Amendment 189 #
2022/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 10
(10) ‘first-of-a-kind facility’ means an industrial facility capable of semiconductor manufacturing, including front-end or back-end, or both front-end and back-end semiconductor manufacturing facility, which provides innovation with regard to the manufacturing process or final product, that is not yet substantively already present or committed to be built within the Union, for instance with regard to the technology noand it includes, substrate material, such as silicon carbide and gallium nitride, and other productbut is not limited to, innovation that can offer betteroncerns performance, improcess innovation or energy and environmental performancevements in computing power or in the level of security, safety or reliability, or in energy and environmental performance, or in the use of a new technology node or substrate material, or in the implementation of production processes that lead to efficiency gains;
Amendment 190 #
2022/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 13
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 13
(13) ‘back-end’ means the packaging, assembly and test of each individual integrated circuit; bonding, assembly and packaging, as well as the functional and quality test of each individual component coming out from the manufacturing of the semiconductor product;
Amendment 195 #
2022/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2
Article 3 – paragraph 2
2. The Initiative, amongst others, shall be supported by funding from the Horizon Europe programme and the Digital Europe programme, and in particular Specific Objective 6 thereof, for a maximum indicative amount of EUR 1.65 billion and EUR 1.65 billion respectively. This funding shall be implemented in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 2021/695 and Regulation (EU) No 2021/694.
Amendment 198 #
2022/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1
Article 4 – paragraph 1
1. The general objective of the Initiative is to support large-scale technological capacity building and innovation throughout the Union to enable development and deployment of cutting- edge and next generation semiconductor and quantum technologies that will reinforce the Union advanced design, systems integration and chips production capabilities, as well as contribute to the achievement of the twin digital and green transition, notably by reducing the environmental impact of next generation chips and contributing to the circular economy, as well as promoting secure and resilient designs capable to counter cybersecurity threats.
Amendment 211 #
2022/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – point f a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – point f a (new)
(f a) the composition of the ECIC with regard to facilitating contributions of SMEs.
Amendment 220 #
2022/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
(b a) its establishment and operations strengthen the semiconductor value chains in the Union as a whole, while promoting the participation of all Member States, leveraging it towards convergent and complementary approaches, particularly with regard to regions facing permanent natural disadvantages, such as peripheral, remote and insular regions;
Amendment 238 #
2022/0032(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Amendment 26 #
2021/2185(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas EU competition policy has an important role – especially at times of uncertainty and transformation – in ensuring effective competition to encourage innovation, set fair economic conditions and provide greater choice for consumersto the benefit of all EU citizens, especially those in a weak consumer position;
Amendment 39 #
2021/2185(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the CommissEuropean Union needs an appropriate and effective set of instruments to enforce competition rules and properly ensure their implementation in a socially balanced manner;
Amendment 44 #
2021/2185(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas direct state intervention in the form of support to businesses and workers across the EU has been crucial to avoid the worst scenarios of an economic crisis during the last two years of pandemic;
Amendment 47 #
2021/2185(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B b (new)
Recital B b (new)
Bb. whereas energy commodity prices have reached unprecedented high levels in Europe with gas prices during the autumn of 2021 becoming 400% more expensive than spring of the same year;
Amendment 63 #
2021/2185(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Emphasises that the challenges arising from the COVID-19 pandemic need to be adequately taken into account and that the guiding principle should be the reasmain rationable phasing out ofbehind specific support measures;
Amendment 76 #
2021/2185(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Calls for the development of an effective system of well-adjusted and complementing regulatory and enforcement instruments to facilitate the digital and green transition in a socially acceptable manner taking into consideration the diversified needs of the different regions in Europe;
Amendment 102 #
2021/2185(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Takes note ofWelcomes the renewal of the temporary framework for State aid measures, which was established in response to the COVID-19 crisis and is designed to accelerate the recovery;
Amendment 110 #
2021/2185(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes the planned evaluation of the rules on health and social services of general economic interest (SGEI) to ensure that those rules meet their objectives and are fit for purpose; in this context, is concerned about the systemic weakening of healthcare systems in many Member States also due to a reduction of public spending in the sector, and to this effect the fragile response by many Member States to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic;
Amendment 113 #
2021/2185(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Emphasises the critical moment for the Union’s hospitality industry which has been from an economic and financial perspective the hardest hit throughout the ongoing COVID-19crisis; in this context applauds state assistance directed towards the sector and calls for an EU policy aimed at reinforcing these efforts until a full recovery is achieved;
Amendment 134 #
2021/2185(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Stresses the importance of a structured global dialogue and cooperation on competition policy enforcement particularly with regard to State aid issues;
Amendment 141 #
2021/2185(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. WelcomNotes the Commission’s proposal for a new regulation on foreign subsidies in orderproposed with the aim to curtail potentially distortive effects on the single market, close the enforcement gap, and level the playing field for European companies by using EU competition law instruments and their key building blocks; questions if all diplomatic routes were exhausted before taking the steps to launch this proposal;
Amendment 168 #
2021/2185(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Calls on the Commission to ensure a smooth and rapid implementation of the new regulatory measures, while ensuring synergies and avoiding overlap with or duplications of existing measures;
Amendment 211 #
2021/2185(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Repeats its calls that allowing State aid in the context of Services of General Economic Interest (SGEI) remains essential for the survival of several communities across Europe especially in the context of state support dedicated to isolated, remote or peripheral regions in the Union;
Amendment 219 #
2021/2185(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18a. Is specifically worried about the increased energy prices and the ripple effect it will have on the European economy, its external competitiveness, as well as the socioeconomic impact the rise of prices of energy bills and final goods will have on European citizens; in this context, recommends State aid measures aimed at cushioning this impact;
Amendment 225 #
2021/2185(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Believes that mainstreaming green and digital strategies is vital to support the EU’s transition; calls on the Commission to incorporate this approach into the future conditions for State aid through its assessment of the De Minimis Regulation5 upon expiry; remarks that the De Minimis ceilings should be revisited and increased particularly given the very difficult economic realities being faced by Member States, whilst acknowledging the targets which are to be achieved in the areas of environment, energy and the digital transition; __________________ 5 OJ L 352, 24.12.2013, p. 1.
Amendment 226 #
2021/2185(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19a. Requests caution in the consolidation of the EU airline industry and the creation of EU industry leaders while taking into account the massive state aid allowed for certain EU airlines so as to ensure that on such a basis, the latter will not be enabled to eliminate or takeover smaller EU competitors; notes that peripheral regions and islands continue needing to have autonomy in regulating and supporting airlines that maintain their connectivity, even as these have been stricken hard by the pandemic; notes with concern how the connectivity of European insular regions gets to a practical halt during low seasons to the detriment of residents and businesses in these regions; questions how major EU airlines are often granted grand scale requests in quick time while smaller airlines are repeatedly investigated and at length regarding any minimal request for assistance; stresses that State aid money approvals should include safeguards against predatory actions on other EU firms by the firms which have received State aid;
Amendment 24 #
2021/2061(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas according to the Commission’s Summer forecasts, the GDP growth rate for 2021 stands at 4.38 % of GDP per capita in the euro area andand for 2022 at 4.25 % in both the EU 27, and is expected to rise to 4.4 % respectieuro area; whereas differences across countries in the pace of the recovelry in 2022from the crisis remain substantial;
Amendment 37 #
2021/2061(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas unemployment rates decreasedthe European Union overall lost more than 3 million jobs in 2020 and unemployment rates increased in all Member States during the crisis; whereas young people have experienced the sharpest decline in employment; whereas unemployment rates decreased since last summer to an average rate of 8.4 % in the euro area and 7.6 % in the EU 27 in May 2021, and; whereas a further decrease to unemployment rates are only expected to fall below 2019 levels in three Member States; whereas in April 2021, the youth unemployment rate was 17.81 % and 7 % respectively is expected in 2022in the EU and 17.2 % which is higher than the pre-crisis levels;
Amendment 38 #
2021/2061(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Recital E a (new)
Ea. whereas the latest Eurostat figures show that EU tourism went down by 61 % during the pandemic with the highest decreases recorded in Malta (-80%) and Spain (-78 %), followed by Greece (- 74 %), Portugal (-70 %) and Hungary (- 66 %);
Amendment 39 #
2021/2061(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E b (new)
Recital E b (new)
Eb. whereas the levels of poverty in Europe, particularly amongst pensioners and children, and those of unemployment especially in Southern euro countries, were already worrying before the commencement of the COVID-19 economic crisis;
Amendment 40 #
2021/2061(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E c (new)
Recital E c (new)
Ec. whereas direct state intervention in the form of support to businesses and workers across the EU has been crucial to avoid the worst scenarios of an economic crisis;
Amendment 53 #
2021/2061(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas reference values of up to 3 % of planned or actual government deficit and 60 % of debt to GDP are defined by the TFEU; whereas these reference values were established in the early 1990s under fundamentally different economic circumstances and they are not based on a scientific analysis of the debt sustainability of public budgets;
Amendment 57 #
2021/2061(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H a (new)
Recital H a (new)
Ha. whereas both public and private sector investment were already clearly insufficient before the crisis, despite historically low interest rates; whereas to address the extensive public investment backlog in, inter alia, transport, education and science infrastructure and to vigorously tackle the challenges of digital transformation, green and just transition, additional annual public investment in the three digit billion range is needed which cannot be provided for under current fiscal policy;
Amendment 67 #
2021/2061(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I b (new)
Recital I b (new)
Ib. whereas the crisis resulted in increasing social, territorial, and economic and gender based inequalities;
Amendment 75 #
2021/2061(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes that the European economy is slowly recovering from the devastating impact of the global pandemic; remains concerned about low growth potential compared to other regions in the post- pandemic recovery;
Amendment 77 #
2021/2061(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Believes that the apparent "symmetrical" effects of COVID-19 have actually widened the socioeconomic rift between EU member states and their regions; therefore emphasizes that this is not the time for one-size-fits-all strategies as regards structural reforms and competition policies, state aid policies in particular;
Amendment 78 #
2021/2061(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Recognises that the crisis triggered by the COVID-19 pandemic has been especially severe for enterprises, mostly SMEs, in tourism, hospitality and culture, not least those based in EU island regions;
Amendment 82 #
2021/2061(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Acknowledges that despite the progress with vaccination campaigns, substantial risks to the forecasts remain from an epidemiological and economic perspective, which in turn couldreate a high level of uncertainty and could further delay the transition to a more sustainable and future- proof economy;
Amendment 83 #
2021/2061(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Insists that the call by some for a quick return to the old economic regulations regime has no real-life logic to back it and is just based on dogma;
Amendment 87 #
2021/2061(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Points out that the roll-out of the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) will help to make EU economies and societies more sustainable, inclusive, resilient and better prepared for the just, green and digital transitions, foster economic, social and territorial cohesion, bring convergence and help the Member States to mitigate the economic and social impact of the crisis; notes that the facility, which is the centrepiece of NextGenerationEU, will provide large- scale financial support to Member States of up to EUR 672.5 billion in grants and loans to finance reforms and investments;
Amendment 100 #
2021/2061(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Is pleased that, according to the Commission forecasts, economic activity in the EU is expected to pick up in all Member States, with acceleration as of the second half of 2021, asin the positive scenario that containment measures are gradually relaxed and vaccination progresses, reflecting the growth impulse stemming from the implementation of the national recovery and resilience plans; remains concerned, however, that the speed of the recovery will vary across Member States and regions;
Amendment 107 #
2021/2061(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Notes that the general escape clause of the Stability and Growth Pact will continue to be applied in 2022 and is expected to be deactivated as of 2023; expects however that the general escape clause will remain activated as long as the underlying justification of the activation exists in order to support the efforts of the Member States to recover from the pandemic crisis and strengthen their competitiveness, as well as economic and social resilience; notes, furthermore, that the decision to deactivate the general escape clause should be taken as an overall assessment of the state of the economy based on quantitative criteria, with the level of economic activity in the EU compared to pre-crisis levels as the key, social and employment situation based on quantitative and quantlitative criteriona; points out that country-specific situations will continuhave to be taken into account also after the deactivation of the general escape clause;
Amendment 114 #
2021/2061(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Notes that the general escape clause of the Stability and Growth Pact will continue to be applied in 2022 and is expected to be deactivated as of 2023; notes, furthermore, that; supports the decision to deactivate the general escape clause should be taken asfollowing an overall assessment of the state of the economy based on quantitative criteria, with the level of economic activity in the EU compared to pre-crisis levels as the key quantitative criterion on a country-by- country basis; points out that country- specific situations will continue to be taken into account after the deactivation of the general escape clause;
Amendment 137 #
2021/2061(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Is convinced that coordination of national fiscal policies remains crucial in underpinning the recovery; notes that the overall fiscal stance, taking into account national budgets and the RRF, should remain supportive in 2021 and 2022as long as necessary;
Amendment 141 #
2021/2061(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Is convinced that coordination of national fiscal policies remains crucial in underpinning the recovery; notagrees that the overall fiscal stance, taking into account national budgets and the RRF, should remain supportive in 2021 and 2022;
Amendment 149 #
2021/2061(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Highlights that fiscal policy should remain agile and flexible to adjust to the evolving situation as warranted, and that a premature withdrawal of fiscal support should be avoided at all costs; further highlights the expectation that economic activity will gradually normalise in the second half of 2021 and agrees that Member States’ fiscal policies should become more differentiated in 2022, duly taking into account the state of the recovery, fiscal sustainability, geographic and demographic limitations, and the need to reduce economic, social and territorial divergences;
Amendment 166 #
2021/2061(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Notes that Member States with high debt should use the RRF to finance additional investment to support the recovery, while pursuing a prudent fiscal policy; stresses the importance of the Member States using the potential of the RFF to support the necessary structural changes and the transformation to more globally competitive, future-proof, agile industries; agrees that the growth of nationally financed current expenditure should be kept under control and be limited for Member States with high debt, allowing fiscal measures to maximise support to the recovery without pre- empting future fiscal trajectories and creating a permanent burden on public finances;
Amendment 173 #
2021/2061(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Takes into consideration the systemic weakening of healthcare systems in many Member States of the EU also due to a reduction of public spending in the sector; proposes to exclude health related expenses from the calculation of the structural balance until a suitable upgrade of the European public health sector is achieved;
Amendment 185 #
2021/2061(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Notes that environmental sustainability, productivity, social fairness and macroeconomic stability remain the guiding principles of the EU’s economic agenda; stresses, furthermore, that the digital transformation of our societies, businesses and economies is crucial in order to increase Europe’s productivity and competitiveness for a robust recovery, in line with the Digital Decade;
Amendment 186 #
2021/2061(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Stresses that responsible fiscal and sustainable policies are a tool to achieve the overarching EU priorities as enshrined in the treaties: sustainable development based on balanced economic growth and price stability, a highly competitive social market economy aiming at full employment and social progress, a high level of protection and improvement of the quality of the environment;
Amendment 190 #
2021/2061(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 2
Subheading 2
Socially balanced, inclusive and sustainable structural reforms and, investment and public revenues
Amendment 199 #
2021/2061(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Highlights that the RRF is an unprecedented opportunity for all Member States to address key structural challenges and investment needs, while embracing the green and digital transitions;
Amendment 203 #
2021/2061(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Points towards the Commission’s Communication on a Strong Social Europe for Just Transitions whereby it is claimed that the European Pillar of Social Rights is the European answer to the fundamental transitions of climate neutrality, digitalisation and demographic change; in this context affirms the essentiality of the European Pillar of Social Rights as an important parameter of the European Semester’s analysis;
Amendment 226 #
2021/2061(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Welcomes the fact that the updated New European Industrial Strategy, the European Digital Strategy and all the other relevant strategies set out the framework for speeding up Europe’s recovery and transition towards a cleaner, more digital, and more resilient economic and industrial model, as well as for building a stronger and more resilient single market and insists that within such strategy, SMEs should continue to be accorded privileged attention;
Amendment 238 #
2021/2061(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Highlights that tackling structural challenges is crucial for a sustainable recovery and continuedfighting poverty, and creating economic growth, and that implementing reforms to address structural vulnerabilities is key not only to improving the ability to withstand and cope with existing challenges but also to accomplishing the twin transitions in a sustainable and socially fair manner;
Amendment 239 #
2021/2061(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16a. Is convinced that building a resilient economy calls for reinforcing the social dimension of European governance, aiming at providing adequate protection to all people as well as to promote efficient social and healthcare systems for everyone;
Amendment 261 #
2021/2061(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Recalls that Member States, in their recovery and resilience plans, are required to effectively address all or a significant subset of challenges identified in the relevant CSRs, including the fiscal aspects thereof, and that beyond the scope of the RRF, those recommendations that are not addressed remain valid and will continue to be monitored under the European Semester framework;
Amendment 279 #
2021/2061(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
Amendment 285 #
2021/2061(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20a. Welcomes the DG ECFIN’s initiatives and ongoing reflection on the idea of an alternative set of indicators to measure economic, social and environmental progress, supplementing GDP as a welfare measure for inclusive and sustainable growth; is convinced that the EU policy objectives have to be reflected as well in terms of new measurements and granular performance indicators for progress; highlights in this respect the advanced statistical standards and the development of concepts and methods on international level, such as the beyond GDP framework of the OECD and the United Nations; urges the Commission to follow these international standards and integrate this approach in the EU economic governance framework;
Amendment 290 #
2021/2061(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 b (new)
Paragraph 20 b (new)
20b. Calls for the Social Scoreboard of the European Pillar of Social Rights (EPSR) to be fully taken into account for the purposes of monitoring Member States´ performance in relation to the EPSR´s principles; takes note of the Commission initiative in confirming that the revised Social Scoreboard will be part of the policy coordination framework in the context of the European Semester; takes notes that the EU leaders welcomed the European Social Partners joint proposal for an alternative set of indicators to measure economic, social and environmental progress, supplementing GDP as welfare measure for inclusive and sustainable growth; calls for better reflecting scoreboards in policy recommendations;
Amendment 14 #
2021/2010(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses that the IIA binds the Council, Parliament and the Commission to irreversibly move forward with an EU digital levy that will enter the long-term EU budget as an own resource; underlines that, irrespective of whether the ground rules will be determined at OECD or EU level, revenues generated by an EU digital taxation in the Member States will become an own resource;
Amendment 25 #
2021/2010(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Reiterates that the EU digital levy willhas the purpose to counter tax base erosion, ensure a level playing field and improve tax fairness by capturing mobile bases; considers that its revenues would be intricately linked to the open borders of the single market and the ‘digital Union’;
Amendment 36 #
2021/2010(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Maintains that the EU digital levy will be part of a basket of new own resources whose proceeds will be sufficient to cover, through the long-term EU budget, the repayment costs of the EU Recovery Instrument’s grants component, expected to be around EUR 15 billion per year on average and EUR 29.25 billion maximum per year from 2028 until 2058, while avoiding a reduction in expenditure for EU programmes; notes that the revenue is estimated to be in the range of several billion euros to several tens of billions of euros depending on, among other factors, the taxable revenues, the taxable entity, the place of taxation, the calculation and the rate of tax;
Amendment 37 #
2021/2010(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
Recital I
I. whereas adequate international tax laws are a key for a fair and efficient taxation system addressing inequality and ensuring certainty and stability, which are prerequisites for competitiveness, as well as for a level playing field between companies, especially for small and medium-sized enterprises; whereas the digitalisation of the economy has enabled small companies across the board and from different sectors to become more competitive and to reach out to new clients; whereas smaller start-ups and scale-up businesses should remain unburdened by EU measures for digital taxation;
Amendment 70 #
2021/2010(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Highlights the need to address the under-taxation of the digital economy, while ensuring a fair distribution of taxing rights among all countries where the value creation of multinational digital companies takes place; insists nevertheless that any EU measure for digital taxation should not lead either to the over-taxation of the digital economy; stresses that taxing rights are still, under the treaties, a national sovereign competence and that the risk of discriminating small peripheral Member States in their distribution has not yet been properly tackled upstream, rather overlooked;
Amendment 104 #
2021/2010(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Welcomes the fact that the two pillar approach suggested in the G20/OECD IF does not ring fence the digital economy but seeks a comprehensive solution to the new challenges of the digital economy; acknowledges that both pillars are complementary, and supports a holistic solution in which one pillar is not adopted without the other; stresses in this context the need for a proper substance-based carve-out especially in an intra-EU framework, where undertakings, which demonstrate adequate level of economic substance, should remain unhindered by such OECD global rules;
Amendment 41 #
2021/0434(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) To ensure a comprehensive and proportionate approach, the rules should apply to all undertakings in the Union which are taxable in a Member State, regardless of their legal form and status, as long as they have their residence for tax purposes in a Member State and are eligible to obtain a certificate of tax residence in that Member State.
Amendment 53 #
2021/0434(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) To facilitate implementation of this Directive, undertakings at risk of being found to lack substance and used with the main objective of obtaining a tax advantage should declare, in their annual tax return, that they possess a minimum level of resources such as people and premises in the Member State of tax residence and provide documentary evidence if that is the case. The requirement relating to premises in a Member State has to take into account the growing prevalence of remote working, for which legitimate enterprises downscale their premises and move away from retaining exclusive premises. While it is recognised that different activities may require a different level or type of resources, a common minimum level of resources would be expected under all circumstances. This assessment should solely aim at identifying the substance of undertakings for tax purposes and does not question the role that “trust or company service providers”, as defined in Directive (EU) 2015/849 of the European Parliament and of the Council12, have in the identification of money laundering, its predicate offences and terrorist financing. Conversely, the absence of a minimum level of resources may be considered to indicate a lack of substance where an undertaking is already at risk of being found to lack substance for tax purposes. To ensure compatibility with relevant international standards, a common minimum level should draw on the existing Union and international standards on substantial economic activity in the context of preferential tax regimes or in the absence of corporate taxation13 , as developed in the context of the Forum on Harmful Tax Practices. It is necessary to provide for submission of documentary evidence with the tax return in support of the declaration of the undertaking that it disposes a minimum of resources. It is also necessary in order to allow the administration to form a view based on the facts and circumstances of the undertaking and decide whether to initiate an audit procedure. __________________ 12 Directive (EU) 2015/849 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2015 on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purposes of money laundering or terrorist financing, amending Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council, and repealing Directive 2005/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Commission Directive 2006/70/EC (OJ L 141, 5.6.2015, p. 73). 13 General Secretariat of the Council, 9637/18 FISC 241 ECOFIN 555, Code of Conduct (Business Taxation), Guidance on the interpretation of the third criterion; OECD/G20 Base Erosion and Profit Shifting Project, Countering Harmful Tax Practices More Effectively, Taking into Account Transparency and Substance, Action 5: Final Report
Amendment 115 #
2021/0434(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point e
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point e
(e) undertakings with at least five own full-time equivalent reasonably adequate number of full-time employees or members of staff exclusively carrying out the activities generating the relevant income;
Amendment 126 #
2021/0434(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the undertaking has at least one own and active bank account or e-money account in the Union;
Amendment 23 #
2021/0384(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 6 a (new)
Recital 6 a (new)
(6 a) Delegated Regulation (EU) 2017/565 mandates investment firms to take into account clients' sustainability preferences, which can be expressed in terms of sustainable investment as defined by Regulation 2020/852 (the Taxonomy Regulation) or Regulation 2019/2088 (the Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation). However, a lack of training of investment firms means they struggle taking these preferences on board. Therefore, there should be sufficient training on sustainability topics by investment firms, as is already mandated for insurance providers in Directive (EU) 2016/97. In addition, for clients with a sustainability preference, at least three funds shall be offered that have sustainable investment as its objective in accordance with the Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation. Lastly, when asking for a minimum proportion of alignment with sustainable investments as defined in Article 2, point (17) of Regulation 2019/2088, the lack of clear underlying definition of sustainable investment means that every fund calculates this differently. Comparing such products may benefit those using a more lenient definition of sustainable investments. As such, the Delegated Regulation should take this into account to ensure that clients do not attempt to compare products that are fundamentally incomparable.
Amendment 38 #
2021/0384(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new)
Directive 2014/65/EU
Article 25
Article 25
3 a. Article 25 is amended as follows: (a) paragraph 1 is replaced by the following: ‘ 1. Member States shall require investment firms to ensure and demonstrate to competent authorities on request that natural persons giving investment advice or information about financial instruments, investment services or ancillary services to clients on behalf of the investment firm possess the necessary knowledge and competence to fulfil their obligations under Article 24 and this Article. To that end, Member States shall publish the criteria to be used for assessing such knowledge and competence. have in place and publish mechanisms to control effectively and assess the professional knowledge and competence of the employees of investment firms, based on at least 35 hours of professional training or development per year, taking into account the nature of the products sold, the type of distributor, the role they perform, and the activity carried out within the investment firm. To ensure that natural persons can adequately identify a client’s individual sustainability preferences and give adequate advice about the sustainability risks of financial instruments, at least 10 hours of this professional training should be dedicated to sustainability issues. . ' (b) the following paragraph 3a is inserted 3a. When providing investment advice to a client that has indicated that they have sustainability preferences as defined in Article 2(7) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2017/565, the products proposed by the investment firm shall include at least three products that have sustainable investment as its objective as stipulated in Article 9(1) of Regulation (EU) 2019/2088.’ (c) in paragraph 8, the following point (ca) is added (ca) the limited comparability of multidimensional non-financial metrics across different products.
Amendment 78 #
2021/0377(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) ELTIFs have a potential to facilitate long-term investments in the real economy. Long- term investments in projects, undertakings, and infrastructure projects in third countries can bring capital to ELTIFs and thereby benefit the economy of the Union. Such benefits can originate in multiple ways, including through investments that promote the development of border regions, enhance commercial, financial and technological cooperation and facilitate investments in environmental and sustainable energy projects. Investments in third country qualifying undertakings and eligible assets may bring substantial benefits to investors and ELTIF managers and to the economies, infrastructure, climate and environmental sustainability and citizens of such third countries. It and should therefore be allowed that the. However, the main objective of the ELTIF Regulation is to channel capital towards European long-term investments in the real economy, and therefore a majority of suchthe ELTIF assets and investments or the main revenue or profit generation of such assets and investments arshould be located in a third countrywithin the Union.
Amendment 82 #
2021/0377(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) Investments in commercial property, in facilities or installations for education, research, sports or development, or in housing, including in senior residents or social housing, should also be deemed to be eligible assets due to the capacity of such assets to contribute to the objectives of smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. To enable real investment strategies in areas where direct investments in real assets are not possible or uneconomical, eligible investments in real assets should also comprise investments in water rights, forest rights, building rights and mineral rights. Eligible investment assets should exclude speculative investment assets, such as art, manuscripts, jewellery or other similar types of investment assets, which do not represent long-term investments in the Union's real economy.
Amendment 89 #
2021/0377(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9 a (new)
Recital 9 a (new)
(9 a) The objective of Regulation (EU) 2015/760 is to channel capital towards long-term investments in the Union's real economy. To ensure that ELTIFs channel capital flows towards projects that put the Union economy on a path towards smart, sustainable and inclusive growth, an ELTIF should be required to invest at least 37% of its investments in environmentally sustainable economic activities in accordance with Regulations (EU) 2020/852 and 2019/2088.
Amendment 97 #
2021/0377(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10 a (new)
Recital 10 a (new)
(10 a) To ensure alignment with other Union legislative acts that promote long- term sustainable investments and equitable economic development, including Regulation (EU) 2020/852, ELTIFs should have measures in place to protect social rights and minimum social safeguards.
Amendment 113 #
2021/0377(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) Unlike retail investors, professional investors may, in certain circumstances, have a longer time horizon, distinct financial returns objectives, more expertise, possess higher risk tolerance to adverse market conditions and higher capacity to absorb losses. Such professional inverstors thus require lessa different set of investor protection measure thans as compared to retail investors. It is therefore appropriate to remove the diversification requirements for ELTIFs that are solely marketed to professional investors.
Amendment 115 #
2021/0377(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18 a (new)
Recital 18 a (new)
(18 a) To avoid an excessive concentration of a client's financial instrument portfolio in ELTIFs, the manager of the ELTIF or the distributor should issue a clear written alert that informs the client that investing an aggregate amount exceeding 10 % of the client's financial instrument portfolio in ELTIFs could constitute excessive risk taking.
Amendment 144 #
2021/0377(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31
Recital 31
(31) Article 19(1) of the current version of Regulation (EU) 2015/760 requires that the rules or instruments of incorporation of an ELTIF do not prevent units or shares of the ELTIF from being admitted to trading on a regulated market or on a multilateral trading facility. Despite that possibility, ELTIF managers, investors and market participants have hardly used the secondary trading mechanism by for the trading of shares or units of ELTIFs. To promote the secondary trading of ELTIF units or shares, it is appropriate to allow ELTIF managers to put in place a possibility for an early exit of ELTIF investors, before the end of the ELTIF’s life. In order to ensure an effective functioning of such a secondary trading mechanism, such an early exit should be possible only where the manager of the ELTIF has put in place a policy for matching potential investors and exit requests. That policy should, among others, specify the transfer process, the role of the ELTIF manager and the ELTIF administrator, the duration of the liquidity window during which the units or shares of the ELTIF could be exchanged, the execution price, pro-ration conditions, disclosure requirements, fees, costs and charges and other conditions pertaining to such a liquidity window mechanism. In order to avoid any misperception by retail investors regarding the legal nature of, and the liquidity that is potentially created by, the policy for matching under the optional liquidity window mechanism, the manager of the ELTIF or the distributor should issue a clear written alert to the retail investor that the availability of such a matching policy does not guarantee a match or entitle retail investors to exit or redeem their units or shares of the ELTIF concerned.
Amendment 147 #
2021/0377(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 34
Recital 34
(34) Adequate disclosure of fees and charges is critically important for the evaluation of the ELTIFs as a potential investment target by investors. Such disclosure is also important where the ELTIF is marketed to retail investors in the case of master-feeder structures. It is therefore appropriate to require the ELTIF manager to include in the annual report of the feeder ELTIF a statement on the aggregate charges of the feeder ELTIF and the master ELTIF. In order to protect investors from being charged unjustified additional costs, there should be a prohibition on master ELTIFs charging feeder ELTIFs subscription and redemption fees.
Amendment 191 #
2021/0377(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Regulation (EU) 2015/760
Article 10 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 10 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Eligible investment assets shall be subject to the minimum safeguards referred to in Article 18 of Regulation (EU) 2020/852 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Amendment 266 #
2021/0377(COD)
Amendment 268 #
2021/0377(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20
Regulation (EU) 2015/760
Article 30 – paragraph 1
Article 30 – paragraph 1
1. The units or shares of an ELTIF may onlyshall be marketed to a retail investor whereonly if the following conditions are fulfilled: (a) an assessment of suitability in accordance with Article 25, paragraphs 1, 2 and 5, Article 25(6), second and third subparagraph, and Article 25(7) of Directive 2014/65/EU has been ca(2) of Directive 2014/65/EU has been carried out, and its result has been communicated, with respect to that investor; (b) in all cases, the seller of the ELTIF has ascertained, on the basis of the assessment referried out with respect to thatto in point (a) of this paragraph, that the ELTIF is suitable for that retail investor.
Amendment 269 #
2021/0377(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20
Regulation (EU) 2015/760
Article 30 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 30 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. The manager of the ELTIF or the distributor shall issue a clear written alert to the retail investor that investing an aggregate amount exceeding 10 % of the retail investor’s portfolio of financial instruments in ELTIFs may constitute excessive risk taking.
Amendment 127 #
2021/0376(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) To develop a reliable overview of delegation activities in the Union governed bycompliance with Article 20 of Directive 2011/61/EU and to inform future policy decisions or supervisory actions, competent authoritieAIFMs should provide the European Securities and Markets Authority (‘ESMA’) with delegation notifications where an AIFM delegates morecompetent authorities of their home Member States with comprehensive and up-to-date information on delegation of portfolio management, or risk management functions of the AIF, than it manages itself to entities located in third countries.
Amendment 131 #
2021/0376(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 7
Recital 7
Amendment 135 #
2021/0376(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 7 a (new)
Recital 7 a (new)
(7 a) Marketing of AIFs is not always conducted by the AIFM directly but by one or several distributors either on behalf of the AIFM or on their own behalf. There may also be cases where an independent financial advisor markets a fund without the AIFM’s knowledge. Most fund distributors are subject to regulatory requirements pursuant to Directive 2014/65/EU or Directive 2016/97/EU, which define the scope and extent of their responsibilities towards their own clients. Directive 2011/61/EU should therefore acknowledge the diversity of distribution arrangements and recognise the existing safeguards for the arrangements whereby a distributor acts on its own behalf when it markets the AIF, among others, under Directive 2014/65/EU or through life insurance based investment products in accordance with Directive 2016/97/EU, in which case the provisions of this Directive regarding delegation should not apply irrespective of any distribution agreement between the AIFM and the distributor.
Amendment 145 #
2021/0376(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9 a (new)
Recital 9 a (new)
(9 a) In order to uphold the European Single Market and further advance the Capital Markets’ Union, a future review should assess the appropriateness of complementing this Directive with a depositary passport. The current location- related restriction is against the principle of free movement of services and capital in the Union. Moreover, the present lack could also lead to systemic and concentration risks, as the custody business is concentrated within a limited number of credit institutions. A depositary passport would allow such hurdles to be overcome. It would also benefit investors by promoting competition between depositories and possibly result in lower costs as a result of the availability of larger number of depositories.
Amendment 165 #
2021/0376(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 28
Recital 28
(28) To support supervisory convergence in the area of delegation ESMA should conduct peer review on the supervisory practices wiget a better understanding of the application of the provisions of this directive, including in the a particular focus on preventing the creation of letter- box entities. ESMA’s analysis of the peer reviews will feed into the review of the measures adoprea of appropriate oversight and control over delegation arrangements, in all the Member States. To this effect, ESMA should, before the review of this Directive takes place, activate the tool at its disposal in the area of supervisory convergence that is most adequated in this Directive and inform the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission of any additional measures that may be needed to supportorder to achieve the intended objective. ESMA’s analysis of the data collected during this supervisory convergence exercice will feed into a report, to be provided before the start of the review, analysing market practices regarding compliance with the requirements of the effdirectiveness of the delegation regimes laid down in Directive 2011/61/EU regarding oversight and control over delegation arrangements and substance rules.
Amendment 169 #
2021/0376(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 28 a (new)
Recital 28 a (new)
(28 a) Marketing of UCITS is not always conducted by the management company directly but by one or several distributors either on behalf of the management company or on their own behalf. There may also be cases where an independent financial advisor markets a fund without the management company’s knowledge. Most fund distributors are subject to regulatory requirements pursuant to Directive 2014/65/EU or Directive 2016/97/EU, which define the scope and extent of their responsibilities towards their own clients. Directive 2009/65/EC should therefore acknowledge the diversity of distribution arrangements and recognise the existing safeguards for the arrangements whereby a distributor acts on its own behalf when it markets the AIF, among others, under Directive 2014/65/EU or through life insurance based investment products in accordance with Directive 2016/97/EU, in which case the provisions of this Directive regarding delegation should not apply irrespective of any distribution agreement between the management company and the distributor.
Amendment 188 #
2021/0376(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 38
Recital 38
(38) To develop a reliable overview of delegation activities in the Union governed bycompliance with Article 13 of Directive 2009/65/EC and to inform future policy decisions or supervisory actions, competent authoritmanagement companies should provide ESMA with delegation notifications where a UCITS management companycompetent authorities of their home Member State with comprehensive and up-to-date information on delegates moreion, portfolio management or risk management functions, than it manages itself, to entities located in third countries.
Amendment 189 #
2021/0376(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 39
Recital 39
Amendment 204 #
2021/0376(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 50
Recital 50
(50) To support supervisory convergence in the area of delegation ESMA should conduct peer reviews on the supervisory practices particularly focusing on preventing creation of letter-box entities. ESMA’s analysis of the peer reviews would feed into the review of the measures adopget a better understanding of the application of the provisions of this directive, including in the area of appropriate oversight and control over delegation arrangements, in all the Member States. To this effect, ESMA should, before the review of this Directive takes place, activate the tool at its disposal in the area of supervisory convergence that is most adequated in this Directive and inform the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission what additional measures may be needed to support effectiveness of the delegation regime laid down in Directive 2009/65/ECorder to achieve the intended objective. ESMA’s analysis of the data collected during this supervisory convergence exercise would feed into a report, to be provided before the start of the review, analysing market practices regarding compliance with the requirements of the directive regarding oversight and control over delegation arrangements and substance rules.
Amendment 231 #
2021/0376(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b
Directive 2011/61/EU
Article 7 – paragraph 5
Article 7 – paragraph 5
Amendment 306 #
2021/0376(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point a a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point a a (new)
Directive 2011/61/EU
Article 20 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 20 – paragraph 1 a (new)
(a a) The following paragraph 1a is inserted: 1a. Where the delegation relates to portfolio management or risk management functions, the AIFM shall, on a yearly basis, inform the competent authority of the following: (a) information on the entities to which such functions have been delegated (name and legal entity identifier of each delegate, its jurisdiction of establishment and, where relevant, its supervisory authority); (b) information on the function delegated (portfolio management or risk management), type of delegation (full or partial), and the date of the delegation agreement or contract; (c) where sub-delegation arrangements are in place, the same information in respect of the sub-delegates and the functions sub-delegated; (d) the date of conclusion of the delegation and sub-delegation arrangements; (e) description of periodic due diligence measures carried out by the AIFM to oversee, monitor and control the delegate, including the date of performance of these measures, the issues identified and, where relevant, the measures and timeline adopted to address these issues.
Amendment 308 #
2021/0376(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point b
Directive 2011/61/EU
Article 20 – paragraph 3
Article 20 – paragraph 3
3. The AIFM’s liability towards its clients, the AIF and its investors shall not be affected by the fact that the AIFM has delegated functions to a third party, or by any further sub-delegation, nor shall the AIFM delegate its functions to the extent that, in essence, it can no longer be considered to be the manager of the AIF or the provider of the services and to the extent that it becomes a letter- box entity.;
Amendment 443 #
2021/0376(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c
Directive 2009/65/EC
Article 13 – paragraph 3
Article 13 – paragraph 3
Amendment 453 #
2021/0376(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c
3 a. Where the delegation relates to portfolio management or risk management functions, the management company shall, on a yearly basis, inform the competent authority of the following: (a) information on the entities to which such functions have been delegated (name and legal entity identifier of each delegate, its jurisdiction of establishment and, where relevant, its supervisory authority); (b) information on the function delegated (portfolio management or risk management), type of delegation (full or partial), and the date of the delegation agreement or contract; (c) where sub-delegation arrangements are in place, the same information in respect of the sub-delegates and the functions sub-delegated; (d) the date of conclusion of the delegation and sub-delegation arrangements; (e) description of periodic due diligence measures carried out by the AIFM to oversee, monitor and control the delegate, including the date of performance of these measures, the issues identified and, where relevant, the measures and timeline adopted to address these issues.
Amendment 455 #
2021/0376(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c
Directive 2009/65/EC
Article 13 – paragraph 4
Article 13 – paragraph 4
Amendment 462 #
2021/0376(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c
Directive 2009/65/EC
Article 13 – paragraph 5
Article 13 – paragraph 5
5. By … [12 months before the date of the review referred to in Article 110a], ESMA shall provide the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission with regular reports, at least every two years, analysing market practices regarding delegation to entities located in third countries anda report analysing compliance with Articles 7 and 13.
Amendment 314 #
2021/0342(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) To address those problems, provide legal certainty and signal our commitment to our international partners in the G20, it is of utmost importance to implement the outstanding elements of the Basel III reform faithfully. At the same time, the implementation should avoid a significant increase in overall capital requirements for the EU banking system on the whole and take into account specificities of the EU economy. Where possible, adjustments to the international standards should be applied on a transitional basis. The implementation should help avoid competitive disadvantages for EU institutions, in particular in the area of trading activities, where EU institutions directly compete with their international peers. It should take into full account the different financial structures prevailing outside the Union, especially but not only with regards to the mortgage market. Furthermore, the proposed approach should be coherent with the logic of the Banking Union and avoid further fragmentation of the Single Market for banking. Finally, it should ensure proportionality of the rules and aim at further reducing compliance costs, in particular for smaller institutions, and the economies of the smaller Member States, without loosening the prudential standards.
Amendment 324 #
2021/0342(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) For subordinated debt and equity exposures, a more granular and stringent risk weight treatment is necessary to reflect the higher loss risk of subordinated debt and equity exposures when compared to debt exposures, and to prevent regulatory arbitrage between the banking book and the trading book. Union institutions have long-standing, strategic equity investments in financial and non-financial corporates. As the standard risk weight for equity exposures increases over a 5-year transition period, existing strategic equity holdings in corporates and insurance undertakings under significant influence of the institution should be grandfathered to avoid disruptive effects and to preserve the role of Union institutions as long-standing, strategic equity investors. Given the prudential safeguards and supervisory oversight to foster financial integration of the financial sector, however, for equity holdings in other institutions within the same group or covered by the same institutional protection scheme, the current regime should be maintained. In addition, to reinforce private and public initiatives to provide long-term equity to EU corporates, be they listed or unlisted, investments should not be considered as speculative where they are made with the firm intention of the institution’s senior management to hold it for three or more years or when they were made in response to national strategies to support economic activity during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Amendment 326 #
2021/0342(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) Corporate lending in the Union is predominantly provided by institutions which use the internal ratings based (IRB) approaches for credit risk to calculate their capital requirements. With the implementation of the output floor, those institutions will also need to apply the SA- CR, which relies on credit assessments by external credit assessment institutions (‘ECAI’) to determine the credit quality of the corporate borrower. TWhile remaining proportionate, the mapping between external ratings and risk weights applicable to rated corporates should be more granular, to bring such mapping in line with the international standards on that matter.
Amendment 332 #
2021/0342(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) Most EU corporates, however, do not seek external credit ratings, in particular due to cost considerations. To avoid disruptive impacts on bank lending to unrated corporates and to provide enough time to establish public or private initiatives aimed at increasing the coverage of external credit ratings, it is necessary to provide for a transitional period for such increase in the coverage. During that transitional period, institutions using IRB approaches should be able to apply a favourable treatment when calculating their output floor for investment grade exposures to unrated corporates, whilst initiatives to foster widespread use of credit ratings should be established. That transitional arrangement should be coupled with a report prepared by the European Banking Authority (‘EBA’). After the transition period, institutions should be able to refer to credit assessments by ECAIs to calculate the capital requirements for most of their corporate exposures. To inform any future initiative on the set-up of public or private rating schemes, the European Supervisory Authorities (ESAs) should be requested to prepare a report on the impediments to the availability of external credit ratings by ECAIs, in particular for corporates, and on possible measures to address those impediments. In the meanwhile, the European Commission stands ready to provide technical support to Member States via its Technical Support Instrument in this area, e.g. to formulate strategies on increasing the rating- penetration of their unlisted corporates or to explore best practices on setting up entities capable of providing ratings or providing related guidance to corporates. Meanwhile, further efforts should be made to promote the creation of a pan- European credit rating agency.
Amendment 363 #
2021/0342(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 42
Recital 42
(42) It is essential for supervisors to have the necessary empowerments to assess and measure in a comprehensive manner the risks to which a banking group is exposed at a consolidated level and to have the flexibility to adapt their supervisory approach to new sources of risks. It is important to avoid loopholes between prudential and accounting consolidation which may give rise to transactions aimed at moving assets out of the scope of prudential consolidation, even though risks remain in the banking group. The lack of coherence in the definition of “parent undertaking”, “subsidiary” and “control” concepts, and the lack of clarity in the definition of “ancillary services undertaking”, “financial holding company” and “financial institution” make it more difficult for supervisors to apply the applicable rules consistently in the Union and to detect and appropriately address risks at a consolidated level. Those definitions should therefore be amended and further clarified as a matter of priority. In addition, it is deemed appropriate for EBA to investigate further whether these empowerments of the supervisors might be unintendedly constrained by any remaining discrepancies or loopholes in the regulatory provisions or in their interaction with the applicable accounting framework.
Amendment 94 #
2021/0341(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) The provision of banking services in the Union is conditional upon the credit institution’s having previous authorisation and a physical presence through a legal person or a branch in its territory. Only in that way credit institutions may be subject to effective prudential regulation and supervision that are necessary to minimise the risk of failure and, when it occurs, to manage that failure in order to prevent it from spreading in a disorderly manner and leading to the collapse of the financial system (contagion risk by e.g. a bank run or a bank failure triggered by imprudent lending). The provision of banking services in the Union without such physical presence would increase the presence and prevalence in the financial markets where credit institutions are closely involved of risk segments not subject to Union’s prudential regulation and supervision, that may eventually threaten the financial stability of the Union or of its individual Member States. The financial crisis of 2008-2009 is the latest historical precedent, which underlines how small market segments may become the source of significant threats to the financial stability of the Union and its Member States if left outside the scope of prudential regulation and supervision. Hence, it is necessary to lay down an explicit requirement in Union law that undertakings established in a third country and seeking to provide banking services in the Union should at least establish a branch in a Member State and that such branch be authorised in accordance with Union legislation, unless the undertaking wishes to provide banking services in the Union through a subsidiary in which it has a proven financial and operational control. However, that requirement to establish a branch should not apply to cases of reverse solicitation of services, as in this case it is the customer that approaches the undertaking in the third country to solicit the provision of the service.
Amendment 116 #
2021/0341(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 37
Recital 37
(37) Members of the management body may undergo the suitability assessment only after a significant time after their appointment or, in the case of key function holders, not at all. Thus, members of the management body who do not meet the suitability criteria may have exercised their duties for a long time, which is problematic especially for large institutions. Moreover, cross-border institutions must navigate through a wide diversity of national rules and processes, which does not make the current system efficient. The existence of different requirements as regards the suitability assessment across the Union is a particularly acute issue in the context of the Banking Union. As a result, it is important to provide a set of rules at Union level to put in place a consistent and predictable “fit-and-proper” framework. This will foster supervisory convergence, enabling further trust between competent authorities and give more legal certainty to institutions. Having a robust “fit-and- proper” framework for assessing the suitability of members of the management body and key function holders is a crucial factor to ensure that institutions are adequately run and their risks appropriately managed. Such a framework should be introduced step by step, in a graduated basis cumulatively, taking into full account the particular features applying within national financial systems, not least those of the smaller Member States.
Amendment 123 #
2021/0341(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 41
Recital 41
(41) In light of the role of the suitability assessment for the prudent and sound management of institutions, it is necessary to provide competent authorities with new tools, such as statements of responsibilities and a mapping of duties, to assess the suitability of members of the management body and key function holders. Those new tools will also support the work of competent authorities when reviewing the governance arrangements of institutions as part of the supervisory review and evaluation process. Notwithstanding the overall responsibility of the management body as a collegial body, institutions should be required to draw up individual statements and a mapping that clarify the duties held by members of the management body, senior management and key function holders. Their individual duties are not always clearly or consistently laid down and there may be situations where two or more roles overlap or where areas of duties are overlooked because they do not fall neatly under the remit of a single person. The scope of each individual’s duties should be well defined and no areas of duties should be left without ownership. Those tools should ensure further accountability of the members of the management body, senior management and key function holders without inhibiting the operational flexibility of institutions required to face changing competitive realities.
Amendment 132 #
2021/0341(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 46
Recital 46
(46) To enable the timely and effective activation of the systemic risk buffer it is necessary to clarify the application of the relevant provisions and simplify and align the applicable procedures. Setting a systemic risk buffer should be possible for designated authorities in all Member States to enable the recognition of systemic risk buffer rates set by authorities in other Member States and to ensure that authorities are empowered to address systemic risks in a timely, proportionate and effective manner. Recognition of a systemic risk buffer rate set by another Member State should require only a notification from the authority recognising the rate. To avoid unnecessary authorisation procedures where the decision to set a buffer rate results in a decrease or no change from any of the previously set rates, the procedure laid down in Article 131(15) of Directive 2013/36/EU needs to be aligned with the procedure laid down in Article 133(9) of that Directive. The procedures laid down in Article 133(11) of that Directive should be clarified and made more consistent with the procedures applying for other systemic risk buffer rates, where relevant.
Amendment 5 #
2021/0227(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Calls for the 2022 budget to contribute to the fulfilment of the priorities outlined in the European SemesterUnion’s recovery strategy, the Recovery and Resilience Facility and the Annual Sustainable Growth Strategy, while allowing to deliver the European Green Deal, the European Pillar of Social Rights and the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals;
Amendment 11 #
2021/0227(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Supports the “whatever it takes” approach taken by European Institutions and Member States, supported by both monetary and budgetary tools; highlights that businesses and households have received needed financial support since the COVID-19 pandemic broke out. The magnitude of the COVID-19-related emergency measures is sizeable, at an estimated 4% of GDP in both 2020 and 2021 in the Union as a whole, including emergency investment in health-care to address the COVID-19 pandemic, and other measures like transfers to firms and workers most hit by the crisis; considers that such support will remain necessary until the spread of the pandemic is not fully under control and in order to support Member States’ efforts to recover from the crisis and strengthen their economic and social resilience;
Amendment 13 #
2021/0227(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Believes that the Union budget must be equipped with the tools to enable it to respond to multiple crises simultaneously while not abandoning its long-term strategies; reiterates Parliament’s view that the 2022 budget should play a pivotal role in ensuring a positive and tangible impact on citizens’ lives by strengthening the drive towards an upward socioeconomic convergence between European regions; against this background, supports increases to boost investment with a particular focus on SMEs, strengthen efforts towards the green and digital transitions, give fresh opportunities to young people in particular, build a strong European Health Union; reinforces, further, priorities in the fields of security, migration, fundamental rights, while acknowledging the recent deteriorating situation in external policy and humanitarian aid and the need to be able to react swiftly to the upcoming challenges;
Amendment 20 #
2021/0227(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Emphasises the importance ofCalls for sufficient resources for the coordination and surveillance of macroeconomic policies,of macroeconomic, social and environmental policies; highlights that the new framework for anti-money laundering, and countering financial crime and for enforcement of the economic governance frameworkwould require new resources to deliver adequate enforcement and supervision;
Amendment 29 #
2021/0227(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Welcomes the adoption of the InvestEU program which includes EUR 26 000 000 000 guarantee aiming at levelling up EUR 372 000 000 000 of investments and hope to fully enable further risk-taking in fulfilling the Union policy priorities; insists that in 2022, InvestEU Fund should prioritise a facilitated access to finance for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) as well as financing social investment and skills to maximize the Fund's contribution to a sustainable recovery, oriented towards greening and digital transitions; stresses that InvestEU should strive to address regional disparities, namely those resulting from long-term investment deficits and geographical disadvantages, and enhance economic and social convergence and cohesion;
Amendment 32 #
2021/0227(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4 b. Welcomes the extension of the State Aid Temporary Framework until 31 December 2021 in the context of the COVID-19 crisis; calls for reinforced resources to ensure full and fast application of the Union competition policy; encourages Member States and the EU via its new recovery instrument, Recovery and Resilience Facility, to make full use of the State Aid Temporary Framework regarding the directly COVID-19-related financial needs; expects that the Commission would also monitor all schemes approved under the Temporary Framework and their impact on the functioning of the internal market;
Amendment 51 #
2021/0227(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. Welcomes the launch of the EU Tax and Financial Crimes Observatory as a preparatory action; considers such Observatory as a useful contribution to both the needed democratic debate and to decision makers; calls on the Commission to make proposals to perpetuate the Observatory after 2022;
Amendment 59 #
2021/0227(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Reiterates and emphasises its long- standing request for a dedicated budget line and allocation for tourism, particularly considering the severe contraction that the sector has experienced as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic; acknowledges that several EU programmes contribute to the long-term competitiveness and sustainability of the sector, but strongly believes that an EU tourism programme would ensure more coordinated, visible and transparent action;
Amendment 93 #
2021/0227(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Observes that the COVID-19 pandemic has served to emphasise the strategic role that agriculture plays in avoiding a food crisis by providing safe, high-quality food at affordable prices all over Europe; insists that additional support measures under some budget lines for selected agricultural sectors especially those dedicated to small-scale farming and young farmers need to be funded in 2022 to mitigate the impact of the COVID- 19 pandemic;
Amendment 117 #
2021/0227(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38
Paragraph 38
38. Stresses the importance of a progressive framing of the Union’s common security and defence policywhile respecting the neutrality status of some of the EU’s Member States; underlines the importance of enhancing European cooperation in defence matters since it not only makes Europe and its citizens safer, but also leads to a cost reduction; calls for increased funding for the European Defence Fund and for military mobility in order to fully foster an innovative and competitive defence industrial base that will contribute to the much-needed strategic autonomy of the Union;
Amendment 141 #
2021/0227(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45 a (new)
Paragraph 45 a (new)
45 a. Further recognises the role played by host Countries in the Southern Mediterranean, particularly Libya, Tunisia and Morocco and reaffirms that the Union and its Member States must continue to provide adequate support to the region, at a level that is not lower than that provided through the EU Trust Fund for Africa. Decides, therefore, to earmark an adequate amount under the emerging challenges and priorities cushion of NDICI-Global Europe to this effect.
Amendment 37 #
2021/0218(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 1 a (new)
Recital 1 a (new)
(1a) The European Commission and Member States should support regional and local commitments to achieve the European Green Deal objectives, notably to ensure greater deployment of renewable energy sources. Networks, which facilitate multilevel governance arrangements, play an essential role in increasing local ambition and action at local level, involving citizens and local actors.
Amendment 44 #
2021/0218(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 2 a (new)
Recital 2 a (new)
(2a) Renewable Energy Communities are a key tool for promoting the widespread use of renewable energy sources and achieving a decentralised energy system while ensuring local economic and social benefits. Initiatives for collective self-generation and collective self-consumption in buildings and at district level should be facilitated by reducing permitting, administrative difficulties and burdens, or other factors inhibiting grid access, grid fees, and enhancing the deployment of technologies such as solar thermal and photovoltaic, wind and geothermal technologies.
Amendment 67 #
2021/0218(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5 a (new)
Recital 5 a (new)
(5a) Since energy poverty affects around 8% of the population of the Union, renewable energy policies have an essential role to play in addressing energy poverty and consumer vulnerability ;
Amendment 70 #
2021/0218(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 7 a (new)
Recital 7 a (new)
(7a) Local and regional authorities (LRAs) play a very important role in an integrated and decentralised energy system. The Commission shall support LRAs, including in insular territories, with regard to working across borders by assisting them in setting up cooperation mechanisms. Closer cooperation between the EU and Member States and increased investment in Research and Development and Innovation (RDI) will provide the significant added value needed to meet the objectives of this Directive across the EU.
Amendment 84 #
2021/0218(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 11 a (new)
Recital 11 a (new)
(11a) Member States should therefore guarantee to support proactive policies that focus especially on low-income households at risk of energy poverty or in social housing;
Amendment 98 #
2021/0213(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3 a (new)
Recital 3 a (new)
(3 a) Insular, peripheral and remote regions had little alternative but to build their economic competitiveness with the support of air transport, enabling and promoting key economic flows and other drivers of economic development enabled by efficient and affordable air services. Improved air connectivity has brought about wider economic benefits, beyond those that benefit the immediate users of air transport networks. Beyond those that could be considered direct economic benefits of aviation, air connectivity between Member States serves as an essential catalyst for economic growth and social welfare. Air linkages that connect central Member States to the insular, peripheral and remote regions continue to make a vital contribution to economic growth.
Amendment 100 #
2021/0213(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3 b (new)
Recital 3 b (new)
(3 b) Until cleaner energy is made available through technological advances, taxpayers are encouraged to consume smartly and use transport that consumes less fossil fuels. However, until more environmentally friendly alternatives are available, the insular, peripheral and remote regions will be at an economic disadvantage compared to the central ones. Insular, peripheral and remote regions should not be discriminated against since in the near future they will not have transport alternatives that are more ecological than air transport. Citizens and businesses on islands and at the periphery should continue to benefit from equivalent connectivity opportunities as their counterparts in more central areas of the Union.
Amendment 101 #
2021/0213(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) Environmental taxation can be a cost-effective mean for Member States to achieve the targeted reductions of greenhouse gasses. The proper functioning of the internal market requires common rules on that taxation, while preserving Member States' flexibility and sovereignty over tax prerogatives, not least with respect to promoting economic and social development of their insular, peripheral and remote regions.
Amendment 112 #
2021/0213(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 7 a (new)
Recital 7 a (new)
(7 a) For insular regions having no connections by road, train or bridge with the European mainland, and for peripheral and remote regions, especially those with an economy that is highly dependent on tourism, the kerosene tax should be waived for flights to and from such regions, during the first five years, and should then be raised in five equal annual steps in the following five years to reach the levels achieved for all flights at the end of the ten year period. All precautionary steps should be taken to avoid any "détournement de trafic" in kerosene usage.
Amendment 184 #
2021/0213(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 28 a (new)
Recital 28 a (new)
(28 a) Energy is essential and access to energy services is a basic social right. Households regarded as vulnerable are more often affected by energy poverty as defined in the Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on energy efficiency (recast) and need special attention. 'Energy poverty' means a household’s inability, linked to non- affordability, to meet its basic energy supply needs and lack of access to essential energy services such as to guarantee basic levels of comfort and health, a decent standard of living, including adequate heating and cooling, lighting, and energy to power appliances, in the relevant national context, existing social policy and other relevant policies, as a result of insufficient disposable income.
Amendment 191 #
2021/0213(CNS)
(29 a) The implementation of the Directive could have socio-economic consequences as well as a diverse impact on income classes and Member States. In that regard, a Social Monitor is established by this Directive to assess the implementation of the Directive and its impact in different Member States, regions and income classes. The Social Monitor should distribute reporting obligations to both the Commission and Member States. While the Commission should provide a holistic overview, also with regard to the evolution of energy prices, Member States should describe the social measures taken to ease the potential socio-economic consequences of the implementation of this Directive. If according to the assessments of the Social Monitor no significant progress is made to ease the potential socio-economic consequences on households recognised as vulnerable, Member States should have the possibility to prolong the transition period for those households.
Amendment 196 #
2021/0213(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 36
Recital 36
(36) Every fivthree years and for the first time fivthree years after the entry into force of this Directive, the Commission should report to the Council on the application of this Directive, examining in particular the minimum levels of taxation, the impact of innovation and technological developments, especially as regards energy efficiency, the use of electricity in transport and the justification for the exemptions, reductions and differentiations laid down in this Directive. The report should take into account the proper functioning of the internal market, environmental and social considerations, the real value of the minimum levels of taxation and, the impact of this Directive on air connectivity and the economic and social welfare of insular, peripheral and remote regions as well as the wider relevant objectives of the Treaties.
Amendment 236 #
2021/0213(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 242 #
2021/0213(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 a (new)
Article 7 a (new)
Amendment 306 #
2021/0213(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
(a a) - consumers under Power Purchase Agreements (PPAs), energy communities and active consumers whose self-production of electricity derives from products specified in this Article;
Amendment 348 #
2021/0213(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 1 a (new)
After the end of the transition period, if no significant progress is made according to the assessments of the Social Monitor as defined in this Directive, Member States shall continue to exempt households recognised as vulnerable.
Amendment 367 #
2021/0213(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 26 a (new)
Article 26 a (new)
Article 26 a Reporting obligations of the European Commission - Social monitor Within two years after the adoption of this Directive and every two years thereafter, the Commission shall adopt and make public available a report providing detailed assessments of the situation of energy prices in Member States and on the EU market and of the effects of this Directive therein. The Report shall include all relevant facts and figures covering energy price developments, as well as an assessment of the effects of the implementation of the revised Directive on those prices, with special emphasis on households recognised as vulnerable as defined in this Directive. The Commission shall in this respect take into consideration the different starting positions of Member States and assess possible extensions of the transitional period, targeted reductions and exemptions. This shall specifically apply to justified cases related to households recognised as vulnerable to prevent severe price jumps that may occur after the end of the transitional period. The Commission in cooperation with Member States shall identify and report on the number of households recognised as vulnerable as well as those suffering from energy poverty as defined in the directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on energy efficiency (recast).
Amendment 368 #
2021/0213(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 26 b (new)
Article 26 b (new)
Article 26 b Reporting obligations for the Member States - Social monitor By 2025 or two years after the entry into force of this Directive, and every two years thereafter, Member States shall report to the Commission on the implementation of social measures directly or indirectly linked to the effects of this Directive. Such a report shall include at least: a) the ratio comparing the actual amount of increased revenues passed to Member States’ national budget as a result of revised energy taxation to the amount of resources used on social measures tackling direct or indirect effects linked to this directive; b) energy price developments and relevant data available covering or mapping impacted households per region, per household, and per income group; c) a detailed mapping of social instruments and measures implemented in the Member States tackling the socio- economic consequences linked to the application of this revision.
Amendment 369 #
2021/0213(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 29 – paragraph 2
Article 29 – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt the delegated acts referred to in Article 2(8) and Article 5(2) shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from 1 January 2023.
Amendment 372 #
2021/0213(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 29 – paragraph 3
Article 29 – paragraph 3
3. The delegation of power referred to in Article 2(8) and Article 5(2) may be revoked at any time by the Council. A decision to revoke shall put an end to the delegation of the power specified in that decision. It shall take effect the day following the publication of the decision in the Official Journal of the European Union or at a later date specified therein. It shall not affect the validity of any delegated acts already in force.
Amendment 374 #
2021/0213(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 29 – paragraph 6
Article 29 – paragraph 6
Amendment 378 #
2021/0213(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 31 – paragraph 1
Article 31 – paragraph 1
Every fivthree years and for the first time fivthree years after 1 January 2023, the Commission shall submit to the Council a report on the application of this Directive.
Amendment 384 #
2021/0213(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 31 – paragraph 2
Article 31 – paragraph 2
The report by the Commission shall, inter alia, examine the minimum levels of taxation, the impact of innovation and technological developments, in particular as regards energy efficiency, the use of electricity in transport and the justification for the exemptions, reductions and differentiations laid down in this Directive. The report shall take into account the proper functioning of the internal market, environmental and social considerations, the real value of the minimum levels of taxation and, the impact of this directive on air connectivity and the economic and social welfare of insular, peripheral and remote regions as well as the relevant wider objectives of the Treaties.
Amendment 32 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) The increase in the price for fossil fuels may disproportionally affect vulnerable households, vulnerable micro- enterprises and vulnerable transport users who spend a larger part of their incomes on energy and transport, who, in certain regions, in particular, insular, peripheral, remote and rural regions, do not have access to alternative, affordable mobility and transport solutions and who may lack the financial capacity to invest into the reduction of fossil fuel consumption.
Amendment 43 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) For that purpose, each Member State should submit to the Commission a Social Climate Plan (‘the Plan’). Those Plans should pursue two objectives. Firstly, they should provide vulnerable households, vulnerable micro-enterprises and vulnerable transport users the necessary resources to finance and carry out investments in energy efficiency, decarbonisation of heating and cooling, in zero- and low-emission vehicles and mobility. Secondly, they should mitigate the impact of the increase in the cost of fossil fuels on the most vulnerable and thereby prevent energy and transport poverty during the transition period until such investments have been implemented. The Plans should have an investment component promoting the long-term solution of reduce fossil fuels reliance and could envisage other measures, including temporary direct income support to mitigate adverse income effects in the shorter term. It will need to be kept in mind that especially in insular and peripheral regions, such investment is likely not to benefit from economies of scale and to require a financial envelope that at first sight will appear to be disproportionate to the results that it will seek to achieve.
Amendment 59 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) Taking into account the importance of tackling climate change in line with Paris Agreement commitments, and the commitment to the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, the actions under this Regulation should contribute to the achievement of the target that 30% of all expenditure under the 2021- 2027 multiannual financial framework should be spent on mainstreaming climate objectives and should contribute to the ambition of providing 10% of annual spending to biodiversity objectives in 2026 and 2027, while considering the existing overlaps between climate and biodiversity goals. For this purpose, the methodology set out in Annex II of Regulation (EU) 2021/1060 of the European Parliament and of the Council33 should be used to tag the expenditures of the Fund. The Fund should support activities that fully respect the climate and environmental standards and priorities of the Union as well as all measures intended to safeguard the national heritage, and comply with the principle of ‘do no significant harm’ within the meaning of Article 17 of Regulation (EU) 2020/852 of the European Parliament and of the Council34 . Only such measures and investments should be included in the Plans. Direct income support measures should as a rule be considered as having an insignificant foreseeable impact on environmental objectives, and as such be considered compliant with the principle of ‘do no significant harm’ not least with reference to the natural and historic heritage. The Commission intends to issue technical guidance to the Member States well ahead of the preparation of the Plans. The guidance will explain how the measures and investments must comply with the principle of ‘do no significant harm’ within the meaning of Article 17 of Regulation (EU) 2020/852. The Commission intends to present in 2021 a proposal for a Council Recommendation on how to address the social aspects of the green transition. _________________ 33 Regulation (EU) 2021/1060 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 June 2021 laying down common provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund Plus, the Cohesion Fund, the Just Transition Fund and the European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund and financial rules for those and for the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund, the Internal Security Fund and the Instrument for Financial Support for Border Management and Visa Policy (OJ L 231, 30.6.2021, p. 159). 34 Regulation (EU) 2020/852 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 June 2020 on the establishment of a framework to facilitate sustainable investment, and amending Regulation (EU) 2019/2088 (OJ L 198, 22.6.2020, p. 13).
Amendment 63 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19 a (new)
Recital 19 a (new)
(19a) Insular regions in the Union should receive a special focus when it comes to EU funding aimed at assisting citizens and microenterprises in the transition towards climate neutrality especially due to their traditional reliance on carbon induced energy and transportation as well as the scale diseconomies they face when applying investment solutions to address carbon pricing challenges. For this reason too, microenterprises established in insular regions are particularly vulnerable to energy and transport price movements.
Amendment 79 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24
Recital 24
(24) The Fund should support measures that respect the principle of additionality of Union funding. The Fund should not be a substitute for recurring national expenditures, except in duly justified cases. It shall be ensured that all Member States will have access and benefit from the fund in a manner that is commensurate with their base requirements.
Amendment 80 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) Those amendments have differing economic and social impacts on the different sectors of the economy, on the citizens, and the Member States. In particular, the inclusion of greenhouse gas emissions from buildings and road transport into the scope of Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and the Council31 should provide an additional economic incentive to invest into the reduction of fossil fuel consumption and thereby accelerate the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions from these sectors. Combined with other measures, this should, in the medium to long term, reduce the costs for buildings and road transport, and provide new opportunities for job creation and investment. _________________ 31 Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 October 2003 establishing a system for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the Union (OJ L 275, 25.10.2003, p. 32).
Amendment 89 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) The increase in the price for fossil fuels may disproportionally affect vulnerable households, vulnerable micro- enterprises and vulnerable transport users who spend a larger part of their incomes on energy and transport, who, in certain regions in particular, insular, peripheral, remote and rural regions, do not have access to alternative, affordable mobility and transport solutions and who may lack the financial capacity to invest into the reduction of fossil fuel consumption.
Amendment 97 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1
(1) ‘building renovation’ means all kinds of energy-related building renovation, including the insulation of the building envelope, that is to say walls, roof, floor, the replacement of windows, the replacement of heating, cooling, humidity control, electricity supply installations and cooking appliances, and the installation of on-site production of energy from renewable sources;
Amendment 105 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 13
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 13
(13) ‘vulnerable transport users’ means transport users, includingespecially those from lower middle-income households, that are significantly affected by the price impacts of the inclusion of road transport into the scope of Directive 2003/87/EC and lack the means to purchase zero- and low- emission vehicles or to switch to alternative sustainable modes of transport, including public transport, particularly in rural and remoteinsular, peripheral, remote and rural areas.
Amendment 114 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) For that purpose, each Member State should submit to the Commission a Social Climate Plan (‘the Plan’). Those Plans should pursue two objectives. Firstly, they should provide vulnerable households, vulnerable micro-enterprises and vulnerable transport users the necessary resources to finance and carry out investments in energy efficiency, decarbonisation of heating and cooling, in zero- and low-emission vehicles and mobility. Secondly, they should mitigate the impact of the increase in the cost of fossil fuels on the most vulnerable and thereby prevent energy and transport poverty during the transition period until such investments have been implemented. The Plans should have an investment component promoting the long-term solution of reduce fossil fuels reliance and could envisage other measures, including temporary direct income support to mitigate adverse income effects in the shorter term. It will need to be kept in mind that especially in insular and peripheral regions, such investment is likely not to benefit from economies of scale and to require a financial envelope that at first sight will appear to be disproportionate to the results that it will seek to achieve.
Amendment 118 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – point b
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) finance measures and investments to increase the uptake of zero- and low- emission mobility and transport, not least in the EU’s insular, peripheral, remote and rural regions.
Amendment 123 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
(aa) investments that are subject to economic diseconomies of scale especially in insular, peripheral or remote regions, will be allowed if they can be justified in social and environmental terms;
Amendment 126 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14 a (new)
Recital 14 a (new)
(14 a) The Plan should also include measures to provide information support, capacity building and training necessary to implement the investments and measures intended to reduce reliance on fossil fuels through increased energy efficiency of buildings, decarbonisation of heating and cooling of buildings, including the integration of energy from renewable sources, and granting improved access to zero - and low - emission mobility and transport.
Amendment 127 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) an estimate of the likely effects of that increase in prices on households, and in particular on incidence of energy poverty, on micro-enterprises and on transport users, comprising in particular an estimate and the identification of vulnerable households, vulnerable micro- enterprises and vulnerable transport users; these impacts are to be analysed with a sufficient level of regional disaggregation, taking into account elements such as access to public transport and basic services and identifying the areas mostly affected, particularly territories which areinsular, peripheral, remote and rural regions;
Amendment 134 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point h
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point h
(h) an explanation of how the Plan ensures that no investment or measure, included in the Plan does significant harm to environmental objectives within the meaning of Article 17 of Regulation (EU) 2020/852 and the conservation of national heritage objectives; the Commission shall provide technical guidance to the Member States targeted to the scope of the Fund to that effect; no explanation is required for the measures referred to in Article 3(2);
Amendment 140 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – point e
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – point e
(e) reductions in the number of vulnerable households, especially households in energy poverty, of vulnerable micro-enterprises and of vulnerable transport users, includ especially ing in rural and remotesular, peripheral, remote and rural areas.
Amendment 144 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) Taking into account the importance of tackling climate change in line with Paris Agreement commitments, and the commitment to the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, the actions under this Regulation should contribute to the achievement of the target that 30% of all expenditure under the 2021- 2027 multiannual financial framework should be spent on mainstreaming climate objectives and should contribute to the ambition of providing 10% of annual spending to biodiversity objectives in 2026 and 2027, while considering the existing overlaps between climate and biodiversity goals. For this purpose, the methodology set out in Annex II of Regulation (EU) 2021/1060 of the European Parliament and of the Council33 should be used to tag the expenditures of the Fund. The Fund should support activities that fully respect the climate and environmental standards and priorities of the Union as well as all measures intended to safeguard the national heritage, and comply with the principle of ‘do no significant harm’ within the meaning of Article 17 of Regulation (EU) 2020/852 of the European Parliament and of the Council34 . Only such measures and investments should be included in the Plans. Direct income support measures should as a rule be considered as having an insignificant foreseeable impact on environmental objectives, and as such be considered compliant with the principle of ‘do no significant harm’ not least with reference to the natural and historic heritage. The Commission intends to issue technical guidance to the Member States well ahead of the preparation of the Plans. The guidance will explain how the measures and investments must comply with the principle of ‘do no significant harm’ within the meaning of Article 17 of Regulation (EU) 2020/852. The Commission intends to present in 2021 a proposal for a Council Recommendation on how to address the social aspects of the green transition. _________________ 33 Regulation (EU) 2021/1060 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 June 2021 laying down common provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund Plus, the Cohesion Fund, the Just Transition Fund and the European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund and financial rules for those and for the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund, the Internal Security Fund and the Instrument for Financial Support for Border Management and Visa Policy (OJ L 231, 30.6.2021, p. 159). 34 Regulation (EU) 2020/852 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 June 2020 on the establishment of a framework to facilitate sustainable investment, and amending Regulation (EU) 2019/2088 (OJ L 198, 22.6.2020, p. 13).
Amendment 145 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) contribute to the decarbonisation, including the electrification, of heating and cooling of, humidity control, and cooking in, buildings and the integration of energy from renewable sources that contribute to the achievements of energy savings;
Amendment 147 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point f
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point f
(f) support public and private entities in developing and providing affordable zero- and low-emission mobility and transport services and the uptake of attractive active mobility options for rural, insular, peripheral, mountainous, remote and less accessible areas or for less developed regions or territories, including less developed peri-urban areas.
Amendment 149 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19 a (new)
Recital 19 a (new)
(19 a) Insular regions in the Union should receive a special focus when it comes to EU funding aimed at assisting citizens and microenterprises in the transition towards climate neutrality especially due to their traditional reliance on carbon induced energy and transportation as well as the scale diseconomies they face when applying investment solutions to address carbon pricing challenges. For this reason too, microenterprises established in insular regions are particularly vulnerable to energy and transport price movements.
Amendment 162 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
1. The maximum financial allocation shall be calculated for each Member State as specified in Annex I and Annex II. It shall be ensured that all member states can fully and adequately participate in fund programmes right from their inception, subject to their particular economic and social conditions.
Amendment 168 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24
Recital 24
(24) The Fund should support measures that respect the principle of additionality of Union funding. The Fund should not be a substitute for recurring national expenditures, except in duly justified cases. It shall be ensured that all Member States will have access and benefit from the fund in a manner that is commensurate with their base requirements.
Amendment 177 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – point c – point i
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – point c – point i
(i) whether the justification provided by the Member State for the amount of the estimated total costs of the Plan is reasonable, plausible, in line with the principle of cost efficiency and commensurate to the expected national environmental and socialo-economic impact;
Amendment 182 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 3
Article 1 – paragraph 3
The measures and investments supported by the Fund shall benefit households, micro-enterprises and transport users, which are vulnerable andpeople affected by energy poverty and vulnerable transport users, in particular households in social housing, in worst performing buildings, and remote areas, which are particularly affected by the inclusion of greenhouse gas emissions from buildings and road transport into the scope of Directive 2003/87/EC, especially households in energy poverty and citizens without public transport alternative to individual cars (in remote and rural areas).
Amendment 189 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 3
Article 19 – paragraph 3
3. Where the Commission makes a positive assessment, it shall adopt without undue delayin a maximum period of one month a decision authorising the disbursement of the financial allocation in accordance with Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046.
Amendment 190 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 4
Article 1 – paragraph 4
The general objective of the Fund is to contribute to the transition towards climate neutrality, sustainable development, and well-being for all people, by addressing the social impacts of the inclusion of greenhouse gas emissions from buildings and road transport into the scope of Directive 2003/87/ECline with the Union’s commitments under the Paris Agreement, the European Pillar of Social Rights and the UN SDGs, while leaving no one behind. The specific objective of the Fund is to support vulnerable households, people affected by energy poverty, vulnerable micro-enterprises and vulnerable transport users through temporary direct income support and through measures and investments intended to increase energy efficiency of buildings, decarbonisation of heating and cooling of buildings, including the integration of energy from renewable sources, and granting improved access to zero- and low-emission as well as affordable mobility and transport.
Amendment 200 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1
(1) ‘building renovation’ means all kinds of energy-related building renovation, including the insulation of the building envelope, that is to say walls, roof, floor, the replacement of windows, the replacement of heating, cooling, humidity control, electricity supply installations and cooking appliances, and the installation of on-site production of energy from renewable sources;
Amendment 204 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2
(2) ‘energy poverty’ means energy poverty as defa household’s inability linked in point [(49)] of Article 2 of Directive (EU) [yyyy/nnn] of the of the European Parliament and of the Council50 ; _________________ 50 [Directive (EU) [yyyy/nnn] of the of the European Parliamto the non- affordability and the lack of access to essential energy services and an adequate level of energy supply as to guarantee a decent standard of the Council (OJ C […], […], p. […]).] [Proposal for recast of Directive 2012/27/EU on energy efficiency]living and health, including adequate warmth, cooling, lighting, and energy to power appliances, in the relevant national context, existing social policy and other relevant policies;
Amendment 208 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 a (new)
(2 a) 'transport poverty';
Amendment 229 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 13
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 13
(13) ‘vulnerable transport users’ means transport users, includingespecially those from lower middle-income households, that are significantly affected by the price impacts of the inclusion of road transport into the scope of Directive 2003/87/EC and lack the means to purchase zero- and low- emission vehicles or to switch to alternative sustainable modes of transport, including public transport, particularly in rural and remoteinsular, peripheral, remote and rural areas.
Amendment 230 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 13 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 13 a (new)
(13 a) ‘worst performing buildings’ means buildings below the E energy performance rating, as defined in [Article 2(17) of Recast EPBD];
Amendment 236 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1
1. Each Member State shall submit to the Commission a Social Climate Plan (‘the Plan’) together with the update to the integrated national energy and climate plan referred to in Article 14(2) of Regulation (EU) 2018/1999 in accordance with the procedure and timeline laid down in that Article. The Plan shall contain a coherent set of measures and investments to address the impact of carbon pricing on vulnerable households, people affected by energy poverty, vulnerable micro-enterprises and vulnerable transport users in order to ensure affordable heating, cooling and mobility while accompanying and accelerating necessary measures to meet the climate targets of the Union.
Amendment 251 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – point b
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) finance measures and investments to increase the uptake of zero- and low- emission mobility and transport not least in the EU’s insular, peripheral, remote and rural regions.
Amendment 253 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – point b
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) finance measures and investments to increase the uptake ofaccess to zero- and low- emission and affordable mobility and transport.
Amendment 264 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
(a a) investments that are subject to economic diseconomies of scale especially in insular, peripheral or remote regions, will be allowed if they can be justified in social and environmental terms;
Amendment 271 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) an estimate of the likely effects of that increase in prices on households, and in particular on incidence of energy poverty, on micro-enterprises and on transport users, comprising in particular an estimate and the identification of vulnerable households, people affected by energy poverty, vulnerable micro- enterprises and vulnerable transport users; these impacts are to be analysed with a sufficient level of regional disaggregation, taking into account elements such as access to public transport and basic services and identifying the areas mostly affected, particularly territories which are remote and rural;
Amendment 272 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) an estimate of the likely effects of that increase in prices on households, and in particular on incidence of energy poverty, on micro-enterprises and on transport users, comprising in particular an estimate and the identification of vulnerable households, vulnerable micro- enterprises and vulnerable transport users; these impacts are to be analysed with a sufficient level of regional disaggregation, taking into account elements such as access to public transport and basic services and identifying the areas mostly affected, particularly territories which areinsular, peripheral, remote and rural regions;
Amendment 273 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
(c a) a gender impact assessment and an explanation of how the measures and investments contained in the Plan take into account the objectives to contribute to gender equality and equal opportunities for all and the mainstreaming of those objectives, in line with principles 2 and 3 of the European Pillar of Social Rights, with the UN Sustainable Development Goal 5 and, where relevant, with the national gender equality strategy;
Amendment 275 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) where the Plan provides for measures referred to in Article 3(2), the criteria for the identification of eligible final recipients, the indication of the envisaged time limit for the measures in question and their justification on the basis of a quantitative estimate and a qualitative explanation of how the measures in the Plan are expected to reduce energy and transport poverty and the vulnerability of households, energy poverty, micro- enterprises and transport users to an increase of road transport and heating fuel prices;
Amendment 285 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point h
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point h
(h) an explanation of how the Plan ensures that no investment or measure, included in the Plan does significant harm to environmental objectives within the meaning of Article 17 of Regulation (EU) 2020/852 and the conservation of national heritage objectives; the Commission shall provide technical guidance to the Member States targeted to the scope of the Fund to that effect; no explanation is required for the measures referred to in Article 3(2);
Amendment 289 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point i
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point i
(i) the arrangements for the effective monitoring and implementation of the Plan by the Member State concerned, including the involvement and consultation of social partners and civil society, in particular of the proposed milestones and targets, including indicators for the implementation of measures and investments, which, where relevant, shall be those available with the Statistical office of the European Union European Statistical Office and the European Energy Poverty Observatory as identified by Commission Recommendation 2020/156354 on energy poverty; _________________ 54 OJ L 357, 27.10.2020, p. 35.
Amendment 298 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Respect for fundamental and human rights and compliance with the European Convention on Human Rights, the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU, the ILO Conventions and the International Bill of Human Rights shall be ensured throughout the preparation, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of the Fund. The measures and investments financed by the Fund shall respect the principle of non- discrimination on the grounds of gender, racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation throughout their preparation and implementation and ensure, where relevant, the accessibility for persons with disabilities. The measures and investments supported by the Fund shall respect the principle of gender equality and address energy poverty and transport poverty from a gender-sensitive perspective. All beneficiaries of the Fund shall comply with the conditions outlined in this paragraph prior to receiving any form of financial support.
Amendment 305 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – point e
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – point e
(e) reductions in the number of vulnerable households, especially households in energy poverty, of vulnerable micro-enterprises and of vulnerable transport users, including in rural and remote areas, disaggregated per gender.
Amendment 306 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – point e
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – point e
(e) reductions in the number of vulnerable households, especially households in energy poverty, of vulnerable micro-enterprises and of vulnerable transport users, includespecially ing in rural and remotesular, peripheral, remote and rural areas.
Amendment 311 #
Amendment 312 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 3
Article 5 – paragraph 3
3. The Fund shall only support measures and investments respecting the principle of Energy Efficiency First as in Article 3 of the Directive (2022/XX/EU) [the EED], the European Pillar of Social Rights and the principle of ‘do no significant harm’ referred to in Article 17 of Regulation (EU) 2020/852.
Amendment 316 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. The Social Climate Fund shall not support measures and investments excluded under Article 9 of Regulation (EU) 2021/1056.
Amendment 321 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22 a (new)
Recital 22 a (new)
(22a) The socio-economic impact of the climate and green transition will be felt by vulnerable households, vulnerable micro- enterprises, and vulnerable transport users in all Member States. In order to achieve its objectives, the Social Climate Fund should be accompanied by adequate financial allocations that support each Member State and ensure meaningful actions and protection of vulnerable users on their territories for a just transition. To this end, minimum investments and sufficient, proportionate financial assistance should be allocated to all Member States to counter the negative social consequences on vulnerable groups that arise from Europe’s shared commitment in the fight against climate change and in reducing emissions, while considering the different challenges and nature of difficulties faced in different regions of the European Union, each with their own geographic and demographic realities.
Amendment 334 #
2021/0206(COD)
(b) contribute to the decarbonisation, including the electrification, of heating and cooling of, humidity control, and cooking in, buildings and the integration of energy from renewable sources that contribute to the achievements of energy savings;
Amendment 338 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
(c a) provide targeted information, support, capacity building and training necessary to implement the energy efficiency renovation solutions and grant access to zero- and low-emission mobility and transport services;
Amendment 345 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point f
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point f
(f) support public and private entities in developing and providing affordable zero- and low-emission mobility and transport services and the uptake of attractive active mobility options for rural, insular, peripheral, mountainous, remote and less accessible areas or for less developed regions or territories, including less developed peri-urban areas.
Amendment 351 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24 a (new)
Recital 24 a (new)
(24a) Island Member States, islands, and outermost regions face unique and specific challenges with a particularly amplified socio-economic impact, which requires specific individual attention in view of effective measures and investments. To this end, where applicable, Social Climate Plans shall have the adequate funding to set out a specific minimum amount to be allocated for these regions with the corresponding justification, considering the particular challenges faced by those Member States, islands and regions.
Amendment 389 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
1. The maximum financial allocation shall be calculated for each Member State as specified in Annex I and Annex II. It shall be ensured that all Member States can fully and adequately participate in fund programmes right from their inception, subject to their particular economic and social conditions.
Amendment 415 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – point a – point iii a (new)
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – point a – point iii a (new)
(iii a) whether social partners and relevant stakeholders have participated in the development of the plans;
Amendment 416 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – point a – point iii b (new)
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – point a – point iii b (new)
(iii b) whether the Plan contains a gender impact analysis and an explanation of how the measures and investments contained in the Plan are expected to address the gender dimension of energy poverty and transport poverty and ensure a gender-balanced impact, while contributing to the mainstreaming of gender equality, in line with the national gender equality strategy, the European Pillar of Social Rights and the UN SDGs; in case of measures providing direct household expenditure support to women, whether those measures account for an amount which represents at least 60% of the total national allocation for direct expenditure support;
Amendment 417 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – point a – point iii c (new)
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – point a – point iii c (new)
(iii c) whether the measures and investment respect the European Pillar of Social Rights;
Amendment 418 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – point a – point iii d (new)
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – point a – point iii d (new)
(iii d) whether the Plan sufficiently supports energy efficiency investments that can be especially hard to raise for vulnerable customers, low-income households, people affected by energy poverty and people living in social housing ;relevant measures are such as building renovations and modernisation, heating and cooling systems as in Directive (2022/XX/EU) [the EED].
Amendment 426 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – point c – point i
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – point c – point i
(i) whether the justification provided by the Member State for the amount of the estimated total costs of the Plan is reasonable, plausible, in line with the principle of cost efficiency and commensurate to the expected national environmental and socialoeconomic impact;
Amendment 443 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 3
Article 19 – paragraph 3
3. Where the Commission makes a positive assessment, it shall adopt without undue delayin a maximum period of one month a decision authorising the disbursement of the financial allocation in accordance with Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046.
Amendment 497 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 13
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 13
(13) ‘vulnerable transport users’ means transport users, includingespecially those from lower middle-income households, that are significantly affected by the price impacts of the inclusion of road transport into the scope of Directive 2003/87/EC and lack the means to purchase zero- and low- emission vehicles or to switch to alternative sustainable modes of transport, including public transport, particularly in rural and remoteinsular, peripheral, remote and rural areas.
Amendment 565 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – point b
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) finance measures and investments to increase the uptake of zero- and low- emission mobility and transport not least in the EU’s insular, peripheral, remote and rural regions.
Amendment 593 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) an estimate of the likely effects of that increase in prices on households, and in particular on incidence of energy poverty, on micro-enterprises and on transport users, comprising in particular an estimate and the identification of vulnerable households, vulnerable micro- enterprises and vulnerable transport users; these impacts are to be analysed with a sufficient level of regional disaggregation, taking into account elements such as access to public transport and basic services and identifying the areas mostly affected, particularly territories which areinsular, peripheral, remote and rural regions;
Amendment 672 #
2021/0206(COD)
(e) reductions in the number of vulnerable households, especially households in energy poverty, of vulnerable micro-enterprises and of vulnerable transport users, includespecially ing in rural and remotesular, peripheral, remote and rural areas.
Amendment 784 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point f
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point f
(f) support public and private entities in developing and providing affordable zero- and low-emission mobility and transport services and the uptake of attractive active mobility options for rural, insular, peripheral, mountainous, remote and less accessible areas or for less developed regions or territories, including less developed peri-urban areas.
Amendment 876 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 a (new)
Article 10 a (new)
Article 10 a Specific challenges facing island Member States, islands and outermost regions When preparing their social climate plans in accordance with Article 3, Member States shall take particular account of the situation of outermost regions, islands, and island Member States. These face serious socio-economic challenges deriving from the green transition towards climate neutrality and net zero emissions, having regard to their specific needs and social impacts. An adequate minimum amount of funds shall be allocated for those territories with the corresponding justification, taking into account the particular challenges of those territories.
Amendment 890 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – title
Article 13 – title
13 Maximum and minimum financial allocation
Amendment 895 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. The minimum financial allocation shall be set and specified in Annex I and II so that each Member State receives an allocation allowing for the support of meaningful actions.
Amendment 976 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – point d a (new)
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – point d a (new)
(da) For the purpose of this assessment, the Commission shall take into account the specific challenges faced by island Member States, islands, and outermost regions and assess whether the Plans contain and reflect measures and investments that represent coherent actions proportionate and consistent with the specific challenges for those territories.
Amendment 41 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) A strong, open and competitive internal market enables both European and foreign undertakingsall undertakings active in the Union to compete on merits. The Union benefits from a sophisticated and effective system of State aid control, aiming at ensuring fair conditions for all undertakings engaging in an economic activity in the internal market. This State aid control system aims at preventsing Member States from granting State aid that unduly distorts competition in the internal market.
Amendment 43 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) At the same time, undertakings might receive subsidies from third countries, that provide public funds which are then used, for instance, which could be used to finance economic activities in the internal market in any sector of the economy, such as participation in public procurement tenders, or acquisitions of undertakings, including those with strategic assets such as critical infrastructure and innovative technologies. Such subsidies are currently not subject to Union State aid rules.
Amendment 49 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) No existing Union instruments do not properly address distortions caused by foreign subsidies. Trade defence instruments enable the Commission to act when subsidised goods are imported into the Union, but not when foreign subsidies take the form of subsidised investments, or when services and financial flows are concerned. Under the WTO Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures, the Union has the possibility to initiate State-to-State dispute settlement against certain foreign subsidies granted by WTO members and limited to goods.
Amendment 50 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) It is therefore necessary to complement existing Union instruments withhave in place an international structure that deals with the area of subsidies from different jurisdictions. In its absence, a new tool to effectively deal with distortions in the internal market caused by foreign subsidies and to ensure a level playing field. In particular, t will be created. The new tool complements Union State aid rules which deal with distortions in the internal market caused by Member State subsidies.
Amendment 57 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) To ensure a level playing field throughout the internal market and consistency in the application of this Regulation, the Commission should be the sole authority competent tohave a pivotal role when applying this Regulation. The Commission in conjunction with national competition authorities should have the power to examine any foreign subsidy to the extent it is in the scope of this Regulation in any sector of the economy on its own initiative relying on information from all available sources in order to establish a Union dimension to the impact such subsidy could have. To ensure effective control, in the specific case of large concentrations (mergers and acquisitions) and public procurement procedures above certain thresholds, the Commission should have the power to review foreign subsidies based on a prior notification by the undertaking to the Commission.
Amendment 58 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7 a (new)
Recital 7 a (new)
(7 a) The competent authority having the power to investigate and redress foreign subsidies that have a Union dimension, and thereby distort the internal market, is the European Commission. A Union dimension is established when a clear impact on the internal market has been recognised, as based on the notification thresholds listed in this Regulation. National competent authorities should be empowered to investigate and redress the foreign subsidies, if the subsidy has a distortive effect on the internal market without meeting the notification thresholds listed in this Regulation, or if the investigated foreign subsidy involves only one specific Member State. In the latter case, the Commission may also refer a notification to the competent authority of the Member State concerned. In this Regulation the reference to the competent authority will be the investigative authority unless otherwise specifically indicated.
Amendment 59 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7 b (new)
Recital 7 b (new)
(7 b) A structured communication network between investigative authorities should be established.
Amendment 61 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) There should be a financial contribution provided, directly or indirectly, by the public authorities of a third country. The financial contribution may be granted through public or private entities. Whether a public entity provides a financial contribution should be determined on a case-by-case basis with due regard to elements such as the characteristics of the relevant entity and the legal and economic environment prevailing in the country in which the entity operates including the government’s role in the economy. Financial contributions in the form of a foreign subsidy may also be granted through a private entity if its actions can be attributed to the third country.
Amendment 70 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) Once the existence of a foreign subsidy is established, the Commission should assess whether the foreign subsidy distorts the internal market. Unlike State aid granted by a Member State, foreign subsidies are not generally prohibited. Subsidies in the form of export financing may be a cause of particular concern because of their distortive effects. This is not the case if such financing is provided in line with the OECD Arrangement on officially supported export credits. The Commission should assess on a case-by- case basis whether a foreign subsidy distorts the internal market. If the threshold for notification is not met, the case can be referred by the Commission to the national competition authorities of the relevant Member States.
Amendment 71 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) The lack of transparency concerning many foreign subsidies and the complexity of the commercial reality may make it difficult to unequivocally identify or quantify the impact of a given foreign subsidy on the internal market and equally difficult for companies to identify all the relevant subsidies. To determine the distortion, it therefore appears necessary to use a non-exhaustive set of indicators. When assessing the extent to which a foreign subsidy can improve the competitive position of the undertaking concerned and, in doing so, actually or potentially negatively affects competition in the internal market, the Commissioninvestigative authority could have regard to certain indicators, including but not limited to the amount and nature of the subsidy, the purpose and conditions attached to the foreign subsidy as well as its use in the internal market.
Amendment 73 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) When applying these indicators, the Commissioninvestigative authority could take into account different elements such as the size of the subsidy in absolute terms or in relation to the size of the market or to the value of the investment. For instance, a concentration, in the context of which a foreign subsidy covers a substantial part of the purchase price of the target, is likely to be distortive. Similarly, foreign subsidies covering a substantial part of the estimated value of a contract to be awarded in a public procurement procedure are likely to cause distortions. If a foreign subsidy is granted for operating costs, it seems more likely to cause distortions than if it is granted for investment costs. Foreign subsidies to small and medium-sized undertakings may be considered less likely to cause distortions than foreign subsidies to large undertakings. Furthermore, the characteristics of the market, and in particular the competitive conditions on the market, such as barriers to entry, should be taken into account. Foreign subsidies leading to overcapacity by sustaining uneconomic assets or by encouraging investment in capacity expansions that would otherwise not have been built are likely to cause distortions. A foreign subsidy to a beneficiary that shows a low degree of activity in the internal market, measured for instance in terms of turnover achieved in the Union, is less likely to cause distortions than a foreign subsidy to a beneficiary that has a more significant level of activity in the internal market. Finally, foreign subsidies not exceeding EUR 5 million should be deemed, as a general rule, unlikely to distort the internal market within the meaning of this Regulation.
Amendment 75 #
2021/0114(COD)
(16) The Commissioninvestigative authority should take into account the positive effects of the foreign subsidy on the development of the relevant subsidised economic activity. The Commission should weigh these positive effects against the negative effects of a foreign subsidy in terms of distortion on the internal market in order to determine, if applicable, the appropriate redressive measure or accept commitments. The balancing should also take into account the contribution of a foreign subsidy to overarching goals based on international agreements such as the Paris Agreement and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The balancing may also lead to the conclusion that no redressive measures should be imposed. Categories of foreign subsidies that are deemed most likely to distort the internal market are less likely to have more positive than negative effects. To this effect, the Commission should adopt a delegated act with guidance on the procedure adopted to balance the effects of foreign subsidies.
Amendment 79 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
Amendment 82 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) The undertaking concerned should have the possibility to offer commitments in order to remedy the distortion caused by the foreign subsidy. If the Commissioninvestigative authority considers that the commitments offered fully and effectively remedy the distortion, it could accept them and make them binding by decision.
Amendment 83 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) The undertaking concerned could offer to repay the subsidy, together with appropriate interest. The Commissioninvestigative authority should accept a repayment offered as a commitment if it can ascertain that the repayment fully remedies the distortion, is executed in a transparent manner and is effective in practice, while taking into account the risk of circumvention of the objectives of this Regulation.
Amendment 85 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) Unless the undertakings concerned offer commitments that would fully and effectively remedy the identified distortion, the Commissioninvestigative authority should have the power to prohibit a concentration or the award of a public contract before it takes place. Where the concentration has already been implemented, notably in cases where no prior notification was required because the notification thresholds were not reached, the distortion may nonetheless be so substantial that it cannot be remedied by behavioural or structural measures or by the repayment of the subsidy. In such cases, the Commissioninvestigative authority could decide to remedy the distortion by ordering the undertakings concerned to dissolve the concentration.
Amendment 86 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) The Commission should have the power, on its own initiative,investigative authority should have the power to examine any relevant information on foreign subsidies. To this end, it is necessary to establish a procedure consisting of two steps, namely a preliminary review and an in-depth investigation.
Amendment 88 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) The Commissioninvestigative authority should be given adequate investigative powers to gather all necessary information. It should therefore have the power to request information from any undertaking or association of undertakings throughout the whole procedure. In addition, the Commissioninvestigative authority should have the power to impose fines and periodic penalty payments for failure to timely supply the requested information or for supplying incomplete, incorrect or misleading information. The Commissioninvestigative authority could also address questions to Member States or to third countries. Furthermore, the Commissioninvestigative authority should have the power to make fact-finding visits at the Union premises of the undertaking, or, subject to agreement by the undertaking and the third country concerned, at the premises of the undertaking in the third country. The Commissioninvestigative authority should also have the power to take decisions on the basis of facts available if the undertaking in question does not cooperate.
Amendment 90 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) Furthermore, where necessary to restore competition in the internal market immediately and to prevent irreparable harm, the Commissioninvestigative authority should have the power to adopt interim measures.
Amendment 91 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24
Recital 24
(24) In all cases where, as a result of the preliminary review, the Commissioninvestigative authority has sufficient indications of the existence of a foreign subsidy distorting the internal market, the Commissioninvestigative authority should have the power to launch an in-depth investigation to gather additional relevant information to assess the foreign subsidy, and to allow the interested parties to exercise their rights of defence.
Amendment 93 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
Recital 25
(25) The Commissioninvestigative authority should close the in-depth investigation by adopting a decision.
Amendment 95 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26
Recital 26
(26) The Commissioninvestigative authority should have appropriate instruments to ensure the effectiveness of commitments and redressive measures. If the undertaking concerned does not comply with a decision with commitments, a decision imposing redressive measures, or a decision ordering interim measures, the Commissioninvestigative authority should have the power to impose fines and periodic penalty payments.
Amendment 96 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27
Recital 27
(27) In order to ensure the correct and effective application of this Regulation, the Commissioninvestigative authority should have the power to revoke a decision and adopt a new one, where the decision was based on incomplete, incorrect or misleading information, or where an undertaking acts contrary to its commitments or the redressive measures imposed.
Amendment 98 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28
Recital 28
(28) Given the potentially significant impact of concentrations on the internal market, the Commissioninvestigative authority should have the power, upon notification, to examine information on foreign financial contributions in the context of a proposed concentration. Undertakings should not be allowed to implement the concentration prior to the conclusion of the Commissioninvestigative authority’s review.
Amendment 99 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29
Recital 29
(29) This examination by the Commissioninvestigative authority should follow the same procedure as the one where a foreign subsidy is reviewed on the Commissioninvestigative authority’s initiative, subject to adjustments to reflect the specificities of concentrations.
Amendment 100 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31
Recital 31
(31) Below the notification thresholds, the Commissioninvestigative authority could require the notification of potentially subsidised concentrations that were not yet implemented or the notification of potentially subsidised bids prior to the award of a public contract, if it considers that the concentration or the bid would merit ex-ante review given their impact in the Union. The Commissioninvestigative authority should also have the possibility to carry out a review on its own initiative of already implemented concentrations or awarded public contracts.
Amendment 105 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 33
Recital 33
(33) The need to address distortive foreign subsidies is especially salient in public procurement, given its economic significance in the internal market and the fact that it is financed by taxpayer funds. The Commissioninvestigative authority should have the power, upon notification prior to the award of a public contract or concession, to examine information on foreign financial contributions to the participating undertakings in the context of a public procurement procedure. Prior notifications should be mandatory above a threshold set in this Regulation to capture economically significant cases while minimising the administrative burden and not hindering the participation of SMEs in public procurement. That obligation of prior notification above a threshold should also apply to groups of economic operators referred to in Article 26(2) of Directive 2014/23/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council40 , Article 19(2) of Directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council41 and Article 37(2) of Directive 2014/25/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council42 . It should also apply to the main subcontractors and the main suppliers of undertaking. _________________ 40 Directive 2014/23/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on the award of concession contracts (OJ L 94, 28.3.2014, p. 1). 41 Directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on public procurement and repealing Directive 2004/18/EC (OJ L 94, 28.3.2014, p. 65). 42 Directive 2014/25/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on procurement by entities operating in the water, energy, transport and postal services sectors and repealing Directive 2004/17/EC (OJ L 94, 28.3.2014, p. 243).
Amendment 107 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 37
Recital 37
(37) Taking into account the nature of the ex ante review mechanism for concentrations and public procurement awards, and the need for legal certainty regarding these specific transactions, a concentration or public procurement tender notified and assessed under the respective procedures cannot be reviewed again by the Commissioninvestigative authority on its own initiative. Financial contributions of which the Commissioninvestigative authority was informed through the notification procedure may however also be relevant outside the concentration or procurement procedure. In order to gather information on foreign subsidies, the Commissioninvestigative authority should have the possibility to launch investigations regarding specific sectors of the economy, particular types of economic activity or the use of particular foreign subsidy instruments.
Amendment 108 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 39
Recital 39
(39) In the interest of transparency and legal certainty, it is appropriate tohat the Commission publishes either in full or in a summary form all decisions adopted by the Commissiondifferent investigative authorities.
Amendment 109 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40
Recital 40
(40) The Commission, wWhen publishing its decisions, investigative authorities should respect the rules on professional secrecy, including the protection of all confidential information, business secrets and personal data, in accordance with Article 339 of the Treaty.
Amendment 110 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 41
Recital 41
(41) In cases where information marked by the undertaking as confidential or business secret does not seem to be covered by obligations of professional secrecy, it is appropriate to have a mechanism in place according to which the Commissioninvestigative authority can decide the extent to which such information can be disclosed. Any such decision to reject a claim that information is confidential should indicate a period at the end of which the information will be disclosed, so that the respondent can make use of any judicial protection available to it, including any interim measure.
Amendment 112 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 46
Recital 46
(46) Where the Commissioninvestigative authority adopts a decision at the end of an in-depth investigation, Member States should be adequately involved prior to the decision making in an advisory procedure pursuant to Article 4 of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council46 . The choice of this procedure is justified taking into account the role of Member States in competition and State aid instruments, which also aim at levelling the playing field in the internal market. _________________ 46 Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by Member States of the Commission’s exercise of implementing powers (OJ L 55, 28.2.2011, p. 13).
Amendment 113 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 48
Recital 48
(48) In order to ensure a level playing field on the internal market also in the long term, with a view to ensuring adequate coverage of cases investigated both through notifications as well as ex officio, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty should be delegated to the Commission in respect of amending the notification thresholds for concentrations and for public procurement procedures, exempting certain categories of unto provide details on the structure of a communication network between the different investigative authorities, dertakings from the notification obligations under this Regulation, as well as amending the time limits for the preliminary review and the in-depth investigations of notified concentrations or notified financial contributioniled rules on the calculation of time limits, the conditions and time limits for proposing commitments under Article 30, provide detailed rules ion the context of a public procurement procedure. In relationprocedural steps referred to financial contributions in the context of a public procurement procedure, the power to adopt such acts should be exercised in a way that takes into account the interests of SME Articles 28, 29, 30 and 31 as well as to provide with guidance on the procedure adopted to balance the effects of foreign subsidies. It is of particular importance that the Commission carries out appropriate consultations during the preparations of those acts, including at expert level, and that those consultations be conducted in accordance with the principles laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement of 13 April 2016 on Better Law-Making47 . In particular, to ensure equal participation in the preparation of delegated acts, the European Parliament and the Council should receive all documents at the same time as Member States' experts, and their experts systematically should have access to meetings of Commission expert groups dealing with the preparation of delegated acts. _________________ 47 Interinstitutional Agreement between the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and the European Commission of 13 April 2016 on Better Law-Making (OJ L 123, 12.5.2016, p. 1).
Amendment 115 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1
(1) This Regulation lays down rules and procedures for investigating foreign subsidies that distort the internal market and for eventually redressing such distortions where detected. Such distortions may arise with respect to any economic activity, and in particular in concentrations and public procurement procedures.
Amendment 119 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2
Article 1 – paragraph 2
(2) This Regulation addresses foreign subsidies granted to an undertaking engaging in an economic activity in the EU's internal market. ASpecifically, an undertaking acquiring control or merging with an undertaking established in the Union or an undertaking participating in a public procurement procedure is considered to be engaging in an economic activity in the internal market.
Amendment 120 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 2 a (new)
(2 a) The competent authority having the power to investigate and redress foreign subsidies that have a Union dimension and thereby distort the internal market is the European Commission. A Union dimension is established when a clear impact on the internal market has been recognised, as based on the notification thresholds listed in this Regulation.
Amendment 122 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 2 b (new)
(2 b) A national competent authority shall have the same powers where the investigated foreign subsidy has a distortive effect on the internal market but falls below the notification thresholds, or if the subsidy involves only one specific Member State, or where a Union dimension has not been established. In this Regulation the reference to the competent authority will be the investigative authority unless otherwise specifically indicated.
Amendment 123 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2 c (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 2 c (new)
(2 c) A structured communication network between investigative authorities shall be established.
Amendment 131 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
(b a) The undertaking(s) concerned received from third countries an aggregate financial contribution in the three calendar years prior to notification of more than EUR50 million.
Amendment 133 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Amendment 150 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 1
(1) a foreign subsidy granted to an ailing undertaking, that is to say which will likely to go out of business in the short or medium term in the absence of any subsidy, unless there is a restructuring plan that is capable of leading to the long-term viability of that undertaking and includes a significant own contribution by the undertaking;
Amendment 154 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1
(1) The Commission shall, where warranted,investigative authority shall balance the negative effects of a foreign subsidy in terms of distortion on the internal market with positive effects on the development of the relevant economic activity taking into account the contribution of a foreign subsidy to overarching goals based on international agreements such as the Paris Agreement and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).
Amendment 157 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2
Article 5 – paragraph 2
(2) The Commissioninvestigative authority shall take into account the balancing between the negative and positive effects when deciding whether to impose redressive measures or to accept commitments, and the nature and level of those redressive measures or commitments while respecting the international regime on trade.
Amendment 162 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 2 a (new)
(2 a) The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts under Article 44 of this Regulation to specify how an investigative authority should apply this Article.
Amendment 164 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 1
(1) To remedy the distortion on the internal market actually or potentially caused by a foreign subsidy, the Commissioninvestigative authority may impose redressive measures. The undertaking concerned may also offer commitments.
Amendment 172 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 4
Article 6 – paragraph 4
(4) The Commissioninvestigative authority may impose reporting and transparency requirements.
Amendment 173 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 5
Article 6 – paragraph 5
(5) If an undertaking offers commitments which fully and effectively remedy the distortion on the internal market, the Commissioninvestigative authority may accept them and make them binding on the undertaking in a decision with commitments according to Article 9(3).
Amendment 176 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 6
Article 6 – paragraph 6
(6) Where the undertaking concerned proposes to repay the foreign subsidy including an appropriate interest rate, the Commissioninvestigative authority shall accept such repayment as commitment if it can ascertain that the repayment is transparent and effective, while taking into account the risk of circumvention.
Amendment 177 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7
Article 7
Amendment 181 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8
Article 8
Amendment 187 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9
Article 9
Amendment 190 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10
Article 10
Amendment 196 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11
Article 11
Amendment 200 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12
Article 12
Amendment 211 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13
Article 13
Amendment 213 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14
Article 14
Amendment 216 #
Amendment 223 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16
Article 16
Amendment 242 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 1
Article 19 – paragraph 1
(1) Notifiable concentrations above the thresholds outlined in Article 18 shall be notified to the Commission prior to their implementation and following the conclusion of the agreement, the announcement of the public bid, or the acquisition of a controlling interest.
Amendment 245 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 2
Article 19 – paragraph 2
(2) The undertakings concerned may also notify the proposed concentration when they demonstrate to the Commission a good faith intention to conclude an agreement or, in the case of a public bid, where they have publicly announced their intention to make such a bid, provided that the intended agreement or bid would result in a notifiable concentration under paragraph 1.
Amendment 246 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 19 – paragraph 3 a (new)
(3 a) Prior to the notification of a concentration within the meaning of paragraph 1, the persons or undertakings referred to in paragraph 2 may inform the Commission, by means of a reasoned submission, that the concentration may significantly affect competition in a market within a Member State which presents all the characteristics of a distinct market and should therefore be examined, in whole or in part, by that Member State. The Commission shall transmit this submission to all Member States without delay.The Member State referred to in the reasoned submission shall, within 15 working days of receiving the submission, express its agreement or disagreement as regards the request to refer the case.Where that Member State takes no such decision within this period, it shall be deemed to have agreed. Unless that Member State disagrees, the Commission, where it considers that such a distinct market exists, and that competition in that market may be significantly affected by the concentration, may decide to refer the whole or part of the case to the competent authorities of that Member State with a view to the application of that State's national competition law. The decision whether or not to refer the case in accordance with the third subparagraph shall be taken within 25 working days starting from the receipt of the reasoned submission by the Commission.The Commission shall inform the other Member States and the persons or undertakings concerned of its decision.If the Commission does not take a decision within this period, it shall be deemed to have adopted a decision to refer the case in accordance with the submission made by the persons or undertakings concerned. If the Commission decides, or is deemed to have decided, pursuant to the third and fourth subparagraphs, to refer the whole of the case, no notification shall be made pursuant toparagraph1 and national competition law shall apply. Article 23a (6) to (9) shall apply mutatis mutandis.
Amendment 247 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 4
Article 19 – paragraph 4
Amendment 252 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1
Article 22 – paragraph 1
The aggregate financial contribution to an undertaking concerned shall be calculated by adding together the respective financial contributions in the form of distortive State aid received from third countries by all undertakings referred to in Article 21(4), points (a) to (e).
Amendment 255 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 a (new)
Article 23 a (new)
Amendment 260 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 2
Article 27 – paragraph 2
(2) For the purpose of Article 28, a notifiable foreign financial contribution in an EU public procurement procedure shall be deemed to arise where the estimated value of that public procurement is equal or greater than EUR 250 million and the undertaking concerned received from third countries an aggregate financial contribution in the three calendar years prior to notification of more than EUR 50 million.
Amendment 264 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 2
Article 28 – paragraph 2
(2) The obligation to notify foreign financial contributions under this paragraph shall extend to economic operators, groups of economic operators referred to in Article 26(2) of Directive 2014/23/EU, Article 19(2) of Directive 2014/24/EU and Article 37(2) of Directive 2014/25/EU, main subcontractors and main suppliers. A subcontractor or supplier shall be deemed to be main where their participation ensures key elements of the contract performance and in any case where the economic share of their contribution exceeds 305% of the estimated value of the contract.
Amendment 265 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 4
Article 28 – paragraph 4
(4) The contracting authority or the contracting entity shall transfer the notification to the Commissioninvestigative authority without delay.
Amendment 266 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 5
Article 28 – paragraph 5
(5) Where the undertaking, economic operators or groups of economic operators referred to in paragraph 1 fail to notify a foreign financial contribution, or where such a notification is not transferred to the Commission, the Commissionthe investigative authority may initiate a review.
Amendment 267 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 6
Article 28 – paragraph 6
(6) Where the Commissioninvestigative authority suspects that an undertaking may have benefitted from foreign subsidies in the three years prior to the submission of the tender or request to participate in the public procurement procedure, it may request the notification of the foreign financial contributions received by that undertaking in any public procurement procedure which are not notifiable under Article 27(2) or fall within the scope of paragraph 5 of this Article, at any time before the award of the contract. Once the Commissioninvestigative authority has requested the notification of such a financial contribution, it is deemed to be a notifiable foreign financial contribution in a public procurement procedure.
Amendment 268 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 2
Article 29 – paragraph 2
(2) The Commissioninvestigative authority shall carry out a preliminary review no later than 6030 working days after it received the notification.
Amendment 271 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 3
Article 29 – paragraph 3
(3) The Commissioninvestigative authority shall decide whether to initiate an in-depth investigation within the time limit for completing the preliminary review and inform the undertaking concerned and the contracting authority or the contracting entity without delayin a 15 working day period.
Amendment 272 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 4
Article 29 – paragraph 4
(4) The Commissioninvestigative authority may adopt a decision closing the in-depth investigation no later than 20060 working days after it received the notification. In exceptional circumstances, this time limit may be extended after consultation with the concerned contracting authority or contracting entity.
Amendment 274 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 1
Article 30 – paragraph 1
(1) Where, after an in-depth investigation, the Commissioninvestigative authority finds that an undertaking benefits from a foreign subsidy which distorts the internal market pursuant to Articles 3 to 5, and where the undertaking concerned offers commitments that fully and effectively remove the distortion on the internal market, it shall adopt a decision with commitments pursuant to Article 9(3). The assessment under Article 5 shall not result in a modification of the initial tender submitted by the undertaking that is incompatible with Union law.
Amendment 275 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 2
Article 30 – paragraph 2
(2) Where the undertaking concerned does not offer commitments or where the Commissioninvestigative authority considers that the commitments referred to in paragraph 1 are neither appropriate nor sufficient to fully and effectively remove the distortion it shall adopt a decision prohibiting the award of the contract to the undertaking concerned (“decision prohibiting the award of the contract”).
Amendment 276 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 3
Article 30 – paragraph 3
(3) Where, after an in-depth investigation, the Commissioninvestigative authority does not find that an undertaking benefits from a foreign subsidy which distorts the internal market, it shall adopt a decision pursuant to Article 9(4).
Amendment 277 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 2
Article 31 – paragraph 2
(2) If a decision to open an in-depth investigation is taken pursuant to Article 29(3), the contract shall not be awarded to an undertaking submitting a notification under Article 28 until the Commissioninvestigative authority reaches a decision under Article 30(3) or the time limit set in Article 29(4) elapses. If the Commissioninvestigative authority has not adopted a decision within this time limit, the contract may be awarded to any undertaking, including the one submitting the notification.
Amendment 278 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 3
Article 31 – paragraph 3
(3) The contract may be awarded to an undertaking submitting a declaration under Article 28 before the Commissioninvestigative authority takes any of the decisions referred to in Article 30 or before the time limit laid down in Article 29(4) elapses only if the tender evaluation has established that the undertaking in question has in any case submitted the most economically advantageous tender.
Amendment 279 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 4
Article 31 – paragraph 4
(4) Where the Commissioninvestigative authority issues a decision under Article 30(2) regarding the most economically advantageous tender, the contract may be awarded to the undertaking having submitted the next best tender not subject to a decision under Article 30(2).
Amendment 280 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 5
Article 31 – paragraph 5
(5) Where the Commissioninvestigative authority adopts a decision in accordance with Article 30(1) or (3), the contract may be awarded to any undertaking having submitted the most economically advantageous tender, including, as the case may be, the undertaking(s) having submitted the notification under Article 28.
Amendment 281 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 6
Article 31 – paragraph 6
(6) In all cases, the contracting authority or the contracting entity shall inform the Commissioninvestigative authority of any decision relating to the outcome of the public procurement procedure.
Amendment 282 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 8
Article 31 – paragraph 8
(8) Each time limit shall begin on the working day following that of the receipt of the notification or of the adoption of the relevant Commission decisiondecision by the investigative authority.
Amendment 283 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 1
Article 32 – paragraph 1
(1) The Commissioninvestigative authority may impose fines and periodic penalty payments as set out in Article 15.
Amendment 284 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 2
Article 32 – paragraph 2
(2) In addition, the Commissioninvestigative authority may impose by decision on the undertakings concerned fines not exceeding 1 % of their aggregate turnover in the preceding business year, where they intentionally or negligently supply incorrect or misleading information in a notification pursuant to Article 28 or supplement thereto;
Amendment 285 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 3
Article 32 – paragraph 3
(3) The Commissioninvestigative authority may impose by decision on the undertakings concerned fines not exceeding 10 % of their aggregate turnover in the preceding business year where they, intentionally or negligently, fail to notify a subsidy in accordance with Article 28 during the public procurement procedure.
Amendment 287 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 1
Article 33 – paragraph 1
(1) A financial contribution notified in the context of a concentration under Articles 18 and 19 may be relevant and assessed again in relation to another economic activity.
Amendment 289 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 2
Article 33 – paragraph 2
(2) A financial contribution notified in the context of a public procurement procedure under Articles 27 and 28 may be relevant and assessed again in relation to another economic activity.
Amendment 290 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 1
Article 34 – paragraph 1
(1) Where the information available substantiates a reasonable suspicion that foreign subsidies above the thresholds established in this regulation, in a particular sector, for a particular type of economic activity or based on a particular subsidy instrument may distort the internal market, the Commissioninvestigative authority may conduct a market investigation into the particular sector, the particular type of economic activity or into the use of the subsidy instrument concerned. In the course of that market investigation, the Commissioninvestigative authority may request the undertakings or associations of undertakings concerned, as well as the relevant national authorities, to supply the necessary information and may carry out the necessary inspections. The Commission may also request the Member State or third country concerned to supply information.
Amendment 292 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 2
Article 34 – paragraph 2
(2) The Commissioninvestigative authority may publish a report on the results of its market investigation into particular sectors, particular types of economic activity or particular subsidy instruments and invite comments from interested parties.
Amendment 294 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 3
Article 34 – paragraph 3
(3) The Commissioninvestigative authority may use the information obtained from such market investigations in the framework of procedures under this Regulation.
Amendment 296 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 1
Article 35 – paragraph 1
(1) The powers of the Commissionconferred under Article 9 shall be subject to a limitation period of tenfive years, starting on the day on which a foreign subsidy is granted to the undertaking concerned. Any action taken by the Commission under Articles 8, 11, 12 or 13 with respect to a foreign subsidy shall interrupt the limitation period. After each interruption, the limitation period shall start to run afresh.
Amendment 298 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 2
Article 35 – paragraph 2
(2) The powers of the Commission to impose fines and periodic penalty payments under Articles 15, 25 and 32 shall be subject to a limitation period of three years, starting on the day on which the infringement referred to in Articles 15, 25 or 32 took place. In the case of continuing or repeated infringements, the limitation period shall start on the day on which the infringement ceases. Any action taken by the Commissioninvestigative authority with respect to an infringement referred to in Articles 15, 25 or 32 shall interrupt the limitation period for the imposition of fines or periodic penalty payments. After each interruption, the limitation period shall start to run afresh.
Amendment 299 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 3
Article 35 – paragraph 3
(3) The powers of the Commissioninvestigative authority to enforce decisions imposing fines and periodic penalty payments under Articles 15, 25 and 32 shall be subject to a limitation period of five years, starting on the day on which the Commission decision imposing fines or periodic penalty payments was taken. Any action taken by the Commission, or by a Member State acting upon request of the Commission,investigative authority intended to enforce payment of the fine or periodic penalty payment shall interrupt that limitation period. After each interruption, the limitation period shall start to run afresh.
Amendment 300 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 1
Article 36 – paragraph 1
(1) The CommissionEach investigative authority shall publish a summary notice of the decisions adopted pursuant to Article 8(2).
Amendment 301 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 2
Article 36 – paragraph 2
(2) The CommissionEach investigative authority shall publish the decisions adopted pursuant to Article 9(2), (3) and (4), Article 24(3), and Article 30(1), (2) and (3) in the Official Journal of the European Union.
Amendment 302 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 36 – paragraph 2 a (new)
(2 a) The Commission shall publish either in full or in a summary form all decisions adopted by the different investigative authorities.
Amendment 303 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 3
Article 36 – paragraph 3
(3) When publishing summary notices and decisions, the Commission shall take due account of the legitimate interests of undertakings in the protection of their business secrets and other confidential information shall be taken.
Amendment 304 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 1
Article 37 – paragraph 1
(1) Decisions adopted pursuant to Articles 8, 9, 15, 24(3), 25, 30(1) and 32 shall be addressed to the undertakings or to the association of undertakings concerned. The Commissioninvestigative authority shall notify the decision to the addressee without delay and shall give the addressee the opportunity to indicate to the Commission which information it considers to be confidential. The Commissioninvestigative authority shall provide the contracting authority or the contracting entity concerned with a copy of any Commission decision it addressed to an undertaking participating in a public procurement procedure.
Amendment 305 #
2021/0114(COD)
(2) Decisions adopted pursuant to Article 30(2) and (3) shall be addressed to the contracting authority or the contracting entity concerned. The Commissioninvestigative authority shall provide the undertaking to which the award of the public contract is prohibited with a copy of that decision.
Amendment 306 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 38 – paragraph 1
Article 38 – paragraph 1
(1) The Commissioninvestigative authority shall, before adopting a decision pursuant to Articles 9, 15, 24(3) point (c), 25, 30(2) or 32 give the undertaking concerned the opportunity to submit observations on the grounds on which the Commisa decision intends to be adopt its decisioned.
Amendment 307 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 38 – paragraph 2
Article 38 – paragraph 2
(2) The Commissioninvestigative authority shall base its decision only on grounds on which the undertakings concerned have been given the opportunity to submit their observations.
Amendment 308 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 42 – paragraph 1 – point e
Amendment 309 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 1 – point f
Article 42 – paragraph 1 – point f
Amendment 310 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 1 – point g
Article 42 – paragraph 1 – point g
Amendment 311 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 44 – paragraph 1 – point a
Amendment 313 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 44 – paragraph 1 – point b
Amendment 314 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 44 – paragraph 1 – point c
Amendment 316 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
Article 44 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
(c a) determining the structure of a communication network between the different competent authorities;
Amendment 317 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 1 – point c b (new)
Article 44 – paragraph 1 – point c b (new)
(c b) establishing detailed rules on the calculation of time limits;
Amendment 318 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 1 – point c c (new)
Article 44 – paragraph 1 – point c c (new)
(c c) determining the conditions and time limits for proposing commitments under Article 30;
Amendment 319 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 1 – point c d (new)
Article 44 – paragraph 1 – point c d (new)
Amendment 320 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 1 – point c e (new)
Article 44 – paragraph 1 – point c e (new)
(c e) specifying the application of the balancing tool outlined in Article 5.
Amendment 325 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 1
Article 46 – paragraph 1
Amendment 327 #
2021/0114(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 47 – paragraph 1
Article 47 – paragraph 1
(1) This Regulation shall apply to foreign subsidies granted in the tenfive years prior to the date of application of this Regulation where such foreign subsidies distort the internal market after the start of application of this Regulation.
Amendment 21 #
2020/2263(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H a (new)
Recital H a (new)
H a. whereas the general objective of digitalisation of taxation is key to ensure transparency, accountability and automated reporting, essential for a definitive, simplified and future-proof VAT regime; whereas the COVID-19 pandemic has catalysed the development of digitalisation for all transactions; whereas SMEs are at the centre of such digitalisation process and should be supported in this respect in acquiring the latest technology and know-how;
Amendment 27 #
2020/2263(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that simplifying VAT with the introduction of a single rrough estimates show thate and revenue -neutrality tax reform could reduce the standard VAT rate ion the EU by an average of 7%, thus bringing the standard rate down from 13% to 2%average by 7 percentage points in the EU-27, in addition to reducing compliance costs; highlights that, according to those estimates, the size of the reduction varies between EU member states from 2 to 13 percentage points;
Amendment 34 #
2020/2263(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Takes the view that applying a multitude of reduced rates has a legitimate purpose in society, notably to reduce the regressiveness of the VAT system and helping achieve certain national policy objectives, but it also aggravates the complexity and opacity of the tax system, facilitates fraud and increases compliance costs and may facilitate fraud;
Amendment 43 #
2020/2263(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Observes that the VAT gap fluctuates in line with the business cycle, and that low tax compliance is correlsometimes associated with high standard VAT rates and multiple VAT rates as well asbut also with lower legal and judicial efficiency, weaker legal institutions, higher perceived levels of corruption and the overall share of the shadow economy;
Amendment 53 #
2020/2263(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Notes digitalisation’s potential to reduce compliance costs in the long term; maintains that digital innovations23 are likely to reduce compliance costs and help increase the transparency of commercial transactions; stresses the need to ensure data security and individual and corprivacy; insists that SMEs and other vulnerable economic actors need to be supporate privacyd through EU programmes and EU-induced trainings in the digital transition in order to benefit from it and contribute to it; stresses that such general approach towards accelerating the digitalisation of SMEs’ know-how and operations on the ground would ultimately benefit VAT collection; _________________ 23Such as AI, big data and blockchain technology.
Amendment 62 #
2020/2263(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Observes that the wide variety of rates may causes price distortion in the internal market, creating incentives for cross-border purchases and giving rise to increased tax competition between Member States; recalls that companies need simplified and centralised access to information on rates, as well as clear and unambiguous VAT rules to encourage cross-border business and reduce their administrative burdens; welcomes in this respect the simplified and digitalised method for registering under the VAT exemption regime for SMEs engaging in cross-border business activities through an online portal, thus reducing costs and administrative burdens;
Amendment 68 #
2020/2263(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Stresses that a well-designed VAT system is neutral and should not affect trade, but that in practice this principle is difficult to verify at global level given the application of VAT exemptions, the ineffectiveness of refund systems, the wide variety of rates – incurring higher compliance costs – and the fact that VAT has superseded income taxes with a view to encouraging trade; stresses that an increasing number of SMEs are willing to trade across the EU, especially through online transactions, and that the EU VAT system should aim at facilitating such cross-border growth;
Amendment 79 #
2020/2263(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Observes that the application of reduced rates does not systematically give rise to permanent price reductions for the consumer; that the effectiveness of a reduced rate depends on a number of factors, such as the extent to which businesses pass it on to consumers, its duration over time, the size of the reduction and the complexity of the rate system; that the passing-on of reductions in their entirety is therefore a random process and should not be the basis for policy-making; that it is impossible to targethat requires extensive analysis and impact assessment to make sure that reductions only apply where they can benefit low-income households;
Amendment 80 #
2020/2263(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10 a. Highlights that reduced rates normally pursue the legitimate purpose of ensuring that essential goods are accessible to everyone; stresses that reduced VAT rates on necessities (e.g. food) tend to make VAT more progressive and should only apply to products which bring social, environmental or cultural benefits; stresses that reduced rates can be particular important in societies with great income disparities and high level of social and economic inequality;
Amendment 89 #
2020/2263(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Recalls that for it to have a leverage effect, green taxation must be inclusive, fair and strive for social equity and not undermine businesses’ international competitiveness; observes that the effectiveness of reduced rates in promoting this type of goods and services or, in a broader sense, merit goods (e.g. culture, health, biodiversity) is chiefly a function of the extent to which they are used to promote such goods;
Amendment 94 #
2020/2263(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
Amendment 103 #
2020/2263(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Takes the view that direct tax incentives, such as direct grants or tax credits targeting specific consumers and producers, are morcan be effective, flexible, visible and cost-effective tools for achieving these social and environmental objectives;
Amendment 108 #
2020/2263(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Stresses that a uniform VAT system, combined with a direct tax incentive tool such as the income-based tax credit scheme for low-income households, together with a raft of social reforms, would be a winning strategyare all options worth exploring; recalls that New Zealand has a flat-rate VAT system and applies tax credit for low-income households; points out that flat-rate subsidies and information campaigns are an option for the promotion of merit goods;
Amendment 119 #
2020/2263(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Endorses the findings of the DIW Econ study which stresses that on average the standard rate was applied to 71% of the total tax base in the Member States in 2019; points out that the costs of diversified VAT systems impose costs on businesses, particularly SMEs via increased compliance costs, create distortionsthe distortions they might cause in the internal market and trade, and incur costs their impact on government through lost revenuerevenue need to be carefully assessed in order to achieve a cohesive, fair and efficient VAT system in the EU; adds that reduced rates are an insufficient means of achieving revenue- distribution or environmental objectives;
Amendment 120 #
2020/2263(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16 a. Calls for the assessment and adjustment of distorting and environmentally harmful reduced rates;
Amendment 123 #
2020/2263(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Notes the difficulties in reducing the VAT gap between Member States owing to the need to maintain a number of VAT exemptions for certain goods and services and the willingness of Member States to maintain reduced rates of at least 5%a combination of factors; acknowledges that Member States need to conserve the flexibility to set their own VAT rates given the importance of this tax as a budgetary instrument;
Amendment 131 #
2020/2263(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Calls for a simplified VAT system with limits on exemptions and non- standard rates to be introduced with a view to promoting competitivenessefficiency and fairness in the internal market;
Amendment 140 #
2020/2263(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Stresses that the VAT gap is chiefly attributable to legislative loopholes, lack of resources and digital efficiency in tax administrations, the ineffectiveness of enforcement and control measures, particularly those against tax evasion and avoidance and aggressive tax planning;
Amendment 146 #
2020/2263(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Recalls that the effectiveness of reduced rates as a policy tool must always be assessed in the specific context of other existing policy tools; adds that reduced rates are often complementary to existing social and environmental policy tools; and that direct tax incentives are instruments that might better target low-income households and are generally less costly, provided that other conditions are fulfilled;
Amendment 23 #
2020/2259(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A c (new)
Recital A c (new)
A c. whereas the Covid-19 pandemic had an extremely negative overall impact on the economic performance of the European Union, including dramatic and asymmetric social consequences;
Amendment 24 #
2020/2259(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A d (new)
Recital A d (new)
A d. whereas the European social model, based on quality public services and inclusive social protection, was paramount to face the consequences of the Covid-19 pandemic;
Amendment 3 #
2020/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 20 a (new)
Citation 20 a (new)
— having regard to the resolution of the European Parliament on the implementation of the EU requirements for exchange of tax information: progress, lessons learnt and obstacles to overcome (2020/2046(INI)),
Amendment 15 #
2020/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas a swift recovery requires a strong economic and fiscal policy response ensuring, inter alia: (i) an effective level playing field for businessetax payers, including less red tape to promote both domestic trade and trade within the Single Market, supported by a simple and more predictable tax environment; (ii) securing tax revenues for Member States to finance the recovery and reducboost investments that will support the reduction in the debt to GDP ratio and (iii) fair taxation of businesses and citizens, enhancing both trust in society and fair competition;
Amendment 28 #
2020/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas current international corporate tax rules are no longer suitable in the context of digitalisation and globalisation of the economy; whereas developments of digitalisation create aopportunities and challenges in terms of traceability of economic operations and taxable events;
Amendment 40 #
2020/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the Commission's Action Plan and supports its thorough implementation; observes that the majority of the 25 actions are related to VAT, which is appropriate due to the high level of revenue losses in the area of VAT; considers however that an impact assessment should be carried out, before presenting concrete legislative proposals to better apprehend the potential effects on taxpayers and businesse and the need to support business, especially SMEs;
Amendment 81 #
2020/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Notes that the Union decision- making process is not promoting change, as tax policy is a national prerogative and subject to unanimity; recalls the existence of Article 116 TFEU; regrets that the current situation sometimes leads to an uneven or inconsistent application of tax regulations; calls on the Commission and the Member States to ensure more harmonised and consistent tax rules and their implementation, to protect the functioning of the single market and to assure the principle of “taxing where profit is generated”;
Amendment 103 #
2020/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Observes that the current EU VAT system remains too complex, especially for SMEs, and vulnerable to fraud, while generating high compliance costs for economic operators8 ; notes that the different measures to tackle tax fraud are adopted in the Member States; recalls that the modernisation of the VAT system and the shift towards a more coherent VAT system across the Union should be addressed urgently9 ; _________________ 8As per the EPRS’ EAVA (September 2021), the VAT gap, including cross- border VAT evasion and fraud, could be estimated at around €120 billion in 2020, page 42. 9As per the EPRS' EAVA (September 2021), the estimated added value of the extended cooperation between the Member States plus the full implementation of the OSS could bring a reduction of est. €29 billion of the VAT gap, and a reduction of est. €10 billion in compliance costs for businesses, page 39.
Amendment 112 #
2020/2254(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10 a. Notes that the Commission, with the new proposals, should take into account the specific needs of SMEs and create a level playing field via requirements based on threshold when relevant;
Amendment 12 #
2020/2223(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas EU competition policy is designed to maintain an open market economy with free, fair and effective competition favouring an efficient allocation of resources to the benefit of all EU citizens, especially those in a weak consumer position;
Amendment 30 #
2020/2223(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
D a. whereas given that recent data scandals, investigations and evidence have shown how personal data is being collected, used and sold to third parties by platforms and how dominant technology players and platforms have been tracking consumers online systematically;
Amendment 37 #
2020/2223(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Highlights that a competition policy aiming to ensure a level playing field in all sectors, drive innovation and give consumers morehigher quality choices, is crucial for guaranteeing the proper functioning of the single market;
Amendment 42 #
2020/2223(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Notes that competition policy is not solely about ensuring “fair” or low prices for consumers but also about providing quality, innovation and sustainability; urges the Commission in that regard to strengthen the role of the European Consumers Centres Network (ECC-Net) in the spirit of the ECN+ Directive1a; _________________ 1a OJ L 11, 14.1.2019, p.3.
Amendment 51 #
2020/2223(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Believes that a strict and impartial enforcement of EU competition rules by independent competition authorities can make a significant contribution to key political priorities, such as social inequalities or the climate crisis; emphasises itshowever the importance alsoof flexibility in crisis conditions;
Amendment 80 #
2020/2223(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes the adoption of a Temporary Framework for State aid measures established in response to the COVID-19 crisis and supports its application for as long as the recovery is ongoing;
Amendment 85 #
2020/2223(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Underlines that the action of the European Commission aiming at eliminating the condition of monopoly and dominant positions and at limiting public funding to companies that could lead such conditions does not provide any solution to the issue of systemic and structural disadvantages that affect the competitiveness of businesses based and operating from European insular territories and outermost regions;
Amendment 97 #
2020/2223(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to launch a post COVID-19 roadmap for less and better targeted State aid; including a chapter on competition policy on, among others, how to tackle fragmentation, market distortions and an unlevel playing field in the single market caused by Member States’ asymmetric capacities to apply State Aid as well as clear guidance on how to best use competition policy tools to foster a recovery with sustainable jobs and sustainable transition of companies; calls furthermore for the roadmap to encompass a first assessment on the effect of the pandemic on, and thus the future of, EU competition policy;
Amendment 105 #
2020/2223(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Emphasises the critical moment for the Union’s hospitality industry which has been from an economic and financial perspective the hardest hit throughout the ongoing crisis; in this context applauds state assistance directed towards the sector and calls for an EU policy aimed at reinforcing these efforts;
Amendment 106 #
2020/2223(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6 b. Calls for a reflection on maintaining exceptional measures beyond the expiry date of the temporary framework for the sectors that have been mostly affected by the COVID-19 crisis (e.g. tourism, air and maritime transports);
Amendment 134 #
2020/2223(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8 a. Given the Covid19 economic crisis and the realisation of the existential role of European farmers for our food supply and agriculture sovereignty; calls on the Commission to pay particular attention to any third country anti-competitive practices that risk penalising our agriculture sector and penalise our farmers; the same rules and standards should be requested from third countries when importing agriculture products;
Amendment 135 #
2020/2223(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 b (new)
Paragraph 8 b (new)
Amendment 139 #
2020/2223(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Emphasises the importance of a structured global dialogue and cooperation on competition policy enforcement;
Amendment 143 #
2020/2223(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 b (new)
Paragraph 9 b (new)
9 b. Calls for the EU and the UK to find common ground to continuously cooperate and strive towards fair competition and a level playing field;
Amendment 145 #
2020/2223(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Expresses its concern about distortive state-funded competition from Chinese and other foreign undertakings acquiring European undertakings, especially those active in innovative technologies and the airline industry;
Amendment 154 #
2020/2223(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Amendment 177 #
2020/2223(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. InvitesHighlights the importance of Important Projects of Common European Interest (IPCEI); calls on the Commission to identify strategic dependencies, particularly in sensitive industrial ecosystems, and to propose measures to reduce these, including by diversifying production and supply chains, fostmote major IPCEIs in these areas; underlines the need to simplify the relevant procedures so that smaller ing production and investment in Europe, dustrial research projects cand ensuring strategic stockpilingasily benefit from its support;
Amendment 223 #
2020/2223(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18 a. Calls for further EU action as regards the lack of interoperability of digital devises with the aim of avoiding the situation whereby consumers are locked with one provider;
Amendment 258 #
2020/2223(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 c (new)
Paragraph 22 c (new)
22 c. Calls on the Commission to update its antitrust tools especially on merger control and adequate them to new realities of digital and technology markets and to change the assessment of market power, merger notification thresholds, measurement of merger effects on consumer privacy, industrial data and investigation of abuse of dominant position;
Amendment 268 #
2020/2223(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)
Paragraph 25 a (new)
25 a. Recalls, with view to its report on competition policy 2019 (2019/2131 (INI))2a that abuse of market power can take place even when products or services are supplied for free or in exchange of private data; believes that the passing on of private data to third parties for marketing or commercial purposes is frequently done without the consumer’s proper consent, as alternatives to sharing data are often not provided; considers that in the digital economy, the concentration of data in a small number of companies leads to market failures, excessive rent extraction and a blocking of new entrants; _________________ 2a https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/doc ument/A-9-2020-0022_EN.html
Amendment 287 #
2020/2223(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)
Paragraph 26 a (new)
26 a. Repeats its calls that allowing state aid in the context of services of general economic interest (SGEI) remains essential for the survival of several communities across Europe especially in the context of state support dedicated to isolated, remote or peripheral regions in the Union;
Amendment 289 #
2020/2223(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 b (new)
Paragraph 26 b (new)
26 b. Welcomes the Commission’s open consultation regarding government subsidies (small amounts) for essential public services and the eventual extension of rules to 2023;
Amendment 290 #
2020/2223(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 c (new)
Paragraph 26 c (new)
26 c. Is concerned about the untimely revision proposals in the context of the new Regional Aid Guidelines 2022 -2027 whereby the Commission is aiming at reducing population coverage; notes that this proposal will especially impact in a negative manner European peripheral regions that have already been disproportionately affected by the ongoing economic downfall;
Amendment 291 #
2020/2223(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 d (new)
Paragraph 26 d (new)
26 d. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to launch a territorial assessment on the socioeconomic impact of the COVID-19 crisis in the context of the application of state aid rules and the relevant ongoing revision process; in this regard, special attention should be paid to analyse impacts on enterprises based in EU islands and outermost regions according to the provisions of Articles 174 and 349 TFEU;
Amendment 327 #
2020/2223(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31 a (new)
Paragraph 31 a (new)
31 a. Points out that while the level of fines imposed by the Commission is amongst the highest in the world, nearly two-thirds of the fines imposed by the Commission in cartel cases since 2006 stayed below 0.99% of global annual turnover, thus well below the ceiling of 10% of a company’s annual worldwide turnover allowed3a; notes that while the ECA rightly points out that the amount of fines alone does not allow conclusions on whether they are effective deterrents, the ECA also underlines that the ceiling itself of possible fines can limit the deterrent effect in “serious cases”; _________________ 3a https://www.eca.europa.eu/Lists/ECADoc uments/SR20_24/SR_Competition_policy _EN.pdf
Amendment 339 #
2020/2223(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 a (new)
Paragraph 32 a (new)
32 a. Again reiterates its alarm at the concentration in the European food supply chain and emphasises that European consumers and small-scale farmers are those most negatively affected through a concentrated food market structure;
Amendment 341 #
2020/2223(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 a (new)
Paragraph 32 a (new)
32 a. Welcomes Directive(EU) 2019/633 17 April 2019 on unfair trading practices in business-to-business relationships in the agricultural and food supply chain, recalls that is an important first step in ensuring fairness between operators, combating dual standards in agri-food practices and in addressing the imbalance of the bargaining power within the food supply chain; stresses the need for the Commission to monitor the progress of transposition closely and to promote the sharing of best practices between Member States; encourages Member States to list further unfair practices as prohibited and set higher standards;
Amendment 342 #
2020/2223(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 b (new)
Paragraph 32 b (new)
32 b. Regrets the fact that selling at a loss is not prohibited at EU level; highlights the important contribution made by primary producers in supplying high-quality food and delivering public goods to society; calls on the Commission to guarantee fair competition and greater transparency in offline platforms’ commercial practices, including supermarket and hypermarkets, so as to ensure that EU producers receive fair conditions and prices for their products;
Amendment 345 #
2020/2223(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 b (new)
Paragraph 32 b (new)
32 b. With regards the food sector; calls on the Commission to guarantee fair competition and greater transparency in supermarket and hypermarkets chains commercial practices; European farmers should receive a fair price for their products; stresses the need for the Commission to look at hypermarkets powers in the distribution chain and commercial practices in placing competing products, including their own, on the shelves;
Amendment 349 #
2020/2223(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 c (new)
Paragraph 32 c (new)
32 c. Calls on the Commission to devote special attention to supermarkets, hypermarkets and retail alliances’ bargaining powers with their clients and suppliers; notes that in some Member States supermarkets, hypermarkets and retail alliances’ sovereignty affects brand value and product choice, cuts corners on their own brands quality, limits innovation and price comparability, thus distorting price architectures;
Amendment 352 #
2020/2223(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 d (new)
Paragraph 32 d (new)
32 d. Calls on the Commission to make it compulsory for banks receiving State aid to retain their full retail banking/consumer banking services and to ensure that banks are not allowed to use the COVID-19 crisis as a pretext for permanently reducing such services; Calls the Commission to have a close look at cases in the banking sector in certain Member States where consumers currently face higher interest rates and a lack of transparency when it comes to loans, potentially due to concentration of ownership in the banking sector, which could lead to deceptive selling practices of mortgages; Calls the Commission to have a close look at the banking sector in Romania where consumers face high interest rates and lack of transparency when it comes to loans because of potential bank cartels tendencies when it comes to deceptive selling practices of credit;
Amendment 49 #
2020/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3 b. Calls, in this context, on the European Commission to study the possibility to be represented in the EIB Board of Governors through the subscription of capital of the EIB using funds from the EU budget;
Amendment 57 #
2020/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Calls for prioritisation to regions suffering from a long-term investment deficit especially those suffering from permanent geographical disadvantages such as peripheral, mountainous, and insular regions of the Union;
Amendment 64 #
2020/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Stresses the importance of avoiding further geographical imbalances in the EIB’s lending activity so as to ensure a broader geographical and sectoral allocation of investments, reduce regional disparities and enhance convergence; welcomes the efforts already made by the EIB in this regard; notices with concern, however, that, according to the geographical breakdown of lending by country in which projects are located, four Member States received almost 50% of the total loans granted in 2019;
Amendment 66 #
2020/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Stresses the importance of avoiding further geographical imbalances in the EIB’s lending activity so as to ensure a broader geographical and sectoral allocation of investments, reduce regional disparities and enhance convergence; welcomes the efforts already made by the EIB in this regard but stresses that more needs to be done in this regard;
Amendment 69 #
2020/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Calls for the EIB to address systemic deficiencies that prevent certain regions or countries from taking full advantage of EIB financial opportunities, by, inter alia, strengthening its efforts to expand its loan activities, providing technical assistance and advisory support, especially in regions which attract low investment and which did not benefit significantly from the derogation to the State-aid rules during the pandemic crisis because of the lack of financial capacity of the State;
Amendment 84 #
2020/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Underlines that in the light of the successive and unpredictable waves of COVID-19 infections, these instruments will need to be further strengthened and extended; asks the EIB to stand ready to launch new supportive financial initiatives;
Amendment 91 #
2020/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Welcomes the adoption by the EIB Board of Directors of the EIB Climate Bank Roadmap for 2021-2025, which provides a crucial framework to support the transition towards and eventual implementation of the European Green Deal and marks a decisive step towards making the EIB the EU Climate Bank, promoting sustainable investments and protecting the environment during the critical decade ahead;
Amendment 102 #
2020/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Notes, however, that the roadmap envisages the introduction of a transition period until the end of 2022, which would mean that the EIB will not be aligned with the objectives of the Paris Agreement until 2023 at the earliest;
Amendment 118 #
2020/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15 a. Requests that a tailor-made transport policy is adopted for EU regions that due to their geographical features do not fit the standard European requirements; points out that these regions most commonly need a public injection of funding in order to have a functioning climate friendly transport structure;
Amendment 128 #
2020/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16 a. Calls on the EIB to support projects aimed at facilitating a just transition in the Member States; underlines that the transition towards a carbon-neutral economy must be inclusive, fair and must leave no one behind; suggests the EIB to proactively work with Member States in view of supporting regions where jobs are highly dependent on high-emitting industries;
Amendment 144 #
2020/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Reiterates that supporting SMEs and mid-caps must remain a fundamental objective for the EIB, notably to assist them with decarbonisation and access to ICT tools; questions the EIB’s investment appeal towards small businesses and asks whether it is being too restricted by its traditional limitations on funding projects with a significant risk component welcomes efforts made to provide online assistance and counselling to SMEs in accessing EIB lending;
Amendment 148 #
2020/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18 a. Highlights the need for the EIB to have a strong focus on projects directed to young people, especially for start-ups and projects directed towards tackling the increasingly rising problem of youth unemployment and young people in precarious jobs;
Amendment 159 #
2020/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 b (new)
Paragraph 20 b (new)
20 b. Welcomes the EIB’s commitment to invest in the social sector, thereby fostering well-being, access to education, health and housing, as well as the acquisition of skills required by a modern knowledge-based economy;
Amendment 170 #
2020/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)
Paragraph 22 a (new)
22 a. Calls on the EIB to refrain from participating in projects which may weaken citizens’ access to high quality public services;
Amendment 192 #
2020/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Proposes the establishment of a protocol for a Memorandum of Cooperation between the EIB and Parliament, applicable with immediate effect, in order to improve interinstitutional dialogue and enhance the EIB’s transparency and accountability, specifying the rights of Parliament and its Members as regards access to documents, data, questions put to the EIB, regular hearings and economic dialogues;
Amendment 196 #
2020/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)
Paragraph 26 a (new)
Amendment 221 #
2020/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Welcomes the EIB’s Group Strategy on Gender Equality and Gender Action Plan; takes note of the 2019 Progress Report on Diversity and Inclusion; notes that women represent 51.4% of the EIB workforce; regrets the fact that women are still not sufficiently represented in managerial and senior office positions; believes that more needs to be done in this regard during the implementation of the second phase of the Action Plan in 2021; calls, therefore, on the EIB to further encourage the participation of women and actively promote a balance gender representation in its senior positions;
Amendment 237 #
2020/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 a (new)
Paragraph 30 a (new)
30 a. Calls on the EIB to take advantage of the ongoing review of its overall policy on alignments with counterparties and ensure greater transparency and stricter due diligence over its partners and their eligibility to disburse EIB-backed funds under strict conditionality, comprising ethical, integrity, social and environmental criteria;
Amendment 244 #
2020/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 g (new)
Paragraph 30 g (new)
30 g. Calls furthermore for a stringent Exclusion Policy, to provide the Bank with the possibility to go beyond the application of contractual remedies, by excluding entities found engaged in fraud, corruption, money laundering or other forms of wrongdoing from EIB financing;
Amendment 28 #
2020/2122(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
B a. whereas both the ECB and the SRB call for the swift completion of the Banking Union namely with the establishment of the EDIS (European Deposit Insurance Scheme);
Amendment 54 #
2020/2122(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas consumer protectionand investor protection is paramount to the deepening of the Capital Markets Union (CMU), but varies across the Banking Union;
Amendment 68 #
2020/2122(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas the EU and the UK are currently committed to maintaining regulatory and supervisory cooperation in the field of financial services; whereas this engagement by the UK should be kept for future relations;
Amendment 104 #
2020/2122(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Notes that the full implementation of the Banking Union is necessary to deliver better conditions for the financing of the European economy, both to households and companies, still largely reliant on bank credit to foster investment and job creation;
Amendment 177 #
2020/2122(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Notes the postponement of the implementation of the Basel III reforms and awaits the Commission’s upcoming proposal on the implementation of the finalised standards, taking into account, where appropriate, the specificities of the EU banking sector and the necessity to introduce measures aimed at increasing banks’ lending to the real economy;
Amendment 185 #
2020/2122(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Notes the interdependencies between banks and central counterparties (CCPs) and increasingly with crypto- assets and digital finance;
Amendment 234 #
2020/2122(INI)
18 a. Underlines the need to protect borrowers' rights in the context of NPL transactions and calls on Member States to put measures in place to ensure that borrowers, who might be in already vulnerable financial situations, are not subject to aggressive and unfair treatment and practices by poorly-regulated debt buyers and collectors; calls on the Commission, in the upcoming revision of the Consumer Credit Directive, to laydown more ambitious provisions on the protection of borrowers against abusive practices, ensuring that those rights apply equally to existing and future loans;
Amendment 17 #
2020/2078(INI)
B. whereas the shock is symmetrical but the impact varies considerably among Member States due to wide pre-existent socioeconomic divergences between EU regions, reflecting the severity of the pandemic and the stringency of their containment measures, but also their specific economic exposures and initial conditions, including their available scope for discretionary fiscal policy responses; notes that the asymmetric impact of the shock is being strongly manifested through both the sanitary and the economic responses in the different EU countries;
Amendment 22 #
2020/2078(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas the ongoing global pandemic has exacerbated the uneven economic recovery experienced in the last decade across the EU, a recovery that was marked by significant imbalances within the euro area and the EU as a whole;
Amendment 24 #
2020/2078(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B b (new)
Recital B b (new)
Bb. whereas the levels of poverty in Europe, particularly amongst pensioners and children, and those of unemployment especially in Southern euro countries, were already worrying before the commencement of the ongoing COVID-19 economic crisis;
Amendment 25 #
2020/2078(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B c (new)
Recital B c (new)
Bc. whereas the EU objective to close the economic and social gap between Northern and Southern countries is in the current economic context even harder to reach;
Amendment 28 #
2020/2078(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas a determined, coordinated and solidarity-based European response is essential to mitigate the negative economic and social consequences of the crisis, the fragmentation of the internal market and the further deepening of macroeconomic divergence and structural polarisation between regions and countries;
Amendment 43 #
2020/2078(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C c (new)
Recital C c (new)
Cc. whereas the COVID 19 crisis is affecting vulnerable groups in particular, resulting in increased inequalities, poverty, unemployment and social divergences, as well as undermining social and employment standards in Europe;
Amendment 49 #
2020/2078(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C f (new)
Recital C f (new)
Cf. whereas the disruption is affecting the European economy as a whole, and whereas an equal debt issuance capacity and access to funding must be ensured in order to deal with the crisis, including for Member States not in the euro area;
Amendment 50 #
2020/2078(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes with great concern that, according to the Commission’s Spring 2020 economic forecast, the EU is expected to suffer the deepest recession in its history in 2020; with a contraction in EU GDP of 7½%, far deeper than during the financial crisis in 2009, a surge of the aggregate budget deficit from 0.6% of GDP in 2019 to 8½% of GDP in 2020 in both the euro area and the EU, a new peak of the euro area’s aggregate debt-to- GDP ratio of close to 103% reversing the declining trend since 2014, unemployment in the euro area is expected to increase from 7.5% in 2019 to 9½% and HICP inflation in the euro area of 0.2% in 2020; 1a _________________ 1aEuropean Economic Forecast Spring 2020 https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/ec onomy-finance/ip125_en.pdf
Amendment 60 #
2020/2078(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Points to the IMF World Economic Outlook Update, June 2020 which states that the COVID-19 pandemic has had a more negative impact on activity in the first half of 2020 than anticipated, and that the recovery is projected to be more gradual than previously forecast with the 2021 GDP being some 6.5 percentage points lower than in the pre-COVID-19 projections of January 2020;
Amendment 70 #
2020/2078(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. In this context emphasis the urgency to protect workers’ rights and conditions at a European level; requests further consideration on a wage increase at a European level that should take the following format: an increase of 5 per cent in the minimum wage of all countries that have a minimum wage, while the minimum wage system, always adapted to national circumstances, is introduced in those countries that do not have it;
Amendment 74 #
2020/2078(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Points out that the Commission’s estimate of the investment needs of the EU for delivering the green transition and digital transformation amounts to at least EUR 595 billion per year8 ; acknowledges that more than ever this transformation needs to keep at its core the objective of an upward transformation of the standard of living of all EU citizens across the Union; _________________ 8 Commission Staff Working Document - Identifying Europe's recovery needs, p. 16: https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/eco nomy- finance/assessment_of_economic_and_inv estment_needs.pdf
Amendment 78 #
2020/2078(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Amendment 85 #
2020/2078(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Recognises that the EU faces the unprecedented challenge of mitigating the social and economic consequences of the historic recession accompanied with a global pandemic, and setting the course for a rapid economic recovery linked to a sustainable and just transition and digital transformation; is convinced that, for this, a significant increase in public and private investment compared to the 2010s is in the current juncture even more indispensable and that the increased level of investment must be stabilised for many years to come;
Amendment 104 #
2020/2078(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes the swift and strong response to the crisis in the area of monetary and fiscal policy, at both EU and Member State level, as well as the European Recovery Plan; considers it essential that the recovery package is fully aligned with the EU’s new growth strategy, i.e. in accordance with the principles of the European Green Deal (EGD), the European Pillar of Social Rights (EPSR) and the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), and with the aim to protect women’s rights and achieve gender equality; demands that funds and resources be directed to projects and beneficiaries that comply with our Treaty-based fundamental values and that recipient firms protect their workers, pay their fair share of taxes, and refrain from paying out dividends or offering share buy-back schemes aimed at remunerating shareholders as well as a prohibition to adopt predatory actions on other firms that find themselves in a week financial condition following the ongoing COVID- 19crisis;
Amendment 113 #
2020/2078(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Underlines the need for the recovery plan to protect workers, employees, the self-employed and SMEs and ensure their income compensation; The recovery must be based on upward social economic convergence, social dialogue and improved social rights and working conditions with targeted measures for those in precarious forms of work; Calls on the EU institutions and the Member States to ensure that public financial support to corporations is provided under the condition to guarantee the jobs and the income of their employees, to commit to sustainability objectives upon adherence to international standards of responsible business;
Amendment 134 #
2020/2078(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Recalls the specific urgent need to foster convergence within the EU and more specifically the euro area;
Amendment 149 #
2020/2078(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Welcomes the conclusion of the European Fiscal Board (EFB)9 that the fiscal framework has to be revised, and with the objective to avoid a "second wave" austerity led crisis; is convinced that the deep economic crisis triggered by the pandemic further exacerbates this need; believes that the review and reform have to meet the above requirements in terms of increasing socially conscious investment relating to climate change and digitalisation and stabilising the new level of investment, while ensuring sound budgetary management; _________________ 9EFB Annual report 2019, p. 71 - https:/ec.europa.eu/info/sites/infos/files/20 19-efb-annual-report_en.pdf
Amendment 160 #
2020/2078(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Is concerned about the significant but uneven negative impact of the COVID- 19 crisis on government deficit and private debt, which further aggravates the situation of Member States that are particularly affected by the pandemic and/or pre- existing high levels of government debt accompanied by harsh austerity measures; calls for a flexible solution that guarantees the sustainability of public debt;
Amendment 191 #
2020/2078(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Proposes a combination of expenditure rules for public non- investment expenditure and a golden rule for public investment which is central to both; wishes to see a rapid recovery from the COVID-19 crisis and a tailor-made transition to a cleaner, socially sustainable, socially equal, and more digital society;
Amendment 197 #
2020/2078(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Calls on European Institutions to continue revising EU methodologies for the evaluation of the economic and social performance of EU Member States as well as the targets applied under the Stability and Growth Pact given the drastic changes in the socioeconomic conditions at both national and European levels;
Amendment 272 #
2020/2078(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Recalls the urgent need to complete and reinforce the EMU architecture with a view to protecting citizens and' standard of living while reducing pressure on public finances during external shocks so as to overcome social and economic imbalances, by creating a fiscal capacity for public investment, a macroeconomic stabilisation and a robust cohesion function for the euro area, and a European unemployment benefit reinsurance scheme;
Amendment 27 #
2020/2075(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D (new)
Recital D (new)
D. whereas the current governance framework presents conceptual and practical weaknesses that lead to rules overly complex, weak enforcement, lack of ownership and of incentives to pursue symmetrical counter-cyclical policies and it did not succeed to reduce divergences between in the EU nor to protect or stimulate growth enhancing public investment;
Amendment 29 #
2020/2075(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F (new)
Recital F (new)
F. whereas there are significant investment funding gaps that should be addressed: €470 billion a year until 2030 to meet EU environmental objectives 20a; €142billion a year for social infrastructure such as hospitals or schools 21a ; along with €190 billion a year to stabilise the stock of public capital 22a; _________________ 20aEuropean Commission, “SWD(2020) 98 final - Identifying Europe’s recovery needs”, 27.5.2020, p.14-16. 21aThis estimation only cover health and long-term care (EUR 70 billion), education and life-long learnings (EUR 15 billion) and affordable housing (EUR 57 billion). Source: FRANSEN, L., BUFALO, G., REVIGLIO, E., “Boosting Investment in Social Infrastructure in Europe - Report of the High-Level Task Force on Financing Social Infrastructure in Europe”, 2018, 116p. 22aEuropean Commission, “SWD(2020) 98 final - Identifying Europe’s recovery needs”, 27.5.2020, p. 18-20
Amendment 31 #
2020/2075(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H (new)
Recital H (new)
H. whereas the pandemic is causing an unprecedented exogenous shock with large asymmetric impacts, weighting negatively on the EU economic outlook and enlarging divergences between Member States;
Amendment 32 #
2020/2075(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I (new)
Recital I (new)
I. whereas the pandemic has amplified pre-existing inequalities and poverty and has demonstrated the importance of European social model and its existing social safety nets;
Amendment 98 #
2020/2075(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Supports policies that are tailored to the stage of the pandemic, the path to the economic recovery and to countries´ individual circumstances;
Amendment 108 #
2020/2075(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Points out that for as long as differences in the pace of recovery are economically significant, fiscal policy should limit the scarring and reduce inequalities by supporting those segments of the economy and society that are at a higher risk of divergence; notes that income inequalities are likely to increase notably within young workers, women and low-skilled workers;
Amendment 207 #
2020/2075(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Stresses the importance of pursuing a broad and transparent DSA in orderebt Sustainability Analysis (DSA) in order to support policymakers´ decision to set an appropriate country-specific path, using innovative tools and techniques such as stress tests and stochastic analysis to better reflect risks to public debt dynamics; (such as interest-growth differentials, debt composition, demographics and climate change) and the quality of public expenditure;
Amendment 240 #
2020/2075(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Calls for the renewed fiscal framework to promote sustainability and cyclical stabilisation and to improve the quality of public expenditure through sustainable investments and reforms; calls for well-defined, transparent, simple, flexible and enforceable rules embedded in a credible and democratic framework that takes into account the specificities of Member States, including the different economic structures and geographical constraints, and promote upward economic and social convergence;
Amendment 286 #
2020/2075(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Proposes, in line with the EFB, ‘ onethe adoption of a general escape clause, triggered based on independent economic judgement’ proposed by the Commission supported by an opinion based on independent economic judgement in order to reduce complexity and to preserve the ability to act in case of unforeseeable circumstances;
Amendment 307 #
2020/2075(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)
Paragraph 22 a (new)
22a. Reminds that meeting the objectives of the European Green Deal will require targeted and sustained fiscal effort over several decades; recalls that failing to meet these objectives would heighten significant sustainability-related fiscal risks;
Amendment 308 #
2020/2075(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 b (new)
Paragraph 22 b (new)
22b. Stresses the importance that public investment costs are distributed over the entire service-life, similarly to the way corporate investment is treated in corporate accounting;
Amendment 435 #
2020/2075(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 a (new)
Paragraph 34 a (new)
34a. Calls on the Commission to further reflect on the design and implementation of Macroeconomic Adjustment Programmes; is firmly convinced that the way macroeconomic adjustment programmes were implemented had serious consequences on the social fabric of the countries, led to permanent losses of output, raised serious doubt of external political interference and presented a lack of national ownership;
Amendment 14 #
2020/2058(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 20 a (new)
Citation 20 a (new)
- having regard to the Valletta Political Declaration on Clean Energy for EU islands of 18 May 2017,
Amendment 27 #
2020/2058(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital -A (new)
Recital -A (new)
-A. whereas the Commission has estimated the investment needs at EU level in order to achieve the current 2030 climate objectives at 240 bn EUR/year1a plus additional amounts of 130 bn EUR/year for environmental objectives , 192 bn EUR/year for social infrastructure and 100bnEUR/year for Europe’s wider transport infrastructure, whereas it is essential to mobilize all available funds to close the investment gap, __________________ 1a https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/ec onomy- finance/assessment_of_economic_and_in vestment_needs.pdf
Amendment 31 #
2020/2058(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital -A (new)
Recital -A (new)
-A. whereas public and private finance should adhere to the EU Taxonomy and to the Do Not Significantly Harm principle so that EU financial instruments, including the EU budget, including facilities financed through Next Generation EU, the EU Semester, the EU Investment Plan, the EIB, ECB and EU funding sources such as cohesion funds and structural and investment funds, should not go to objects, projects and activities that do significantly harm to social or environmental objectives,
Amendment 32 #
2020/2058(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital -A (new)
Recital -A (new)
-A. whereas the Covid-19 sanitary crisis underlines the importance of investments in a socially and environmentally sustainable economy, in particular investments promoting cutting edge R&D, competitive industry, deepening and strengthening of the single market, strong SMEs, healthcare, a strong welfare system and social wellbeing,
Amendment 34 #
2020/2058(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital -A (new)
Recital -A (new)
-A. whereas creating a sustainable economic system is central to developing long-term strategic autonomy of the European Union and to increase the EU’s resilience,
Amendment 65 #
2020/2058(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Welcomes the Commission’s European Recovery Plan with the European Green Deal at its heart; endorses the underlying principle that public investments will respect the oath to ‘do no harm’; highlights that this oath applies to both social and environmental objectives; emphasises that national recovery and resilience plans should put the EU on the path to a 50 % to 55 % reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 compared to 1990 and climate neutrality by 2050 while providing sufficient guarantees to ensure social equity in the sustainable transition;
Amendment 94 #
2020/2058(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses that the success of the EU’s aim to achieve climate neutrality will depend on the adequacy of the financing and on how easily this can be absorbed throughout the different regions of the EU;
Amendment 121 #
2020/2058(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Questions whetherhow the SEIP, as currently constituted, will enable the mobilisation of EUR 1 trillion by 2030, given the negative economic outlook following the COVID-19 crisis; requests the Commission to ensure full transparency on financing issues, such as the optimistic leverage effect or the lack of clarity over the extrapolations of certain amounts; furthermore questions how the new MFF as proposed by the Commission in its revised proposals of 27 and 28 May 2020 would enable the achievement of the SEIP targets;
Amendment 123 #
2020/2058(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Calls for the issuing of long-term common bonds to contribute to financing the recovery and the just and sustainable transition;
Amendment 138 #
2020/2058(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Wishes to see it ensured that funding from the SEIP, at EU and national level, goes towards the policies and programmes with the highest potential to contribute to the fight against climate change, and while adapting to the different national, regional and local needs; looks forward to the Commission’s upcoming climate tracking methodology using appropriately the criteria established by the EU taxonomy;
Amendment 174 #
2020/2058(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls for the phasing-out of public and private investments in highly polluting and harmful industries for which economically feasible alternatives are available, while fully respecting the rights of Member States to choose their energy mix and assuring a high degree of energy supply autonomy;
Amendment 191 #
2020/2058(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Stresses the central role of the EU budget in delivering the SEIP; reiterates its long-standing position that new initiatives should always be financed through additional appropriations and should not negatively affect other policieslongstanding policies of the EU, cohesion and agriculture policies in particular;
Amendment 245 #
2020/2058(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Requests a special more focused treatment to regions that due to their geographical or demographic position face extra hurdles in the adaptation of this significant social and economic transition;
Amendment 246 #
2020/2058(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Calls for ensuring that third countries are eligible for cross- border projects that contribute to the objectives of the Paris Agreement;
Amendment 254 #
2020/2058(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Welcomes the role of InvestEU in the implementation and functioning of the SEIP and considers that it should be at the heart of the Union’s green, fair and resilient recovery; welcomes, therefore, the Commission’s proposal to increase the programme’s size and scope; welcomes the proposal to create a Strategic Investment Facility within InvestEU to promote sustainable investments in key technologies and value chains; Requests full transparency in the allocation of funds under the InvestEU programme and that more geographical balance should be sought; Further demands that a detailed monthly report on the allocation of funds under the same programme is maintained;
Amendment 264 #
2020/2058(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Calls on the Commission to substantially increase funding for technical assistance in relevant EU funds to 1% of the total amount to be spent, and calls on the Commission to focus technical assistance on projects and sectors with the highest environmental, social, resilience added value, in particular nature-based solutions that can deliver climate mitigation, climate adaptation and biodiversity benefits altogether;
Amendment 284 #
2020/2058(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Supports the Commission’s innovative approach in stating that the EU budget will contribute to achieving climate objectives also through its revenue side; recalls Parliament’s longstanding position in favour of generating added-value and policy co-benefits by introducing green new own resources;
Amendment 347 #
2020/2058(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Considers that for the EIB to play a successful role in financing the Green Deal, a bottom-up and participatory approach is crucial, and to better coordinate with various stakeholders, such as local and regional authorities and representatives from civil society;
Amendment 371 #
2020/2058(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Recalls the statement of the ECB President that the ECB is supporting the development of a taxonomy as a way of facilitating the incorporation of environmental considerations in central bank portfolios; calls on the ECB to evaluate the feasibility of including sustainability criteria in its collateral framework and its annual stress testing exercise, while assessing ways to guide lending towards energy transition investments and to rebuild a sustainable economy in the aftermath of the COVID- 19 crisis; encourages the ECB to move forward with its monetary policy review in order to evaluate the financing of economic activities causing significant harm to environmental and social objectives; calls on the ECB to disclose annually its degree of alignment with the Paris Agreement and its exposure to the EU taxonomy;
Amendment 385 #
2020/2058(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Supports the calls from the European Central Bank and the Central Banks and Regulators’ Network for Greening the Financial System (NGFS) to extend the EU taxonomy to unsustainable activities as soon as possible, enabling financial regulators to better assess sustainability-related financial risks;
Amendment 388 #
2020/2058(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 b (new)
Paragraph 17 b (new)
Amendment 391 #
2020/2058(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Supports a renewed sustainable finance strategy; underlines the need for an EU eco-label for financial products, for an EU Green Bond Standard (EU GBS), and for more reliable, comparable and accessible sustainability data obtained by harmonising sustainability indicators and creating a public sustainability data registerwith sector- specific Key Performance Indicators, an EU public sustainability data register and mainstreaming sustainability within all financial legislation through legislative reviews, enabling investors to better act upon their sustainability preferences;
Amendment 398 #
2020/2058(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Amendment 407 #
2020/2058(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Insists on the integration of social objectives in the sustainability framework, including through an evaluation of extending the scope of taxonomy and the development of an EU Social Bond Standard; Calls for the “Do Not Significantly Harm” principle to look at concrete social objectives including employee absenteeism, percentage of full- time employees and employees on long- term contracts, the percentage of salaries above living-wage, gender and ethnic pay gap, ratio in salary and variable remuneration between CEOs and average employees, tax compliance and corruption practices; calls for the activities pursued by companies who fail to achieve a sufficient score on any one of the above parameters to not qualify as sustainable economic activities as defined by the Disclosure Regulation and the Taxonomy Regulation;
Amendment 422 #
2020/2058(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20a. Favours the extension of the sustainability framework to the corporate sector; calls for mandatory sustainability reporting and due diligence for both financial institutions and large corporates, for stricter corporate liability regarding sustainability risks and for better quality data reporting, including by introducing verification mechanism and independent auditing;
Amendment 424 #
2020/2058(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
Amendment 436 #
2020/2058(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21a. Underlines the importance of attaching sustainability to capital market practice; recalls that private capital should be crucial to achieving sustainable goals and that to this end, further progress towards a Capital Markets Union should help to establish a clear channel between private investments and green activities; stresses the key role that could be played by European SMEs in this respect, to foster the necessary innovation and technologies for such transition;
Amendment 458 #
2020/2058(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Calls for the introduction of an enabling framework for public sustainable investments to achieve the goals set out in the European Green Deal, but stresses that whatever financing model is chosen must not undermine the sustainability of public finance in the EU; supports the commitment by EVP Dombrovskis to explore how taxonomy can be used in the public sector; calls for public support for airlines to be used in a sustainable and efficient manner while keeping the respect of EU social, environmental and consumer law as a precondition to such aid;
Amendment 466 #
2020/2058(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)
Paragraph 22 a (new)
22a. Calls for the general escape clause of the Stability and Growth Pact (SGP) to last throughout the current economic and sanitary crisis; highlights that high debt levels following the reactivation of the budgetary rules may result in excessive deficit procedures for many EU Member States; calls for the reform of the SGP with an expenditure rule that facilitates net public investments, allows for counter-cyclical action and takes into consideration the EU fiscal stance as a whole, so as to reduce the risk of severe austerity imposed following the reactivation of the SGP, and enable the investment needed for the recovery and the sustainable and just transition;
Amendment 485 #
2020/2058(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Recalls that the European Semester is a framework for EU Member States to coordinate their budgetary and economic policies; believes that it couldmust facilitate the implementation of the European Green Deal, the European Pillar of Social Rights and the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs); believes that the SDGs should be at the heart of EU’s policy making process; therefore calls for a new Sustainable Development Cycle as one comprehensive surveillance procedure for economic, social and sustainability objectives and to apply the above mentioned sustainable development pact;
Amendment 497 #
2020/2058(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Notes that recovery and resilience plans will be based on shared EU priorities; highlights in this context the European Green Deal and the European Pillar of Social Rights; seeks the inclusion of priorities in areas such as employment, skills, education, research and innovation and health, but also in areas related to the business environment, including public administration and the financial sector; considers that the sustainability provisions in the current Recovery and Resilience Facility Regulation are insufficient; deems essential the incorporation of the EU Taxonomy in recovery and resilience plans through an ambitious minimum spending target on environmentally sustainable economic activities and the application of the Do Not Significantly Harm principle to all spending through these plans; deems the Commission responsible for monitoring adherence to these plans and for re- appropriating funds not spent in accordance with the plans;
Amendment 517 #
2020/2058(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Supports the Solvency Support Instrument to level the playing field in the single market, and the introduction of ‘transition plans’ for certain companies to increase the sustainability of their activities; considers that society can ask for a quid pro quosomething in return when providing support to companies; sees transition plans including science-based and time- bound sustainability targets as a way of ensuring that public funding is spent in line with public interests; believes that transition plans should be obligatory for companies seeking state aid or EU-level support unless it is clear that they do not engage in environmentally or socially harmful activities; urges the Commission to only approve transition plans that set businesses on the path to the climate- neutral and circular economy without significantly harming any other environmental or social objectives;
Amendment 524 #
2020/2058(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)
Paragraph 25 a (new)
25a. Underlines the role of National Promotional Banks in creating a sustainable economy; calls for state aid reforms to enable NPBs to provide preferential loans below market rates to promote sustainability; underlines the importance of ensuring local technical support for project promoters and innovation and the role of project nurseries helping projects to mature to receive financing;
Amendment 547 #
2020/2058(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 c (new)
Paragraph 26 c (new)
26c. Recalls that Value Added Tax (VAT) can be used to incentivise moving from harmful to sustainable activities; therefore urges Member States to adopt the definitive package on VAT which would enable them to make use of targeted VAT rates for goods and services supporting the realisation of the European Green Deal;
Amendment 562 #
2020/2058(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Wishes it to be ensured that all contribute equitably to the post-corona recovery and the transition to a sustainable economy; seeks an intensified fight against tax fraud, tax evasion and tax avoidance and aggressive tax planning; calls on the Commission to create a blacklist of EU Member States facilitating tax avoidance; calls for EU- level coordination to avoid aggressive tax planning by individuals and corporates; seeks in this context an ambitious strategy for business taxation for the 21st century;
Amendment 34 #
2020/2051(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital P a (new)
Recital P a (new)
P a. whereas the overarching priority will remain to have a swift and timely agreement towards a new MFF that is in a position to support, through appropriate funding, both the already established long-term priorities, as well as the newly expected challenges arising from the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic; whereas all negotiators should strive for that end;
Amendment 124 #
2020/2046(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Deplores the fact that one Member State, Malta, has received an overall ‘partially compliant’ score in the peer review by the Global Forum for EOIR; notes nonetheless that Malta is working to address the recommendations made in the Global Forum report, by notably stepping up its supervisory approach and by investing in human resourcing; further notes that a Trusts Ultimate Beneficial Ownership Register (TUBOR) has been set-up as part of wider reforms increasing Malta’s effectiveness in ensuring availability of tax information; regrets the fact that material deficiencies have been identified in 18 Member States15 ; _________________ 15 https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/et udes/STUD/2021/662603/EPRS_STU(202 1)662603_EN.pdf
Amendment 5 #
2020/2044(INI)
F. whereas of the 1 357 petitions submitted in 2019, 938 were declared admissible, 406 were declared inadmissible and 13 were withdrawn; whereas the relatively high percentage (30 %) of inadmissible petitions in 2019 reveals that there is still a widespread lack of clarity about the EU’s fields of activity; in this sense, it is necessary to address this problem with information campaigns dedicated to clarifying the competences of the Union as well as the procedure for submitting petitions to the European Parliament;
Amendment 27 #
2020/2044(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital R a (new)
Recital R a (new)
Ra. whereas the media play a key role in any democratic system and provide more transparency to the process of the Committee on Petitions; whereas a quality press is an essential element for the whole European Union; whereas there is some confusion in some European media in relation to the role and powers of the Committee on Petitions;
Amendment 34 #
2020/2044(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Recalls the important role of the Committee on Petitions in defending and promoting the rights of EU citizens and residents, ensuring that petitioners’ concerns and complaints are examined in timely fashion and, wherever possible, resolved, through an open, democratic and transparent petition process; and avoiding a biased or politicised response to the petitioners;
Amendment 41 #
2020/2044(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Emphasizes the importance of a continuous public debate on the Union’s fields of activity aimed at informing citizens about the scope of the Union’s competences and the different levels of decision-making, in order to reduce the number of inadmissible petitions; proposes information and training campaigns in the European Union be stepped up to ensure that EU citizens have better knowledge of the EU’s competences and to clarify the role of the Committee on Petitions among the public opinion;
Amendment 51 #
2020/2044(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Proposes to carry out campaigns and outreach events targeting journalists and the media in order to prevent vague information and thus improve the relationship between the Committee on Petitions and the media; underlines that the media plays a key role in reaching out to European citizens concerning the day- to-day work of the Committee on Petitions and can contribute through their activity to improving the knowledge that European citizens have about the work of the Committee on Petitions; stresses that it is the EU’s task to encourage European citizens to receive accurate information;
Amendment 55 #
2020/2044(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Points out that petitions offer the opportunity to the European Parliament and other EU institutions to maintain a direct dialogue with EU citizens who are affected by the misapplication of EU law; becoming the entrance door of citizens in the European institutions; stresses the need for enhanced cooperation between the EU institutions and national, regional and local authorities on inquiries regarding implementation of and compliance with EU law;
Amendment 70 #
2020/2044(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Calls on the European Commission to commit to a more active involvement in the Committee on Petitions in order to ensure that petitioners receive a precise response to their requests and complaints regarding with the implementation of EU law;
Amendment 87 #
2020/2044(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Draws attention to the large number of petitions on Brexit submitted in 2019, mostly calling for the protection of EU citizens’ rights before and after Brexit; welcomes the excellent work done by the Committee on Petitions, which by giving voice to the concerns raised by these petitioners contributed to ensuring that citizens’ rights remained one of Parliament’s main priorities in the Brexit negotiations; stresses that there are many citizens – both in the EU and in the United Kingdom – who, in view of the uncertainty of a no-deal Brexit, have turned to the Committee on Petitions because of the fear of seeing their rights in danger due to the lack of agreement;
Amendment 92 #
2020/2044(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16a. Draws attention to the majority support that the Plenary of the European Parliament gave to the Resolution of the European Parliament, of 17 January 2019, on the strategic investigation OI / 2/2017 of the European Ombudsman on the transparency of legislative debates in the bodies preparations for the Council of the European Union; recalls that the Council, as co-legislator, is an indispensable institution for the citizens of the Union; regrets that there are still many closed-door discussions and meetings in this institution; invites the Council to implement a policy of greater transparency in order to thereby improve citizens' trust in public institutions; encourages it to give a greater diffusion to certain meetings and documents in order to achieve a better communication with European citizens and with national parliaments;
Amendment 96 #
2020/2044(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Stresses that the ECI is an importantfundamental instrument for active citizenship and public participation; welcomes the adoption on 17 April 2019 of the new rules for the ECI, which bring a number of structural and technical improvements to make this instrument more user-friendly and accessible as well as to facilitate increased participation of EU citizens in the democratic process of the Union; notes the significant number of new ECIs registered by the Commission in 2019, which shows that citizens are seizing the opportunity to use participatory instruments to have a say in policymaking and lawmaking processes; calls for more dissemination campaigns on the role of the European Citizen Initiative to promote the use of this resource by European citizens and thus encourage their involvement in the democratic process of the Union;
Amendment 104 #
2020/2044(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Recalls that the Petitions Web Portal is an essential tool for ensuring a smooth, efficient and transparent petition process; welcomes, in this regard, its alignment with the ‘look and feel’ of the European Parliament’s website (Europarl), which has made the portal more responsive and accessible for citizens; stresses that efforts must be continued to make the portal more accessible to persons with disabilities in order to ensure that all citizens of the Union can exercise their right to petition the European Parliament contained in Article 20 and 24 of the TFEU and in Article 44 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union;
Amendment 108 #
2020/2044(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)
Paragraph 22 a (new)
22a. Underlines that the ePetitions instrument is an important database for the Committee to function, but calls for an improvement and modernization of the interface in order to make it easier and more accessible;
Amendment 13 #
2020/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas in its 20 years of existence, the euro has become a symbol of Europe’s economic strength and of its position in the world, becoming a channel of proliferating European values of democracy, free markets and international cooperation;
Amendment 22 #
2020/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas the euro's global potential has not been fully reached, and its benefits are shared unevenly among the Eurozone members;
Amendment 30 #
2020/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas a stronger role of the euro, and its increased use as a reserve currency, would increase the ability of the EU to frame its policy stance vis-a-vis other countries and regions;
Amendment 45 #
2020/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas Brexit brings structural changes to the EU financial system and its stability, intensifying the need to continue developing the EU’s capital markets, to avoid market fragmentation and to maintain a global and cooperative mindset, while consolidating its emerging polycentric financial and capital market system; whereas considerable attention shall be given to ensure that any Brexit- induced polycentric system does not evolve into financial fragmentation;
Amendment 55 #
2020/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas post-pandemic economic recovery requires the fast implementation of the EU recovery plan, which will address structural weaknesses and put in place policies to enhance growth, upward convergence and competitiveness; whereas such policies are paramount both to enhancing the attractiveness of the euro globally and to strengthening Europe’s economic and financial autonomy; whereas a meaningful fiscal stimulus, in conjunction with a monetary one – including a joint European effort –, will have a positive effect on the international position of the euro; whereas the premature withdrawal of fiscal stimulus and the lack of coordination of fiscal action can undermine the attractiveness of the euro as an international currency;
Amendment 177 #
2020/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Underlines that a strengthened international role of the euro would enhance the EU’s capability to enforce open strategic autonomy; recommends, therefore, actions intended to both design and implement policy measures that foster the international role of the euro and support market-driven shifts in this direction, while taking care to minimise the possibility that such developments could reinforce the economic and financial vulnerability of peripheral regions by encouraging a shift of resources to the centre of the monetary union;
Amendment 8 #
2020/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 7 a (new)
Citation 7 a (new)
- having regard to the March 2018 action plan from the European Commission on Fintech,
Amendment 15 #
2020/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas the CMU should provide a regulatory environment which mitigates risks to financial stability, and adequately protects the interests of retail investors, pensioners and consumers;
Amendment 17 #
2020/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A b (new)
Recital A b (new)
Ab. whereas the development of a CMU goes necessarily hand in hand with the deepening of the economic and monetary union, and in particular with the completion of the banking union and the creation of a mechanism of fiscal stabilisation for the euro area as a whole; whereas the CMU must be complemented by counter-cyclical policy measures to foster aggregate demand and reduce inequalities;
Amendment 22 #
2020/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A c (new)
Recital A c (new)
Ac. whereas legislative harmonisation remains insufficient to create a truly European capital market if diverging national implementation, supervision, and enforcement practices remain in place;
Amendment 28 #
2020/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the actions taken so far to achieve the CMU are moving in the right direction; whereas much work nevertheless remains to be done in terms of the precision, effectiveness and simplification of the measures adoptedhowever, progress towards achieving CMU has been limited, multiple targets have not been reached and the importance of bank lending as compared to equities has actually increased in recent years as a source of investment funds in the EU;
Amendment 30 #
2020/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas most measures that have been considered and implemented aim to improve and unify capital markets relate to the professional tools and financial vehicles available to practitioners in intermediation and their clients (basically institutions, funds and high net worth individuals), the CMU needs to mobilise retail demand, which in Europe lags at well below the levels prevailing in the USA or Japan; whereas to achieve such an objective, retail investors have to experience a change in investment culture; whereas such a change will only happen when retail investors become convinced that investment in capital markets is desirable because it can be of profit to them more than say, bank deposits, while being subject to risks that are acceptable and clearly defined;
Amendment 37 #
2020/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B b (new)
Recital B b (new)
Bb. whereas SMEs accounted for 99.8% of all enterprises in the EU-28 non-financial business sector (NFBS), generating 56.4% of value added and 66.6% of employment in the NFBS; whereas micro SMEs accounted for 93% of the sector, small SMEs 5,9% and Medium-sized SMEs only 0,9%1a; _________________ 1aEuropean Commission ANNUAL REPORT ON EUROPEAN SMEs 2018/2019
Amendment 40 #
2020/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the social and economic crisis resulting from COVID-19 will have a particularly negative impact on SMEs and retail saverscould similarly affect retail savers (though in the course of the pandemic, individual savings mostly held in banks have risen sharply); whereas the EU’s response to COVID-19 through the European Rrecovery Pplan should provide a large injection of capital in order to increase European enterprises’ access to finance;
Amendment 48 #
2020/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas one of the challenges of a CMU is to ensure equal access to financing and to investment opportunities across the European Union, which should be geographically balanced, reaching citizens and businesses in core and peripheral regions of the European Union;
Amendment 55 #
2020/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C b (new)
Recital C b (new)
Cb. whereas investment activities tend to remain confined by national borders, and retail investors face numerous obstacles to access opportunities outside their Member State, due to legal uncertainty, language and cultural barriers, market fragmentation and costly inefficiencies in the EU;
Amendment 59 #
2020/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C c (new)
Recital C c (new)
Cc. whereas the lack of a centralised mechanism with easily accessible, reliable, understandable and comparable public information is one of the reasons why companies struggle to find investors;
Amendment 62 #
2020/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C d (new)
Recital C d (new)
Cd. whereas the funding ecosystem for SME IPOs in the EU is underdeveloped due to information asymmetries, high costs, administrative burdens, and lack of equity culture; whereas investors find it difficult to evaluate young and small firms with a short business record thus hindering innovative openings especially by young entrepreneurs;
Amendment 66 #
2020/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C e (new)
Recital C e (new)
Ce. whereas Fintech has the potential to suit certain needs of SMEs and retail investors by allowing decentralised ways of operating and delivering efficiency improvements;
Amendment 77 #
2020/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Calls for the removal of barriers, including the simplification of legislation , where appropriate, to diversify funding sources for SMEs, in order to promote SMEs’ ability to access equity markets, and to reduce the existing debt bias; points out that the current situation makes SMEs more fragile and vulnerable;
Amendment 83 #
2020/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Calls on the Commission to strengthen the mandatory feedback given by banks when declining SME credit applications, as a more comprehensive feedback could give the opportunity to SMEs with declined requests to adapt their business approach and to learn;
Amendment 86 #
2020/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Calls on the Commission and Member States to actively inform SMEs of the alternative financing instruments available to them;
Amendment 88 #
2020/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 c (new)
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1c. Welcomes the idea of establishing a European Single Access Point (ESAP) to aggregate information about companies in the EU through the interconnection of existing national and EU registers and databases of company data, as a way to support companies, in particular in smaller Member States, to attract investors; stresses that companies should be able to control the availability of their data in the ESAP;
Amendment 111 #
2020/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Calls for the acceleration of the development of EU venture capital (VC) and private equity markets by increasing the availability of funding for VC investments, developing larger late-stage VC funds, tax incentive schemes for VC and business angel investments, and active IPO markets for VC-backed companies under a common, and transparent, EU level framework; underlines that these tax incentive schemes should be designed so as to be economically and socially viable and responsible;
Amendment 117 #
2020/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
Amendment 126 #
2020/2036(INI)
5. Calls for targeted measures within securities market legislation to expedite the recovery after the COVID-19 crisis; supports changes inSubject to the priority of safeguarding regulatory standards, favours the review of the Prospectus Regulation, the Markets in Financial Instruments Directive (MIFID), the Securitisation Regulation and the Market Abuse Regulation to facilitate investments in the real economy, in particular in SMEs, and to allow newcomers and new products to enter the markets, preserving consumer protection and market integrity while encouraging cross-border equity investments and trades;
Amendment 147 #
2020/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Aasks the Mmember Sstates to amend their national tax frameworks, in order to reduce tax obstacles to cross-border investments, including withholding tax proceduresmost especially with reference to withholding tax procedures for which, beyond seeking to converge their national practices, tax authorities should participate in a pan-European digital platform where withholding tax liabilities and refunds across jurisdictions are cleared transparently such that retail investors are able to determine returns on their investment in real time, and to increase financing by investors to long- term investment opportunities thereby improving returns on long-term savings for EU citizens;
Amendment 162 #
2020/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Stresses the necessity of advancing further in the implementation of a genuinely Single Rule Book for financial services in the internal market, where priority should be given to the continuing development of common definitions and standards on sustainable finance;
Amendment 170 #
2020/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Underlines the need to promote pension provision; welcomes the Pan- European Personal Pension (PEPP) product, whose regulation foresees that capital should be invested taking into account environmental, social and governance (ESG) factors; notes that PEPP is as a complementary and voluntary pension pillar with regard to national public pension systems; reminds Member States that PEPPs need to be subject to the same tax treatment as national pension products to become an option for savers;
Amendment 181 #
2020/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Encourages the Member States to promote multi-pillar pension systems, including occupational pension schemes, as a way to improve market dynamics and the incentives to invest; believes that private pensions should be revitalised and made more attractive; encourages the participation of investors in long-term products with tax reduction or exemption policies designed to generate broader economic and social beneficial impact;
Amendment 195 #
2020/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Sstresses the need for European and national supervisory authorities to overcome their differences; calls for supervisory convergence to promote a common European model of supervision and seamless enforcement, guided by the European Securities and Mmarket Aauthority (ESMA), and, where appropriate, the EIOPA, to reduce the existing obstacles to cross-border fFinancial operations; understands that convergence had best be attained within a decentralised framework that allows national supervisory authorities to fulfil their functions closer to market players; believes that such convergence had best be attempted as part of the Digital Europe programmes;
Amendment 209 #
2020/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Calls on the Commission to ensure the proper funding of civil society operators and consumers representatives in the field of financial services, who offer invaluable insight and independent assessment to policy-makers and regulators;
Amendment 221 #
2020/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Notes the lack of information about the non-debt financing market for SMEs; calls in this regard for better data collection about the non-debt financing tools previously used by the SME population; insists that it could significantly help in assessing and implementing policies in this area;
Amendment 227 #
2020/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Is concerned that retail investors’ engagement with financial markets remains low; calls for measures to promote retail investments in view of the demographic challenges faced by the EU by increasing the participation of retail investors in capital markets through more attractive and appropriate personal pension products; in particular, welcomes the new uniform set of criteria for EU-wide rules to help crowdfunding services function smoothly and foster cross-border business funding, notably for medium-sized and micro- enterprises;
Amendment 243 #
2020/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. RecCalls the existence of different shortcomingsfor the improvement of the disclosure and comparability of key information in the legislation on packaged retail investment and insurance products (PRIIPs) that should be addressed in the next review; expects that Level 2 PRIIPs legislation on the Key Investor Document to respect level 1, in particular in relation to the performance scenarios; regrets the delays in the adoption of Level 2 PRIIPs legislation that will overlap with the first review of PRIIPs, and which increases legal uncertainty and costs for stakeholders; insists that the forthcoming review should provide for disclosure documents which are standardised and machine readable, thereby providing for comparability in a digital-friendly way;
Amendment 258 #
2020/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Is of the opinionTakes note of the belief expressed by financial market intermediaries that the current reporting framework within MIFID II and the European Mmarket Iinfrastructure Rregulation (EMIR) is very costly and complex, hindering the effectiveness of the system; believes that a simplification thereof is necessarshould be considered while taking full account of current experience and ensuring that this in no way serves to undermine the aims set for MIFID II and EMIR and without hindering rules on market integrity, transparency, consumer protection and financial stability;
Amendment 271 #
2020/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Calls for amendments to legislation to ensure access to independent advice by financial intermediaries while avoiding promotion of the institution’s own financial products and ensuring a fair marketing of financial products; agrees that the role of inducements in intermediation and distribution should be further examined to ensure that no conflicts of interest arise and that financial advice is fairly, transparently and adequately supplied to investors;
Amendment 274 #
2020/2036(INI)
19a. Proposes to the Commission to look into the possibility for an EU Individual Savings Accounts, as a complement to national regimes, that could overcome national fragmented markets by operating in a uniform manner and across heterogeneous markets, ensuring portability and security of savings;
Amendment 275 #
2020/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 b (new)
Paragraph 19 b (new)
19b. Insists that retail investors will be an integral part of the sustainable finance agenda and the EU’s sustainable development agenda; calls on the Commission to ensure that the taxonomy label methodology is clear and understood by retail investors;
Amendment 276 #
2020/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 c (new)
Paragraph 19 c (new)
Amendment 281 #
2020/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Underlines that financial education is needed to overcome low retail investor engagement with financial markets, based on lack of knowledge, mistrust and risk aversionNotes that lack of financial literacy and access to widespread public information about financial markets is one of the reasons that explain lack of equity culture in the EU; underlines that financial education is needed to overcome low retail investor engagement with financial markets, based on lack of knowledge, mistrust and risk aversion; insists that an information campaign directed to SMEs on the alternative financing instruments at their disposal could significantly help in deepening the CMU; urges the Commission to launch and support public programmes in Member States to foster financial and digital literacy using a range of instruments, including digital and social media, to engage with citizens and businesses, namely through public agencies created for that effect;
Amendment 285 #
2020/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Emphasises that financial education is a medium-term tool, which enriches the financial system and which is a good step for engaging retail investors with financial markets; however, notes that up to now, financial education has had extremely limited traction in promoting and enhancing equity dealings, both nationally and on a cross-border basis;
Amendment 294 #
2020/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)
Paragraph 22 a (new)
22a. Calls for the promotion of Employee Share Ownership as a way to encourage citizens’ participation in capital markets and help develop an equity culture; proposes that this could be done through for instance a multilingual EU portal to raise awareness about the scheme and inform about its benefits;
Amendment 304 #
2020/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Takes the view that the digitalisation of financial services can be a catalyst for the mobilisation of capital in the EU while reducing barriers and increasing supervisory efficiency; emphasises that an EU framework with high standards of cybersecurity would be conducive to the CMU; notes that such EU framework should be primarily fit for the digital age and technology neutral;
Amendment 308 #
2020/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)
Paragraph 23 a (new)
23a. Calls on the Commission to use the forthcoming reviews of financial services regulations to foster investor and shareholder engagement through digital tools;
Amendment 309 #
2020/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 b (new)
Paragraph 23 b (new)
23b. Stresses that many peer-to-peer lenders are already lending funds to small businesses, making crypto-assets a non- traditional financing channel for SMEs; insists in this regard that clear guidance is needed on the applicability of existing regulatory and prudential processes to crypto-assets which qualify as financial instruments as far as EU legislation is concerned, in order to provide regulatory certainty regarding crypto-assets; stresses that this guidance must be provided consistently at the EU level, to avoid different practices of qualification and supervision by national authorities, which creates an un-level playing field, forum shopping and regulatory arbitrage in the internal market;
Amendment 312 #
2020/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 c (new)
Paragraph 23 c (new)
23c. Stresses that initial coin offerings, being the equivalent of IPOs for cryptocurrencies, have potential in funding SMEs, innovative start-ups and scale-ups; highlights that ICOs can facilitate the exchange of value without the need for a central authority or intermediary which allows for more efficiency and also for the democratisation of financing; notes in this regards that ICOs can accelerate technology transfer, and can be an essential part of the capital markets union; calls on the Commission to assess the advantages of proposing legislative framework for initial coin offerings and initial exchange offerings to foster a coherent EU approach, increase legal certainty, investor and consumer protection, raise warnings, and reduce risks stemming from asymmetric information, fraudulent behaviour and illegal activities;
Amendment 317 #
2020/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Highlights that ‘sandboxes’ may be an adequate tool to enhance the innovation and competitiveness of the financial services sector; requests that the Commission createonsiders the creation of a pan-European ‘sandbox’ for fFinancial services; having due regard for both benefits and risks of these tools and the absence of a common EU framework, as analysed by the European Supervisory Authorities;
Amendment 324 #
2020/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Points out that Europe competes for capital in a global market, and that, as a result, deeper, more integrated and efficient European capital markets are critical to protecting Europe’s economic sovereignty, the use of the euro in third countries, and to attracting foreign investors; believes that the exit of the UK from the EU makes this objective even more important and that it should be pursued according to transparent rules-based criteria and not case-by-case;
Amendment 144 #
2020/2034(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Considers in this respect that FinTech should be considered as an essential and effective tool for European Small and Medium enterprises, able to provide real-time and fast solutions adapted to their financing needs; believes that FinTech has the potential to help closing the SME financing gap;
Amendment 145 #
2020/2034(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Considers in this respect that FinTech should be considered as an essential and effective tool for European Small and Medium enterprises, able to provide real-time and fast solutions adapted to their financing needs; believes that FinTech has the potential to help closing the SME financing gap;
Amendment 165 #
2020/2034(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Points out that Union level measures should not stifle opportunities for businesses to grow and develop within the Union so that the set framework should in no way serve as a barrier to entry for innovative openings especially by young entrepreneurs in the digital sector;
Amendment 196 #
2020/2034(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Considers that developing a pan- European taxonomy for crypto-assets is desirable as a step towards fostering a common understanding, facilitating collaboration across jurisdictions and providing greater regulatory certainty for market participants engaged in cross border activity; recommends taking into account the importance of international cooperation and global initiatives as regards frameworks for crypto-assets, bearing in mind in particular their borderless nature; cautions, however, that developing an open-ended taxonomy template may be more appropriate for this evolving market segment; believes, however, that there is no one size fits all solution when it comes to legal qualification of crypto-assets and therefore a framework which allows for monitoring, adaption and product intervention by EU supervisors is important;
Amendment 215 #
2020/2034(INL)
10a. Expresses concern about the serious carbon footprint attached to the use and dissemination of crypto-assets; calls on the Commission to take this into account in any forthcoming regulatory initiative, having in mind the EU’s commitment to the Sustainable Development Goals and to the necessary transition to a climate-neutral society by 2050 at the latest;
Amendment 228 #
2020/2034(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Points out that applying existing regulations to previously unregulated crypto-assets will be necessary, as will creating bespoke regulatory regimes for evolving crypto-asset activities, such as initial coin offerings; Stresses that initial coin offerings have potential in funding SMEs, innovative start-ups and scale-ups, can accelerate technology transfer, and can be an essential part of the Capital Markets Union;
Amendment 233 #
2020/2034(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Calls on the Commission to assess the advantages of proposing legislative framework for initial coin offerings and initial exchange offerings to increase legal certainty, investor and consumer protection, raise warnings, and reduce risks stemming from asymmetric information, fraudulent behaviour and illegal activities; Stresses however that wider regulation of crypto-assets and related activities may have trade-offs, such as risking legitimising crypto-assets and encouraging wider adoption; Highlights therefore that it will also require further supervisory resources and in-house technological know-how for supervisors;
Amendment 236 #
2020/2034(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
Amendment 303 #
2020/2034(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Requests, in this regard, that the Commission examines how to ensure that digital finance entities can access on an equitable basis relevant and useful data to help ensure that innovative FinTech businesses can grow within the Union and beyond; calls on the Commission to monitor the offering of financial services by “BigTech” firms, and also how the competitive advantages inherent to these operators may distort competition in the market, harm the interests of consumers and innovation;
Amendment 331 #
2020/2034(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Calls for effective oversight of ’big data’ analytics in a way that addresses the opacity of models while ensuring that there is sufficient access to relevant and quality data; emphasises the need for much greater algorithmic accountability and transparency with regard to data processing and analytics as an essential tool to guarantee that the individual is appropriately informed about the processing of their personal data; calls on the Commission to assess which initiatives, legislative and non-legislative, can be taken in this regard;
Amendment 22 #
2020/2023(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Believes it to be in both Parties’ mutual interests to establish an ambitious future economic partnership covering a wide number of sectors; underlines that, in any case, a level playing field must be ensured and EU standards safeguarded in order to avoid a ‘race to the bottom’ and the acquisition of unfair competitive advantages through the undercutting of levels of protection or other regulatory divergences; considers that any future framework should safeguard fair competition, investor and consumer protection, transparency in the promotion and support given to knowledge industries, and the integrity of the single market, while respecting the EU’s regulatory regime and decision-making autonomy;
Amendment 55 #
2020/2023(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Recalls, in the context of financial services, that passporting rights, which are based on mutual recognition and harmonised prudential rules in the internal market, will cease to apply between the EU and the UK at the end of the transitional period; underlines that, thereafter, access to the European financial market must be based on equivalence decisions made within the EU’s legal framework; stresses that, as equivalence regimes cover only part of the activities enabled from passports for EU firms, Brexit could result in cross-border business being limited between EU and UK; thus calls for arrangements to enable a level-playing field in this sector;
Amendment 6 #
2020/1998(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Recalls that in its resolution of 19 June 2020 on general guidelines for the preparation of the 2021 budget, Parliament stressed that the primary focus of the 2021 budget should be to mitigate the effects of the COVID-19 outbreak and support the recovery, built on the European Green Deal and digital transformation, while keeping in focus its long-term goal of socioeconomic convergence between its regions;
Amendment 13 #
2020/1998(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Points towards the asymmetric impact the Covid-19 pandemic is having on the economies of the Member States; underlines the devastating blow felt by service based economies, particularly the tourism sector;
Amendment 19 #
2020/1998(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Calls for the 2021 Union budget to support the implementation of the Recovery and Resilience Facility which aims to address the challenges identified in the European Semester, in which the Sustainable Development Goals shall be integrated, taking into full account the growing need to bridge within the Union the widening economic and social disparities between its different parts and regions;
Amendment 50 #
2020/1998(BUD)
18. Stresses the crucial role of the Connecting Europe Facility in fostering the development of a high-performance trans- European network, supporting energy and transport connectivity projects in the shift towards a climate- neutral economy with security of supply taking into consideration the special situation of European insular and peripheral regions, and buttressing the digital transition, including the up-skilling and re-skilling of Union workers; proposes therefore major increases, in particular for the transport and energy strands;
Amendment 56 #
2020/1998(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Recalls that the introduction of a basket of new own resources that do not particularly target in a damaging manner the economy of any single Member State, is essential to meet the financial needs of supporting the recovery and for other Union priorities.
Amendment 73 #
2020/1998(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Recalls that the cultural and creative sector is one of the most hit by the COVID-19 pandemic and calls for adequate answers and financing to reduce the substantive losses of the sector due to the unforeseeable closure of venues during the pandemic; proposes therefore to substantially increase the respective budget lines of Creative Europe; aiming at assisting arts performers, creators, educators, publishers, authors, promoters and agents to survive the storm;
Amendment 112 #
2020/1998(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44
Paragraph 44
44. Stresses the importance of a progressive framing of the EU’s common security and defence policy; underlines the importance of enhancing EuropeanEuropean enhanced cooperation in defence matters since it not only makes Europe and its citizens safer, but also leads to a cost reduction; calls for increased funding for the European Defence Fund in order to fully foster an innovative and competitive defence industrial base that will contribute to the much-needed strategic autonomy of the EU;
Amendment 127 #
2020/1998(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 50
Paragraph 50
50. Proposes with urgency the creation of a dedicated budget line for "the support to the political process in Libya" with the objective of contributing to a peaceful resolution to the Libyan conflict;
Amendment 145 #
2020/1998(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 54
Paragraph 54
54. Following the recent worrying developments in Belarus, calls for the creation of a new Special Representative for Belarus, to support the process for a peaceful transition of power in accordance with a UN or alternatively an OSCE led dialogue based on the protection of human rights and the will of the Belarusian people;
Amendment 135 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) In particular, online intermediation services, online search engines, operating systems, online social networking, video sharing platform services, number- independent interpersonal communication services, cloud computing services and online advertisingocial networking, number-independent interpersonal communication services, online search engines, operating systems, web browsers, online advertising services, cloud computing services, mobile payment services, digital voice assistants, platforms using integrated voice assistant technologies, video sharing platform services and online on-demand audiovisual media services and audio media services all have the capacity to affect a large number of end users and businesses alike, which entails a risk of unfair business practices. They therefore should be included in the definition of core platform services and fall into the scope of this Regulation. Online intermediation services may also be active in the field of financial services, and they may intermediate or be used to provide such services as listed non-exhaustively in Annex II to Directive (EU) 2015/1535 of the European Parliament and of the Council32 . In certain circumstances, the notion of end users should encompass users that are traditionally considered business users, but in a given situation do not use the core platform services to provide goods or services to other end users, such as for example businesses relying on cloud computing services for their own purposes. _________________ 32Directive (EU) 2015/1535 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 September 2015 laying down a procedure for the provision of information in the field of technical regulations and of rules on Information Society services, OJ L 241, 17.9.2015, p. 1.
Amendment 200 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 42
Recital 42
(42) The advertising revenues for many online advertising services, such as traditional publishers, have significantly declined, whereas the advertising revenues for gatekeepers have steadily increased1a. The conditions under which gatekeepers provide online advertising services to business users including both advertisers and publishers are very often non- transparent and opaque. This opacity is plartgely linked to the practices of a few platforms, but is also due to the sheer complexity of modern day programmatic advertising. The online advertising sector is considered to have become more non- transparent after the introduction of new privacy legislation, and is expected to become even more opaque with the announced removal of third-party cookies. This often leads to a lack of trustworthy information and knowledge for advertisers and publishers about the conditions of the advertising services they purchased and undermines their ability to switch to alternative providers of online advertising services or build their own service. Furthermore, the costs of online advertising are likely to besignificantly higher than they would be in a fairer, more transparent and contestable platform environment. These higher costs are likely to be reflected in the prices that end users pay for many daily products and services relying on the use of online advertising. Transparency obligations should therefore require gatekeepers to provide advertisers and publishers to whom they supply online advertising services, when requested and to the extent possible,In addition, a few dominant platforms have gathered significant sets of data and data points, which erodes the exclusive trademarks of publishers and advertisers and extracts their client's data, creating unfair competition. Transparency obligations should therefore require gatekeepers to provide advertisers and publishers to whom they supply online advertising services continuous, real-time and free of charge access to the performance measuring tools of the gatekeeper and provide for entire disclosure and transparency of the parameters and data used for with information that allows both sides to understand the price paid for each of the different advertising services provided as part of the relevant advertising value chain. A gatekeeper should further provide, free of charge, reliable, non-aggregated, granular and complete data necessary for advertisers and publishers to carry out their own independent high-quality and real-time evaluation of intermediation services, including verification of the ad inventory. Moreover, a prohibition on combining data sets should prevent tracking of end users and thereby level the playing field for providers of online advertising services, strengthening funding of public media and restoring privacy of end users. _________________ 1ahttps://trackingfreeads.eu/the-costs-of- tracking-ads/
Amendment 211 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 47
Recital 47
(47) The rules that the gatekeepers set for the distribution of software applications may in certain circumstances restrict the ability of end users to install and effectively use third party software applications or software application stores on operating systems or hardware of the relevant gatekeeper and restrict the ability of end users to access these software applications or software application stores outside the core platform services of that gatekeeper. Such restrictions may limit the ability of developers of software applications to use alternative distribution channels and the ability of end users to choose between different software applications from different distribution channels and should be prohibited as unfair and liable to weaken the contestability of core platform services. The end user should be required to decide which software application or software application store should become the default. In order to ensure that third party software applications or software application stores do not endanger the integrity of the hardware or operating system provided by the gatekeeper the gatekeeper concerned may implement proportionate technical or contractual measures to achieve that goal if the gatekeeper demonstrates that such measures are necessary and justified and that there are no less restrictive means to safeguard the integrity of the hardware or operating system.
Amendment 222 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 51 a (new)
Recital 51 a (new)
(51 a) Interoperability can have a direct positive impact on contestability, fairness on the market and consumer welfare. Thus, interoperability which requires platforms to use open protocols, such as Application Programming Interface, lowers significantly the barriers to entry for potential competitors on the market, as it would grant competitors access to existing networks and allow them to participate therein. This would as well allow competing platforms to offer their internal systems to users whose data lives elsewhere thereby enabling them to chose an equivalent consumer friendly alternative and at the same time enhance contestability.
Amendment 274 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 71 a (new)
Recital 71 a (new)
(71 a) The Commission should be empowered to request the assistance of Member State authorities. The relevant national authorities may include competition authorities, consumer protection authorities and data protection authorities and other relevant national regulators.
Amendment 370 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point b – introductory part
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point b – introductory part
(b) the requirement in paragraph 1 point (b) where it provides aone or more core platform service that hass combining more than 4523 million monthly active end users established or located in the Union and more than 107 000 yearly active business users per year established in the Union during the last financial year;
Amendment 377 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. Where a provider of core platform services meets all the thresholds in paragraph 2, it shall notify the Commission thereof within three months after those thresholds are satisfied and provide it with the relevant information identified in paragraph 2.. That notification shall include the relevant information identified in paragraph 2 for each of the core platform services of the provider that meets the thresholds in paragraph 2 point (b). The notification shall be updated whenevbe considered as a gatekeeper and shall comply with all its obligations under other core platform services individually meet the thresholds in paragraph 2 point (b)urrent Regulation.
Amendment 397 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 3 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) the size, including turnover and market capitalisation, operations and position of the provider of core platform services, actual or potential market share and market dominance in the relevant markets;
Amendment 420 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 8
Article 3 – paragraph 8
8. The gatekeeper shall comply with the obligations laid down in Articles 5 and 6 within sixas soon as possible, and in any case no later than two months after a core platform service has been included in the list pursuant to paragraph 7 of this Article. If a gatekeeper fails to comply with the obligations within these 2 months, article 25 and 26 are triggered.
Amendment 428 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3
Article 4 – paragraph 3
3. The Commission shall publish and update the list of gatekeepers and the list of the core platform services for which they need to comply with the obligations laid down in Articles 5 and 6 on an on-going basis. The Commission shall publish an annual report setting out the findings of its monitoring activities and present it to the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union.
Amendment 444 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) allow business users to offer the same products or services to end users through third party online intermediation services or through its own online services or distribution channels at prices or conditions that are different from those offered through the online intermediation services of the gatekeeper;
Amendment 454 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) refrain fromnot directly or indirectly preventing or restricting business users and end users from raising issues with any relevant public authority or judicial authority relating to any practice of gatekeepers;
Amendment 465 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point f
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) refrain fromnot requiringe business users or end users to use, subscribe to or register with any other core platform services identified pursuant to Article 3 or which meets the thresholds in Article 3(2)(b) as a condition to access, sign up or register to any of their core platform services identified pursuant to that Articleservice of the gatekeeper as a condition to access, sign up or register to any of their core platform services nor achieve the same result through product design, nor automatically sign users of a core platform service into any such services owned or controlled by the gatekeeper;
Amendment 467 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point f a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point f a (new)
(f a) not require the acceptance of supplementary conditions that have by their nature or according to commercial usage, no connection with and are not necessary for the provision of the platform or services to its business users;
Amendment 489 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point g c (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point g c (new)
(g c) not pre-install any software applications on its core platform services, unless those applications are essential for the integrity of the service, operating system or the device and cannot technically be offered on a standalone basis by third-parties;
Amendment 503 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) allow theand technically enable business users and end users to installation and effective use of third party software applications or software application stores using, or interoperating with, operating systems of that gatekeeper and allow and enable these software applications orand software application stores to be accessed by means other than the core platform services of that gatekeeper. The end user shall be required to decide which application or application store should become the default. The gatekeeper shall not be prevented from taking proportionate measures to ensure that third party software applications or software application stores do not endanger the integrity of the hardware or operating system provided by the gatekeeper provided that the gatekeeper can prove that such measures are necessary, proportionate and justified to safeguard the integrity of the hardware or operating system;
Amendment 587 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 1
1. The measures implemented by the gatekeeper to ensure full compliance with the obligations laid down in Articles 5 and 6 shall be effective in achieving the objective of the relevant obligation. The gatekeeper shall be responsible for, and be able to demonstrate full compliance with these obligations (‘accountability’). The burden of proof regarding the efficiency lies on the gatekeeper. The gatekeeper shall demonstrate which measures have been taken to comply with these obligations. The gatekeeper shall ensure that these measures are implemented in compliance with Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Directive 2002/58/EC, and with legislation on cyber security, consumer protection and product safety.
Amendment 649 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2
Article 11 – paragraph 2
2. Where consent for collecting and, processing and sharing of personal data is required to ensure compliance with this Regulation, a gatekeeper shall take the necessary steps to either enable business users to directly obtain the required consent to their processing, where required under Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Directive 2002/58/EC, or to comply with Union data protection and privacy rules and principles in other ways including by providing business users with duly anonymised data where appropriate. The gatekeeper shall not make the obtaining of this consent by the business user more burdensome than for its own services, and shall offer users a choice in a neutral way, safeguarding the autonomous decision-making of business users or end users via form, function or operation of the user interface.
Amendment 716 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 6 a (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. In order to ensure effective compliance by the gatekeeper with its obligations laid down in Articles 5 or 6, the Commission shall regularly review the remedies imposed in accordance with paragraph 1 or commitments accepted in accordance with paragraph 6. The Commission shall be entitled to require changes to the imposed remedies if, following an investigation, it finds that the remedies are not effective.
Amendment 744 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 24 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Member States shall designate authorities with particular expertise and experience to assist the Commission in the enforcement of this Regulation. Those authorities shall support the Commission in the tasks of monitoring and investigating compliance. The Commission shall entitle designated authorities to use the powers enshrined in Articles 19, 20 and 21 for this purpose as well as to receive complaints from end users and business users on non- compliance by gatekeepers in their territory to report them to the Commission.
Amendment 130 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) Information society services and especially intermediary services have become an important part of the Union’s economy and daily life of Union citizens. Twenty years after the adoption of the existing legal framework applicable to such services laid down in Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council25 , new and innovative business models and services, such as online social networks and marketplaces, have allowed business users and consumers to impart and access information and engage in transactions in novel ways. A majority of Union citizens now uses those services on a daily basis. However, the digital transformation and increased use of those services has also resulted in new risks, not least cybersecurity risks, and challenges, both for individual users and for society and the economy as a whole. _________________ 25Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000 on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market ('Directive on electronic commerce') (OJ L 178, 17.7.2000, p. 1).
Amendment 131 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1 a (new)
Recital 1 a (new)
(1a) The digitalisation of European society and its economy is often leaving policy makers, corporations and citizens struggling to catch up. Furthermore, the accumulation of data is regularly creating an uneven competitive level on the market since this is being used as a tool to determine who enters and who exits the market.
Amendment 137 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) Therefore, in order to safeguard and improve the functioning of the internal market, a targeted set of uniform, effective, risk-based and proportionate mandatory rules should be established at Union level. This Regulation provides the right conditions and competitive settings for innovative digital services to emerge and to scale up in the internal market. The approximation of national regulatory measures at Union level concerning the requirements for providers of intermediary services is necessary in order to avoid and put an end to fragmentation of the internal market and to ensure legal certainty, thus reducing uncertainty for developers and, fostering interoperability and assure the possibility for new entries to penetrate the market. By using requirements that are technology neutral, innovation should not be hampered but instead be stimulated.
Amendment 175 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) In order to benefit from the exemption from liability for hosting services, the provider should, upon obtaining actual knowledge or awareness of illegal content, act expeditiously and in good faith to remove or to disable access to that content. The removal or disabling of access should be undertaken in the observance of the principle of freedom of expression. The provider can obtain such actual knowledge or awareness through, in particular, its own-initiative investigations or notices submitted to it by individuals or entities in accordance with this Regulation in so far as those notices are sufficiently precise and adequately substantiated to allow a diligent economic operator to reasonably identify, assess and where appropriate act against the allegedly illegal content.
Amendment 179 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) In order to ensure the effective protection of consumers when engaging in intermediated commercial transactions online, certain providers of hosting services, namely, online platforms that allow consumers to conclude distance contracts with traders, should not be able to benefit from the exemption from liability for hosting service providers established in this Regulation, in so far as those online platforms present the relevant information relating to the transactions at issue in such a way that it leads consumers to believe that the information was provided by those online platforms themselves or by recipients of the service acting under their authority or control, and that those online platforms thus have knowledge of or control over the information, even if that may in reality not be the case. In that regard, ist should be determined objectively, on the basis of all relevant circumstances, whether the presentation could lead to such a belief on the side of an average and reasonably well-informed consumer.
Amendment 184 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27
Recital 27
(27) Since 2000, new technologies have emerged that improve the availability, efficiency, speed, reliability, capacity and security of systems for the transmission and storage of data online, leading to an increasingly complex online ecosystem that makes it harder for both policymakers to manage, as well as for new entrants to penetrate the market. In this regard, it should be recalled that providers of services establishing and facilitating the underlying logical architecture and proper functioning of the internet, including technical auxiliary functions, can also benefit from the exemptions from liability set out in this Regulation, to the extent that their services qualify as ‘mere conduits’, ‘caching’ or hosting services. Such services include, as the case may be, wireless local area networks, domain name system (DNS) services, top–level domain name registries, certificate authorities that issue digital certificates, or content delivery networks, that enable or improve the functions of other providers of intermediary services. Likewise, services used for communications purposes, and the technical means of their delivery, have also evolved considerably, giving rise to online services such as Voice over IP, messaging services and web-based e-mail services, where the communication is delivered via an internet access service. Those services, too, can benefit from the exemptions from liability, to the extent that they qualify as ‘mere conduit’, ‘caching’ or hosting service.
Amendment 199 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 35
Recital 35
(35) In that regard, it is important that the due diligence obligations are adapted to the type and nature of the intermediary service concerned. This Regulation therefore sets out basic obligations applicable to all providers of intermediary services, as well as additional obligations for providers of hosting services and, more specifically, online platforms holding a dominant position in the market and very large online platforms. To the extent that providers of intermediary services may fall within those different categories in view of the nature of their services and their size, they should be obliged to comply with all of the corresponding obligations of this Regulation. Those harmonised due diligence obligations, which should be reasonable and non-arbitrary, are needed to achieve the identified public policy concerns, such as safeguarding the legitimate interests of the recipients of the service, addressing illegal practices, safeguarding the competitive nature of the sector by assuring the possibility for new entrants to penetrate the market, and protecting fundamental rights online.
Amendment 202 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36
Recital 36
(36) In order to facilitate smooth and efficient communications relating to matters covered by this Regulation, providers of intermediary services should be required to establish a single point of contact, that is free of charge, and to publish relevant information relating to their point of contact, including the languages to be used in such communications. The point of contact can also be used by trusted flaggers and by professional entities which are under a specific relationship with the provider of intermediary services. In contrast to the legal representative, the point of contact should serve operational purposes and should not necessarily have to have a physical location .
Amendment 209 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 38
Recital 38
(38) Whilst the freedom of contract of providers of intermediary services should in principle be respected, it is appropriate to set certain rules on the content, application and enforcement of the terms and conditions of those providers in the interests of transparency, the protection of recipients of the service and the avoidance of unfair or arbitrary outcomes.
Amendment 243 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 54
Recital 54
(54) Very large online platforms may cause societal and economic risks, different in scope and impact from those caused by smaller platforms. Once the number of recipients of a platform reaches a significant share of the Union population, the systemic risks the platform poses have a disproportionately negative socioeconomic impact in the Union. Such significant reach should be considered to exist where the number of recipients exceeds an operational threshold set at 45 million, that is, a number equivalent to 10% of the Union population. The operational threshold should be kept up to date through amendments enacted by delegated acts, where necessary. Such very large online platforms should therefore bear the highest standard of due diligence obligations, proportionate to their societal impact and means.
Amendment 244 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 55
Recital 55
(55) In view of the network effects characterising the platform economy, the user base of an online platform may quickly expand and reach the dimension of a very large online platform, with the related impact on the internal market, economic actors and consumers. This may be the case in the event of exponential growth experienced in short periods of time, or by a large global presence and turnover allowing the online platform to fully exploit network effects and economies of scale and of scope. A high annual turnover or market capitalisation can in particular be an indication of fast scalability in terms of user reach. In those cases, the Digital Services Coordinator should be able to request more frequent reporting from the platform on the user base to be able to timely identify the moment at which that platform should be designated as a very large online platform for the purposes of this Regulation.
Amendment 246 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 56
Recital 56
(56) Very large online platforms are used in a way that strongly influences safety online, the shaping of public opinion and discourse, as well as on online trade. The way they design their services is generally optimised to benefit their often advertising-driven business models and can cause societal concerns. In the absence of effective regulation and enforcement at both European and national level, they can set the rules of the game, without effectively identifying and mitigating the risks and the societal and economic harm they can cause. Under this Regulation, very large online platforms should therefore assess the systemic risks stemming from the functioning and use of their service, as well as by potential misuses by the recipients of the service, and take appropriate mitigating measures.
Amendment 250 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 57
Recital 57
(57) Three categories of systemic risks should be assessed in-depth. A first category concerns the risks associated with the misuse of their service through the dissemination of illegal content, such as the dissemination of child sexual abuse material or illegal hate speech, and the conduct of illegal activities, such as the sale of products or services prohibited by Union or national law, including counterfeit products. For example, and without prejudice to the personal responsibility of the recipient of the service of very large online platforms for possible illegality of his or her activity under the applicable law, such dissemination or activities may constitute a significant societal and economic systematic risk where access to such content may be amplified through accounts with a particularly wide reach. A second category concerns the impact of the service on the exercise of fundamental rights, as protected by the Charter of Fundamental Rights, including the freedom of expression and information, the right to private life, the right to non-discrimination and the rights of the child. Such risks may arise, for example, in relation to the design of the algorithmic systems used by the very large online platform or the misuse of their service through the submission of abusive notices or other methods for silencing speech or hampering competition. A third category of risks concerns the intentional and, oftentimes, coordinated manipulation of the platform’s service, with a foreseeable impact on health, civic discourse, electoral processes, public security and protection of minors, having regard to the need to safeguard public order, protect privacy and fight fraudulent and deceptive commercial practices. Such risks may arise, for example, through the creation of fake accounts, the use of bots, and other automated or partially automated behaviours, which may lead to the rapid and widespread dissemination of information that is illegal content or incompatible with an online platform’s terms and conditions.
Amendment 255 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 58
Recital 58
(58) Very large online platforms should deploy the necessary means to diligently mitigate the systemic risks identified in the risk assessment. Very large online platforms should under such mitigating measures consider, for example, enhancing or otherwise adapting the design and functioning of their content moderation, algorithmic recommender systems and online interfaces, so that they discourage and limit the dissemination of illegal content, adapting their decision-making processes, or adapting their terms and conditions. They may also include corrective measures, such as discontinuing advertising revenue for specific content, or other actions, such as improving the visibility of authoritative information sources. Very large online platforms may reinforce their internal processes or supervision of any of their activities, in particular as regards the detection of systemic risks. They may also initiate or increase cooperation with trusted flaggers, organise training sessions and exchanges with trusted flagger organisations, and cooperate with other service providers, including by initiating or joining existing codes of conduct or other self-regulatory measures. Any measures adopted should respect the due diligence requirements of this Regulation and be effective and appropriate for mitigating the specific risks identified, in the interest of safeguarding public order, the competitive aspect of the economy, security to trade, protecting privacy and fighting fraudulent and deceptive commercial practices, and should be proportionate in light of the very large online platform’s economic capacity and the need to avoid unnecessary restrictions on the use of their service, taking due account of potential negative effects on the fundamental rights of the recipients of the service.
Amendment 257 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 60 a (new)
Recital 60 a (new)
(60a) Auditors of digital services, whether independent or not, need to have specific competences and expertise in the sector, technological and operational. They need as well to be knowledgeable in the social, economic and human rights issues involved, among others. Whether as SMEs or multinationals, extensions of existing accountancy and auditing, legal, and ICT consultancy or similar firms cannot be automatically assumed to have the required knowhow to qualify as auditors. Member States and the Commission are therefore (encouraged) to develop protocols -- following consultation with all actors involved -- by which to assess and accredit auditors of digital services, preferably according to clear rules devised on a Union basis, and thereby to establish registers of accredited auditors on a national and on a European level.
Amendment 261 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 63
Recital 63
(63) Advertising systems used by very large online platforms pose particular risks not least at both economic and political levels, and require further public and regulatory supervision on account of their scale and ability to target and reach recipients of the service based on their behaviour within and outside that platform’s online interface. VIn particular, the accumulation of personal data by online platforms is converted into massive commercial assets often used as a way to give an uneven advantage to certain economic players over others. Therefore, very large online platforms should ensure public access to repositories of advertisements displayed on their online interfaces to facilitate supervision and research into emerging risks brought about by the distribution of advertising online, for example in relation to illegal advertisements or manipulative techniques and disinformation with a real and foreseeable negative impact on public health, public security, civil discourse, political participation and equality. Repositories should include the content of advertisements and related data on the advertiser and the delivery of the advertisement, in particular where targeted advertising is concerned.
Amendment 265 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 65
Recital 65
(65) Given the complexity of the functioning of the systems deployed and the systemic risks they present to society and the economy, very large online platforms should appoint compliance officers, which should have the necessary qualifications to operationalise measures and monitor the compliance with this Regulation within the platform’s organisation. Very large online platforms should ensure that the compliance officer is involved, properly and in a timely manner, in all issues which relate to this Regulation. In view of the additional risks relating to their activities and their additional obligations under this Regulation, the other transparency requirements set out in this Regulation should be complemented by additional transparency requirements applicable specifically to very large online platforms, notably to report on the risk assessments performed and subsequent measures adopted as provided by this Regulation.
Amendment 272 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 68
Recital 68
(68) It is appropriate that this Regulation identify certain areas of consideration for such codes of conduct. In particular, risk mitigation measures concerning specific types of illegal content should be explored via self- and co-regulatory agreements. Another area for consideration is the possible negative impacts of systemic risks on society, the economy and democracy, such as disinformation or manipulative and abusive activities. This includes coordinated operations aimed at amplifying information, including disinformation, such as the use of bots or fake accounts for the creation of fake or misleading information, sometimes with a purpose of obtaining economic gain, which from a microeconomic perspective are particularly harmful for vulnerable recipients of the service, such as children but which could also hamper the competitive aspect of the market. In relation to such areas, adherence to and compliance with a given code of conduct by a very large online platform may be considered as an appropriate risk mitigating measure. The refusal without proper explanations by an online platform of the Commission’s invitation to participate in the application of such a code of conduct could be taken into account, where relevant, when determining whether the online platform has infringed the obligations laid down by this Regulation.
Amendment 276 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 71
Recital 71
(71) In case of extraordinary circumstances affecting public security, the economy of one or more Member States, or public health, the Commission may initiate the drawing up of crisis protocols to coordinate a rapid, collective and cross- border response in the online environment. Extraordinary circumstances may entail any unforeseeable event, such as earthquakes, hurricanes, pandemics and other serious cross-border threats to public health, war and acts of terrorism, where, for example, online platforms may be misused for the rapid spread of illegal content or disinformation or where the need arises for rapid dissemination of reliable information. In light of the important role of very large online platforms in disseminating information in our societies and across borders, such platforms should be encouraged in drawing up and applying specific crisis protocols. Such crisis protocols should be activated only for a limited period of time and the measures adopted should also be limited to what is strictly necessary to address the extraordinary circumstance. Those measures should be consistent with this Regulation, and should not amount to a general obligation for the participating very large online platforms to monitor the information which they transmit or store, nor actively to seek facts or circumstances indicating illegal content.
Amendment 282 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 77
Recital 77
(77) Member States should provide the Digital Services Coordinator, and any other competent authority designated under this Regulation, with sufficient powers and, human resources and financial means to ensure effective investigation and enforcement. Digital Services Coordinators should in particular be able to search for and obtain information which is located in its territory, including in the context of joint investigations, with due regard to the fact that oversight and enforcement measures concerning a provider under the jurisdiction of another Member State should be adopted by the Digital Services Coordinator of that other Member State, where relevant in accordance with the procedures relating to cross-border cooperation. Furthermore, the Digital Services Coordinator of each Member State should establish a structured working relationship with the National Competition Authorities as well as the Financial Regulatory Authorities working on their territory.
Amendment 284 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 87
Recital 87
(87) In view of the particular challenges that may emerge in relation to assessing and ensuring a very large online platform’s compliance, for instance relating to the scale or complexity of a suspected infringement or the need for particular expertise or capabilities at Union level, Digital Services Coordinators should have the possibility to request, on a voluntary basis, assistance from the Commission or otherwise ask the Commission to intervene and exercise its investigatory and enforcement powers under this Regulation.
Amendment 293 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 93 a (new)
Recital 93 a (new)
(93a) However, the sector of digital services is a fast moving one in which Europe cannot afford Regulation that is lagging behind technological and operational innovations. Governance structures should remain fit for purpose, flexible and transparent. While ensuring accountability on the part of players in the sector, they themselves must remain accountable. Regulatory structures in which any one institution is granted powers so that it can operate as prosecution, jury and judge or seem like so, could easily create problems of checks and balances thereby stimulating more litigation; it could also be less flexible in dealing with innovation. Therefore the Board should, during the first five years of this Regulation entering into force, to carry out a continuous assessment of governance structures related to this Regulation and eventually to make recommendations for their improvement, their streamlining, and the consolidation of effective checks and balances mechanisms.
Amendment 294 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 94
Recital 94
(94) Given the importance of very large online platforms, in view of their reach and impact, their failure to comply with the specific obligations applicable to them may affect a substantial number of recipients of the services across different Member States and may cause large societal and economic harms, while such failures may also be particularly complex to identify and address.
Amendment 297 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 97
Recital 97
(97) The Commission should remain free to, on the basis of this Regulation and other relevant EU law, decide whether or not it wishes to intervenes in any of the situations where it is empowered to do so under this Regulation. Once the Commission initiated the proceedings, the Digital Services Coordinators of establishment concerned should be precluded from exercising their investigatory and enforcement powers in respect of the relevant conduct of the very large online platform concerned, so as to avoid duplication, inconsistencies and risks from the viewpoint of the principle of ne bis in idem. However, in the interest of effectiveness, those Digital Services Coordinators should not be precluded from exercising their powers either to assist the Commission, at its request in the performance of its supervisory tasks, or in respect of other conduct, including conduct by the same very large online platform that is suspected to constitute a new infringement. Those Digital Services Coordinators, as well as the Board and other Digital Services Coordinators where relevant, should provide the Commission with all necessary information and assistance to allow it to perform its tasks effectively, whilst conversely the Commission should keep them informed on the exercise of its powers as appropriate. In that regard, the Commission should, where appropriate, take account of any relevant assessments carried out by the Board or by the Digital Services Coordinators concerned and of any relevant evidence and information gathered by them, without prejudice to the Commission’s powers and responsibility to carry out additional investigations as necessary.
Amendment 305 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) contribute to the proper functioning of the internal market for intermediary services and impacted economic actors;
Amendment 330 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point n
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point n
(n) ‘advertisement’ means information designed to promote the messagedirectly or indirectly promote or rank information, products or services of a legal or natural person, irrespective of whether to achieve commercial or non- commercial purposes, and displayed by an online platform on its online interface againsor parts thereof against direct or indirect remuneration specifically for promoting that information, product or service;
Amendment 337 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point q a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point q a (new)
(qa) Trusted Flagger means an economically and politically neutral entity representing collective interests that its expertise and competence is dedicated to detecting, identifying and notifying illegal content;
Amendment 339 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) the provider acts expeditiously and in good faith to remove or to disable access to the information it has stored upon obtaining actual knowledge of the fact that the information at the initial source of the transmission has been removed from the network, or access to it has been disabled, or that a court or an administrative authority has ordered such removal or disablement.
Amendment 342 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) upon obtaining such knowledge or awareness, acts expeditiously and in good faith to remove or to disable access to the illegal content.
Amendment 353 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent 3
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent 3
— information about redress available to the provider of the service and to the recipient of the service who provided the content, which may be sought in the Member State of establishment of the provider of the service and/or in the Member State of establishment of the recipient of the service who provided the content;
Amendment 355 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
Amendment 371 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 1
1. Providers of intermediary services shall include information on any restrictions that they impose in relation to the use of their service in respect of information provided by the recipients of the service, in their terms and conditions. ThaSuch restrictions shall in no way serve to provide selected economic actors with hidden competitive advantages. The relevant information shall include information on any policies, procedures, measures and tools used for the purpose of content moderation, including algorithmic decision-making and human review. It shall be set out in clear and unambiguous language and shall be publicly available in an easily accessible format.
Amendment 396 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point d
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point d
(d) a statement confirming the good faith belief of the individual or entity submitting the notice that the information and allegations contained therein are accurate and complete as well as the relationship, economic or otherwise, if any, the individual or entity has with the notified entity.
Amendment 406 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – point d
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – point d
(d) where the decision concerns allegedly illegal content, a reference to the legal ground relied on and explanations as to why the information is considered to be illegal content on that ground including explanations in relation to the arguments submitted under Article 14 paragraph 2A, where relevant;
Amendment 430 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 5
Article 17 – paragraph 5
5. Online platforms shall ensure that the decisions, referred to in paragraph 4, are not solely taken on the basis of automated means and are involving human settlement in the case of dispute or redress.
Amendment 441 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
(ba) it does not have any economic, social or political interest in the exit from the market of the reported entity;
Amendment 478 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 24 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Online platforms that directly or indirectly display advertising on their online interfaces or parts thereof shall ensure that the recipients of the service can identify, for each specific advertisement displayed to each individual recipientconsumer, in a clear, concise but meaningful, uniform and unambiguous manner and in real time:
Amendment 479 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 24 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) that the information displayed is an advertisement and whether the advertisement is a result of an automated mechanism, such as an advertising exchange mechanism;
Amendment 480 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 24 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the natural or legal person on whose behalf the advertisement is displayed and who directly or indirectly finances the advertisement;
Amendment 481 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
Article 24 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(ba) whether the advertising is based on any form of targeting; and
Amendment 482 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 24 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) meaningful, granular and specific information about the main parameters used to determine the recipient to whom the advertisement is displayedtarget and display the advertisement, which allows the consumer to determine why and how the advertisement in question was shown to him or her. This information shall include categories of data that targeted forms of advertising would use to address and categorise consumers and the data platforms share with advertisers for advertising targeting purposes.
Amendment 488 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 1
Article 25 – paragraph 1
1. This Section shall apply to online platforms which provide their services to a number of average monthly active recipients of the service in the Union equal to or higher than 45 million, calculated in accordance with the methodology set out in the delegated acts referred to in paragraph 3, or if they exercise a dominant position over a specific market sector.
Amendment 497 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) details on the dissemination of illegal content through their services and impacted jurisdictions;
Amendment 501 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(ba) impact on the economy and the competitiveness of single Member States or the EU market as relevant;
Amendment 508 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
(aa) Those reports should be easily accessible and free of charge to the general public and include standardised, open data describing the systemic risks, including socioeconomic ones.
Amendment 509 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) reinforcing the internal processes or supervision, not solely based on automated systems, of any of their activities in particular as regards detection of systemic risk;
Amendment 512 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 27 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) identification and assessment of the most prominent and recurrent systemic risks reported by very large online platforms or identified through other information sources, in particular those provided in compliance with Article 31 and 33 and taking note of their real or likely economic and competitive consequences, if any;
Amendment 532 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 29 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Very large online platforms shall offer users the choice of recommender systems from first and third party providers. Such third parties must be offered access to the same operating system, hardware or software features that are available or used in the provision by the very large online platform of its own recommender systems.
Amendment 533 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Article 29 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Amendment 537 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 30 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) the natural or legal person on whose behalf the advertisement is displayed and who directly or indirectly financed the advertisement;
Amendment 545 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 1
Article 33 – paragraph 1
1. Very large online platforms shall publish the reports referred to in Article 13 within six months from the date of application referred to in Article 25(4), and thereafter every sixthree months.
Amendment 546 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
Article 33 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
(ba) the impact any declared illegal content has on the market of single Member States and/or the EU as relevant;
Amendment 553 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 3
Article 35 – paragraph 3
3. When giving effect to paragraphs 1 and 2, the Commission and the Board shall aim to ensure that the codes of conduct clearly set out their objectives especially in relation to the flow of illegal content, contain key performance indicators to measure the achievement of those objectives and take due account of the needs and interests of all interested parties, including citizens, at Union level. The Commission and the Board shall also aim to ensure that participants report regularly to the Commission and their respective Digital Service Coordinators of establishment on any measures taken and their outcomes, as measured against the key performance indicators that they contain.
Amendment 556 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 1
Article 37 – paragraph 1
1. The Board may recommend the Commission to initiate the drawing up, in accordance with paragraphs 2, 3 and 4, of crisis protocols for addressing crisis situations strictly limited to extraordinary circumstances affecting public security, the economy, or public health.
Amendment 557 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 37 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. The Commission shall encourage and facilitate very large online platforms and, where appropriate, other online platforms, especially those exercising a dominant position, with the involvement of the Commission, to participate in the drawing up, testing and application of those crisis protocols, which include one or more of the following measures:
Amendment 580 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 6
Article 48 – paragraph 6
Amendment 586 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 50 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 50 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
The Commission acting on its own initiative, or the Board acting on its own initiative or upon request of at least three Digital Services Coordinators of destination, may, where it hasthere are reasons to suspect that a very large online platform infringed any of those provisions, recommend the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment to investigate the suspected infringement with a view to that Digital Services Coordinator adopting such a decision within a reasonable time period.
Amendment 652 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 73 – paragraph 1
Article 73 – paragraph 1
1. By fivthree years after the entry into force of this Regulation at the latest, and every fivthree years thereafter, the Commission shall evaluate this Regulation and report to the European Parliament, the Council and the European Economic and Social Committee.
Amendment 129 #
2020/0360(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) Security of supply, as one main driver behind Regulation (EU) No 347/2013, has been significantly improved through projects of common interest. Moreover, the Commission’s climate target impact assessment27 expects the consumption of natural gas to be reduced significantly because its non-abated use is not compatible with carbon-neutrality. On the other hand, the consumption of biogas, renewable and low-carbon hydrogen and synthetic gaseous fuels will increase significantly towards 2050. Therefore, the natural gas infrastructure no longer needs support through the TEN-E policy. The planning of energy infrastructure should reflect this changing gas landscape. However, not all Member States are connected to the European gas network and island Member States still face significant challenges in terms of security of supply and energy isolation. Infrastructure projects which were already included in the fourth or fifth Union list of projects of common interest established pursuant to Regulation(EU) No 347/2013 should be able to maintain this status and be eligible for the Union list of projects of common interest to be established under this Regulation if they contribute to ending energy isolation of those Member States that are currently not connected to the European gas network, provided that the new infrastructure is hydrogen-ready. _________________ 27 SWD(2020) 176 final
Amendment 227 #
2020/0360(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1
1. This Regulation lays down guidelines for the timely development and interoperability of the priority corridors and areas of trans-European energy infrastructure set out in Annex I (‘energy infrastructure priority corridors and areas’) that contribute to the Union’s 2030 climate and energy targets and the climate neutrality objective by 2050, while ensuring the security of supply of all Member States.
Amendment 417 #
2020/0360(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3 – point f a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 3 – point f a (new)
(f a) for natural gas infrastructure projects that were included in the fourth or fifth Union list established pursuant to Regulation (EU) No 347/2013 and falling under one of the energy infrastructure categories set out in Annex II to this Regulation, the project is to contribute to ending energy isolation of those Member States that are currently not connected to the European gas network. Furthermore, the project is to be hydrogen-ready and already under development or planning.
Amendment 878 #
2020/0360(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point d – paragraph 1
Annex II – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point d – paragraph 1
Any of the assets listed in points (a), (b), (c), and (d) may be newly constructed assets or assets converted from natural gas dedicated to hydrogen, or a combination of the two, including from new natural gas infrastructure projects which were already included in the fourth or fifth Union list of projects of common interest established pursuant to Regulation (EU) No 347/2013 if they contribute to ending energy isolation of those Member States that are currently not connected to the European gas network, provided that the new infrastructure is hydrogen-ready and already under development or planning.
Amendment 57 #
2020/0268(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point c
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point c
Directive (E) 2015/2366
Article 95 – paragraph 5
Article 95 – paragraph 5
5. EBA shall promote cooperation, including the sharing of information, in the area of operational risks associated with payment services among the competent authorities, and between the competent authorities, ENISA and the ECB.;
Amendment 59 #
2020/0268(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b a (new)
Directive (EU) 2015/2366
Article 96 – paragraph 6 a (new)
Article 96 – paragraph 6 a (new)
(b a) the following paragraph is added: '6a. Payment service providers referred to in points (a), (b) and (d) of Article 1(1) who fall under the scope of Regulation (EU) 2021/xx of the European Parliament and of the Council* [DORA], and who manage, classify and report operational or security payment-related incidents and major operational or security payment- related incidents in accordance with Chapter III of Regulation (EU) 2021/xx of the European Parliament and of the Council* [DORA], shall be exempted from the application of paragraphs 1 to 5 of this Article.'
Amendment 157 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) In the digital age, information and communication technology (ICT) supports complex systems used for everyday societal activities. It keeps our economies running in key sectors, including finance, and enhances the functioning of the single market. Increased digitalisation and interconnectedness also amplify ICT risks making society as a whole - and the financial system in particular - more vulnerable to cyber threats or ICT disruptions. While the ubiquitous use of ICT systems and high digitalisation and connectivity are nowadays core features of all activities of Union financial entities, digital resilience is not yethas yet to be sufficiently built in their operational frameworks.
Amendment 167 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14 a (new)
Recital 14 a (new)
(14 a) However, that approach should in no way be taken to mean that, in its implementation, this Regulation should serve to hamper innovation and flexibility with regard to how financial entities deal with resilience issues while complying with its provisions. Through dialogue with supervisory authorities, which should acknowledge the virtues of flexibility, there will be full scope for adaptation and innovation while fully maintaining a high level of resilience.
Amendment 172 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) Cloud computing service providers are one category of digital service providers covered by Directive (EU) 2016/1148. As such they are subject to ex- post supervision carried out by the national authorities designated according to that Directive, which is limited to requirements on ICT security and incident notification laid down in that act. Since the Oversight Framework established by this Regulation applies to all critical ICT third-party service providers, including cloud computing service providers, when they provide ICT services to financial entities, it should be considered complementary to the supervision that is taking place under Directive (EU) 2016/1148 and both substantive and procedural requirements applicable to critical ICT third-party service providers under this Regulation should be coherent and seamless with those applicable under that Directive. Moreover, the Oversight Framework established by this Regulation should cover cloud computing service providers in the absence of a Union horizontal sector-agnostic framework establishing a Digital Oversight Authority.
Amendment 174 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) To remain in full control of ICT risks, financial entities need to have in place comprehensive capabilities enabling a strong and effective ICT risk management, alongside specific mechanisms and policies for ICT-related incident reporting, testing of ICT systems, controls and processes, as well as for managing ICT third-party risk. The digital operational resilience bar for the financial system should be raised while allowing for a proportionate application of requirements for financial entities which are micro and small enterprises as defined in Commission Rrecommendation 2003/361/EC32 also taking into account their nature, scale, complexity and overall risk profile. _________________ 32Commission Recommendation of 6 May 2003 concerning the definition of micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (OJ L 124, 20.5.2003, p. 36).
Amendment 193 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 35
Recital 35
(35) Moreover, as solely those financial entities identified as significant for the purposes of the advanced digital resilience testing should be required to conduct threat led penetration tests, the administrative processes and financial costs entailed by the performance of such tests should be devolved to a small percentage of financial entities. Finally, with a view to ease regulatory burdens, only financial entities other than micro enterprises should be asked to regularly report to the competent authorities all costs and losses caused by significant ICT disruptions and the results of post- incident reviews after significantuch ICT disruptions.
Amendment 197 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 41 a (new)
Recital 41 a (new)
(41 a) The definition of critical or important functions in this Regulation should encompass critical functions as defined in Directive (EU) 2014/59. Thereby, functions that are deemed to be critical functions pursuant to Directive (EU) 2014/59 should be deemed to be critical or important within the meaning of this Regulation.
Amendment 208 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 52
Recital 52
(52) To ensure that financial entities remain in full control of all developments which may impair their ICT security, notice periods and reporting obligations of the ICT third-party service provider should be set out in case of developments with a potential material impact on the ICT third- party service provider’s ability to effectively carry out critical or important functions, including the provision of assistance by the latter in case of an ICT- related incident at no additional cost or at a cost that is determined ex-anterelevant to the services being provided by the ICT third-party service provider to the financial institution at no additional cost or at a cost that is determined ex-ante. Ancillary ICT services on which the financial entities are not operationally dependent shall not be covered by this Regulation.
Amendment 211 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 53
Recital 53
(53) Rights of access, inspection and audit by the financial entity or an appointed third party shall cover only critical and important functions and are crucial instruments in the financial entities’ ongoing monitoring of the ICT third-party service provider’s performance, coupled with the latter’s full cooperation during inspections. In the same vein, the competent authority of the financial entity should have those rights, based on notices, to inspect and audit the ICT third-party service provider, subject to confidentiality.
Amendment 213 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 54
Recital 54
(54) Contractual arrangements should provide for clear termination rights and related minimum notices as well as dedicated exit strategies enabling, in particular, mandatory transition periods during which the ICT third-party service providers should continue providing the relevant functions with a view to reduce the risk of disruptions at the level of the financial entity or allow the latter to effectively switch to other ICT third-party service providers, or alternatively resort to the use of on-premises solutions, consistent with the complexity of the provided service. Moreover, credit institutions should also ensure that the relevant ICT contracts are robust and fully enforceable in the event of resolution of the credit institution. In line with the resolution authorities’ expectations, credit institutions should ensure that the relevant contracts for ICT services are resolution-resilient. As long as critical and important ICT functions continue to be performed, those financial entities should ensure that the contracts foresee, among other requirements, non- termination, non-suspension and non- modification clauses on the grounds of restructuring or resolution.
Amendment 236 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 69 a (new)
Recital 69 a (new)
(69 a) Guidelines issued by the ESAs on the application of those regulations and directives should be reviewed and revised as part of the consolidation process so that the legal basis for ICT risk requirements in Union law exclusively derive from this Regulation, its implementing acts and/or decisions and recommendations taken in accordance therewith, concerning entities within its scope.
Amendment 239 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a – indent 2 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a – indent 2 a (new)
- reporting of major operational or security payment-related incidents to the competent authorities by financial entities referred to in points (a) to (c) of Article 2 (1);
Amendment 241 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. This Regulation provides for the development of regulatory technical standards by the ESAs in the areas of ICT risk management, reporting, testing and key requirements for a sound monitoring of ICT third-party risk. When developing those regulatory technical standards, the ESAs shall fully take into account and incorporate previous guidelines and any other regulatory requirements issued before the entry into force of this Regulation, aiming to provide regulatory continuity and stability, wherever possible, and in accordance with this Regulation.
Amendment 242 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. This Regulation is without prejudice to the competences of Member States concerning the maintenance of public security, defence and national security in compliance with Union law.
Amendment 246 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point f
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) central securities depositories, and operators of securities settlement systems,
Amendment 248 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point k
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point k
(k) management companies and self- managed UCITS investment companies within the meaning of Directive 2009/65/EC and managers of alternative investment funds as defined in Article 4(1)(b) of Directive 2011/61/EU,
Amendment 265 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point u a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point u a (new)
(u a) payment cards' networks,
Amendment 267 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point u b (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point u b (new)
(u b) mutatis mutandis, the ESAs, the competent authorities, the Commission’s directorate general responsible for financial policies;
Amendment 270 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. This Regulation shall be considered to be a sector-specific Union legal act in relation to the Directive on measures for a high common level of cybersecurity across the Union [insert the full title and OJ publication reference when known] (NIS 2) with regard to financial entities. The provisions of this Regulation relating to ICT risk management measures, management of ICT-related incidents and notably incident reporting, as well as on digital operational resilience testing, information sharing arrangements and ICT third- party risk shall apply instead of those set up under the NIS 2 directive. Member States shall therefore not apply the provisions of NIS 2 on cybersecurity risk management and reporting obligations, information sharing and supervision and enforcement to any financial entities covered by this Regulation. At the same time, it is important to maintain a strong relationship and the exchange of information with the financial sector under the NIS 2 Directive. To that end, this Regulation allows all financial supervisors, the European Supervisory Authorities (ESAs) for the financial sector and the national competent authorities under this Regulation to participate in strategic policy discussions and the technical workings of the Cooperation Group, and to exchange information and cooperate with the single points of contact designated under the NIS 2 Directive and with the national CSIRTs. The competent authorities under this Regulation shall also transmit details of major ICT-related incidents to the single points of contact designated under the NIS 2 Directive. Moreover, Member States shall continue to include the financial sector in their cybersecurity strategies and national CSIRTs may cover the financial sector in their activities.
Amendment 277 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 4
(4) ‘ICT risk’ means any reasonably identifiable circumstance in relation to the use of network and information systems, - including a malfunction, capacity overrun, failure, disruption, impairment, misuse, loss or other type of malicious or non- malicious event - which, if materialised, may compromise the security of the network and information systems, of any technologyICT-dependaent tool or process, of the operation and process’ running, or of the provision of services, thereby compromising the integrity or availability of data, software or any other component of ICT services and infrastructures, or causing a breach of confidentiality, a damage to physical ICT infrastructure or other adverse effects;
Amendment 279 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 5 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 5 a (new)
(5 a) ‘incident’ means any event having the potential to disrupt, or that in fact disrupts, the operations of a financial entity;
Amendment 284 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 6
(6) ‘ICT-related incident’ means an unforeseen identified occurrenceincident in the network and information systems, whether resulting from malicious activity or not, which compromises the security of network and information systems, of the information that such systems process, store or transmit, or has or is likely to have adverse effects on the availability, confidentiality, continuity or authenticity of financial services provided by the financial entity;
Amendment 286 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 6 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 6 a (new)
(6 a) ‘operational or security payment- related incident’, means an event or a series of linked occurrences unforeseen by financial entities referred to in points (a) to (c) of Article 2(1) which has or is likely to have an adverse impact on the integrity, availability, confidentiality, authenticity or continuity of payment- related services;
Amendment 289 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 7
(7) ‘major ICT-related incident’ means an ICT-related incident with a potentially highhigh risk of material adverse impact on the network and information systems that support critical functions of the financial entity;
Amendment 291 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 7 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 7 a (new)
(7 a) ‘major operational or security payment-related incident’ means an operational or security payment-related incident which meets the criteria set out in Article 16(2)(a);
Amendment 292 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 8 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 8 a (new)
(8 a) ‘significant cyber threat’ means a cyber threat whose characteristics clearly indicate that it is likely to result in a major ICT-related incident or a major operational or security payment-related incident;
Amendment 297 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 15
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 15
(15) ‘ICT third-party service provider’ means an undertaking providing digital and data services, including providers of cloud computing services, software, data analytics services, data centres, including an economic unit providing ICT services that forms part of an undertaking which provides a wider range of products or services, but excluding providers of hardware components and undertakings authorised under Union law which provide electronic communication services as defined referred to in point (4) of Article 2 of Directive (EU) 2018/1972 of the European Parliament and of the Council43 ; _________________ 43Directive (EU) 2018/1972 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2018 establishing the European Electronic Communications Code (Recast)(OJ L 321, 17.12.2018, p. 36).
Amendment 304 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 16
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 16
(16) ‘ICT services’ means digital and data services provided through the ICT systems to one or more internal or external users, including provision of data, data entry, data storage, data processing and reporting services, data monitoring as well as data based business and decision support services excluding maintenance contracts for licensed software and telecom contracts;
Amendment 305 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 17
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 17
(17) ‘critical or important function’ means a function whose discontinued, defective orthat is essential to the operation of a financial entity as it would be unable to deliver its services without the function, or whose failed performance would materially impair the continuing compliance of a financial entity with the conditions and obligations of its authorisation, or with its other obligations under applicable financial services legislation, or its financial performance or the soundness, or continuity of its services and activities;
Amendment 330 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 50 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 50 a (new)
(50 a) ‘small enterprise’ means a financial entity as defined in Article 2(2) of the Annex to Recommendation 2003/361/EC.
Amendment 333 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 50 b (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 50 b (new)
(50 b) 'service' means any service normally provided for remuneration, at a distance, by electronic means and at the individual request of a recipient of services, and where: (i) ‘at a distance’ means that the service is provided without the parties being simultaneously present; (ii) ‘by electronic means’ means that the service is sent initially and received at its destination by means of electronic equipment for the processing (including digital compression) and storage of data, and entirely transmitted, conveyed and received by wire, by radio, by optical means or by other electromagnetic means; and (iii) ‘at the individual request of a recipient of services’ means that the service is provided through the transmission of data on individual request.
Amendment 334 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 50 c (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 50 c (new)
(50 c) 'function' means the identification, protection and prevention, detection, response and recovery, learning and evolution and communication in the use and management of ICT systems.
Amendment 345 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3
Article 4 – paragraph 3
3. Financial entities other than microenterprises shall establish a role to monitor the arrangements within the entity especially those concluded with ICT third- party service providers on the use of ICT services, or shall designate a member of senior management as responsible for overseeing the related risk exposure and relevant documentation.
Amendment 352 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 4
Article 5 – paragraph 4
4. As part of the ICT risk management framework referred to in paragraph 1, financial entities other than microenterprises shall implement an information security management system based on recognized international standards and where already available in accordance with supervisory guidance as laid out in guidelines established for that purpose by the ESAs and shall regularly review it.
Amendment 356 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 5
Article 5 – paragraph 5
5. Financial entities other than microenterprises shall ensure appropriate segregation of ICT management functions, control functions, and internal audit functions, according to the three lines of defense model, or an internal risk management and control model, in coherence and conformity with the guidelines established prior to the entry into force of this Regulation and subsequently further developed and, where applicable, amended, by their respective ESAs in accordance with this Regulation.
Amendment 374 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 10 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 10 a (new)
10 a. Any processing of personal data that takes place by financial entities and ICT service providers operating on their behalf under Chapters II and III of this Regulation shall be necessary for compliance with a legal obligation in accordance with Article 6(1)(c) of Regulation (EU)2016/679.
Amendment 387 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 7
Article 7 – paragraph 7
7. Financial entities other than microenterprises shall on a regular basis, and at least yearly, conduct a specific ICT risk assessment on all legacy ICT systems, especially before and after connecting old and new technologies, applications or systemsand classification in terms of the level of criticality of all ICT systems that were in use for a period of at least six years prior to the date of entry into force of this Regulation and of all ICT systems that have been in use for a period of more than six years since that date.
Amendment 391 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. To achieve the objectives referred to in paragraph 2, financial entities shall use state-of-the-artappropriate ICT technology and processes which:
Amendment 397 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – point a
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – point a
(a) guarantemaximize the security of the means of transfer of information;
Amendment 400 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 4 – point a
Article 8 – paragraph 4 – point a
(a) develop and document an information security policy defining rules to protect the confidentiality, integrity and availability of theirs, and their ICT resources, data and information assets while ensuring full protection of customers’ ICT resources, data and information assets; within financial entities’ own ICT systems
Amendment 401 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 4 – point b
Article 8 – paragraph 4 – point b
(b) following a risk-based approach, establish a sound network and infrastructure management using appropriate techniques, methods and protocols including implementing automated mechanisms to isolate affected information assets in case of cyber- attacks;
Amendment 403 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 4 – point c
Article 8 – paragraph 4 – point c
(c) implement policies, procedures and controls that limit the physical and virtual access to ICT system resources and data to what is required only for legitimate and approved functions and activities, and establish to that effect a set of policies, procedures and controls that address access privileges and a sound administration thereof;
Amendment 404 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 4 – point d
Article 8 – paragraph 4 – point d
(d) implement policies and protocols for strong authentication mechanisms, and protection of cryptographic keys, based on relevant standards and dedicated controls systems to prevent access to cryptographic keys whereby data is encrypted based on results of approved data classification and risk assessment processes;
Amendment 429 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 6
Article 10 – paragraph 6
6. Financial entities other than microenterprises shall have a crisis management function, which may be nested under functions responsible for incident response and management or be a dedicated function and which, in case of activation of their ICT Business Continuity Policy or ICT Disaster Recovery Plan, shall set out clear procedures to manage internal and external crisis communications in accordance with Article 13.
Amendment 433 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 9
Article 10 – paragraph 9
9. Financial entities other than microenterprises shall report to competent authorities all yearly review of costs and losses caused by ICT disruptions and ICT- related incidents.
Amendment 439 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 4
Article 11 – paragraph 4
4. Financial entities shallother than small and microenterprises shall assess the need to maintain redundant ICT capacities equipped with resources capabilities and functionalities that are sufficient and adequate to ensure business needs.
Amendment 441 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 5 – introductory part
Article 11 – paragraph 5 – introductory part
5. Financial entities referred to in point (f) of Article 2(1) shall maintain or ensure that their ICT third-party providers maintain at least one secondary processing site endowed with resources, capabilities, functionalities and staffing arrangements sufficient and appropriate to ensure business needs.
Amendment 451 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
When implementing changes to their ICT operations, financial entities other than microenterprises shall communicate thoseall such significant changes to the competent authorities.
Amendment 453 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – introductory part
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – introductory part
The post ICT-related incident reviews referred to in the first subparagraph shall determine whether the established procedures were followed and the actions taken were effective, includingnamely, where deemed relevant, in relation to:
Amendment 456 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
1. As part of the ICT risk management framework referred to in Aarticle 5(1), financial entities shall have in place communication plans enabling a responsible disclosure of major ICT- related incidents or major vulnerabilities to clients and counterparts as well as to the public,as well as for the subsequent disclosure to the public, when, where and as appropriate.
Amendment 460 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) specify furtherstructural and supplementary elements to be included in the ICT security policies, procedures, protocols and tools referred to in Article 8(2), with a view to ensure the security of networks, enable adequate safeguards against intrusions and data misuse, preserve the authenticity and integrity of data, including cryptographic techniques, and guarantee an accurate and prompt data transmission without major disruptions and undue delays;
Amendment 470 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 15 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. The requirements laid down in the paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 shall apply to operational or security payment-related incidents and to major operational or security payment-related incidents, where they concern financial entities referred to in points (a), (b) and (c) of Article 2(1).
Amendment 471 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 a (new)
Article 15 a (new)
Article 15 a Operational or security payment-related incidents concerning financial entities referred to in points (a), (b) and (c) of Article 2(1) The requirements laid down in Chapter III of this Regulation shall apply to operational or security payment-related incidents and to major operational or security payment-related incidents where they concern financial entities referred to in points (a), (b) and (c) of Article 2(1).
Amendment 474 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. The classification requirements laid down in paragraph 1 shall apply to operational or security payment-related incidents and major operational or security payment-related incidents in cases where they concern financial entities referred to in points (a), (b) and (c) of Article 2(1).
Amendment 475 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 1 b (new)
1 b. 1b. Financial entities shall classify significant cyber threats based on the following criteria: (a) the number or relevance of clients or financial counterparts targeted and, where applicable, the amount or number of transactions targeted by the significant cyber threat; (b) the duration or the frequency of the significant cyber threat; (c) the geographical spread with regard to the areas targeted by the significant cyber threat, particularly if it affects more than two Member States; (d) the criticality of the services targeted, including the financial entity’s transactions and operations;
Amendment 478 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 16 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) the criteria set out in paragraph 1, including materiality thresholds for determining major ICT-related incidents or, as applicable, major operational or security payment-related incidents which are subject to the reporting obligation laid down in Article 17(1);
Amendment 479 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 16 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) the criteria to be applied by competent authorities for the purpose of assessing the relevance of major ICT- related incidents or, as applicable, major operational or security payment-related incidents, to other Member States’ jurisdictions, and the details of ICT-related incidents reporor, as applicable, major operational or security payment-related incidents, to be shared with other competent authorities pursuant to points (5) and (6) of Article 17.
Amendment 482 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
(b a) the criteria set out in paragraph 1b, including high materiality thresholds for determining significant cyber threats which are subject to the reporting obligation laid down in Article 17 (1a);
Amendment 483 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. When developing the common draft regulatory technical standards referred to in paragraph 2, the ESAs shall take into account international standards, as well as specifications developed and published by ENISA, including, where appropriate, specifications for other economic sectorsthe size, nature, scale, complexity and overall risk profile of the financial entities, as well as international standards and specifications developed and published by ENISA, including, where appropriate, specifications for other economic sectors. The ESAs shall further take into account that the timely and efficient management of an incident by small and microenterprises is not constricted by the need to respect the classification requirements set out in this Article.
Amendment 485 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
The ESAs shall submit those common draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by [PO: insert date 13 years after the date of entry into force].
Amendment 487 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – title
Article 17 – title
17 Reporting of major ICT-related incidents and significant cyber threats
Amendment 492 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Financial entities shall notify significant cyber threats without undue delay to the relevant competent authority as referred to in Article 41.
Amendment 493 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2
Article 17 – paragraph 2
2. Where a major ICT-related incident has or may have an material impact on the financial interests of service users and clients, financial entities shall, without undue delay after having become aware of it, inform their service users and clients about the major ICT-related incident and shall as soon as possible inform them of all measures which have been taken to mitigate the adverse effects of such incident.
Amendment 498 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Where a significant cyber threat could adversely impact the financial interests of clients, financial entities shall inform their clients, without undue delay, of the significant cyber threat and of the measures which the financial entity intends to take to mitigate the adverse effects of such threat. Where appropriate, the financial entity shall also advise its clients on the measures they can take to mitigate the adverse effects of the threat.
Amendment 508 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 3 – point a
Article 17 – paragraph 3 – point a
(a) an initial notification, without delay, butafter becoming aware of a major ICT-incident and making best efforts to do so no later than the end of the business day, or, in case of a major ICT- related incident that took placehe financial entity became aware of later than 2 hours before the end of the business day, not later than 4 hours from the beginning of the next business day, or, where reporting channels are not available, as soon as they become available;
Amendment 511 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 3 – point b
Article 17 – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) an intermediate report, no later than 1 weekwhen relevant events occur or information becomes available following the initial notification or, if expressly required by the competent authority, after the initial notification referred to in point (a), followed as appropriate by updated notifications every time a relevant status update is available, as well as upon a specific request of the competent authority;
Amendment 513 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 3 – point c
Article 17 – paragraph 3 – point c
(c) a final report, when the root cause analysis has been completed, regardless of whether or not mitigation measures have already been implemented, and when the actual impact figures are available to replace estimates, but not later than one month from the moment of sending the initial repor and at the latest one month from the date of resolution of the incident
Amendment 518 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 4
Article 17 – paragraph 4
4. Financial entities may only delegate the reporting obligations under this Article to a third-party service provider upon approval of the delegation by the relevant competent authority referred to in Article 41, after an explicit request from both the financial entity and the ICT third-party service provider. In cases of such delegation, the financial entity shall remain fully accountable for the fulfilment of the incident reporting requirements.
Amendment 523 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 5 – introductory part
Article 17 – paragraph 5 – introductory part
5. Upon receipt of the report referred to in paragraph 1 or the notification referred to in paragraph 1a, the competent authority shall, without undue delay, provide details of the incidenmajor ICT-related incident or significant cyber threat to:
Amendment 524 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 5 – point c a (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 5 – point c a (new)
(c a) the Single Resolution Board for entities referred to in Article 7(2) of Regulation EU 806/2014, and national resolution authorities in relation to entitites referred to in Article 7(3) of Regulation EU 806/2014. National resolution authorities should provide to the SRB, on a six monthly basis, a summary of the report received under this Article.
Amendment 528 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point a – point 1 a (new)
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point a – point 1 a (new)
(1 a) establish the content of the notification for significant cyber threats;
Amendment 529 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) common draft implementing technical standards in order to establish the standard forms, templates and procedures for financial entities to report a major ICT- related incident and notify a significant cyber threat.
Amendment 530 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
The ESAs shall submit the common draft regulatory technical standards referred to in point (a) of paragraph 1 and the common draft implementing technical standards referred to in point (b) of the paragraph 1 to the Commission by xx 202x [PO: insert date 12 years after the date of entry into force].
Amendment 534 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 1
Article 19 – paragraph 1
1. The ESAs, through the Joint Committee and in consultation with ECB and ENISA, shall prepare a joint report assessing the feasibility of further centralisation of incident reporting that would replace all pre-existing reporting through the establishment of a single EU Hub for major ICT-related incident reporting by financial entities. The report shall explore ways to facilitate the flow of ICT-related incident reporting, reduce associated costs and underpin thematic analyses with a view to enhancing supervisory convergence.
Amendment 545 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 1
Article 20 – paragraph 1
1. Upon receipt of a report as referred to in Article 17(1) and (1a), the competent authority shall acknowledge receipt of notification and shall as quickly as possible provide all necessary feedback or guidance to the financial entity, in particular to discuss remedies at the level of the entity or ways to minimise adverse impact across sectors and also provide appropriately anonymised feedback, insight and intelligence to all relevant financial entities where it could be beneficial, based on any major incident reports they receive.
Amendment 546 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 20 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. The ESAs shall, through the Joint Committee, report yearlyevery six months on an anonymised and aggregated basis on the ICT-related incident and cyber threat notifications received from competent authorities in accordance with Article17(1) and 17(1.1), setting out at least the number of ICT-related major incidents and significant cyber threats, their nature, impact on the operations of financial entities or customers, costs and remedial actions taken.
Amendment 551 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 3
Article 21 – paragraph 3
3. Financial entities shall follow a risk-based approach when conducting the digital operational resilience testing programme referred toas defined in paragraph 1, taking into account the evolving landscape of ICT risks, any specific risks to which the financial entity is or might be exposed, the criticality of information assets and of services provided, as well as any other factor the financial entity deems appropriate.
Amendment 555 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1
Article 22 – paragraph 1
1. The digital operational resilience testing programme referred to in Article 21 shall provide for the execution of a full range of appropriate tests, including vulnerability assessments and scans, open source analyses, network security assessments, gap analyses, physical security reviews, questionnaires and scanning software solutions, source code reviews where feasible, scenario-based tests, compatibility testing, performance testing, end-to-end testing or penetration testingon the basis of guidelines already developed and implemented by the ESAs and national competent authorities in their respective areas of competence, as well as new and updated guidelines developed after the entry into force of this Regulation.
Amendment 564 #
2020/0266(COD)
At the end of the test, after reports and remediation planthe financial entity and the external testers shave bell provide to the competent agreed, the financial entity and uthority or, in the case of ICT third-party service providers entering into contractual arrangements withe external testers shall provide to the competent authoritydirectly, to the Lead Overseers, a confidential summary of the test results and the documentation confirming that the threat led penetration testing has been conducted in accordance with the requirements. Competent authorities shall validate the documentation and issue an attestationissue an attestation confirming that the test was performed in accordance with the requirements based on the documentation in order to allow for mutual recognition of threat led penetration tests between competent authorities.
Amendment 567 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 23 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. Financial entities shall either contract testers in accordance with Article 24 or use internal testing teams, provided they operate at arms' length and are independent from the rest of the financial entity, for the purposes of undertaking threat led penetration testing.
Amendment 569 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 23 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Amendment 575 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
Article 23 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. EBA, ESMA and EIOPA shall, in co-operation with ENISA and after consulting the ECB and taking into account relevant frameworks in the Union which apply to intelligence-based penetration tests, by taking into account guidelines issued before the entry into force of this Regulation, develop draft regulatory technical standards to specify further:
Amendment 576 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 4 – point c
Article 23 – paragraph 4 – point c
(c) the type of supervisory cooperation needed for the implementation and to facilitate full mutual recognition of threat led penetration testing in the context of financial entities which operate in more than one Member State, to allow an appropriate level of supervisory involvement and a flexible implementation to cater for specificities of financial sub- sectors or local financial markets..
Amendment 577 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Article 23 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
The ESAs shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by [OJ: insert date 26 months before the date of entry into force].
Amendment 578 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 23 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Until the entry into force of this Regulation, and the development and adoption of regulatory technical standards specified in Article 23 (4), financial entities shall follow those relevant guidelines and frameworks in the Union which apply to intelligence-based penetration tests, as these will continue to apply when this Regulation comes into force.
Amendment 581 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 24 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) are certified by an accreditation body in a Member State or are certified by a well-established accreditation body in a third country or adhere to formal codes of conduct or ethical frameworks;
Amendment 589 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – introductory part
Article 25 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – introductory part
4. As part of their ICT risk management framework, financial entities shall maintain and update at entity level and, at sub-consolidated and consolidated levels, a Register of Information in relation to all contractual arrangements on the use of ICT services provided by ICT third- party service providers. Where available, financial entities shall follow the guidelines and other measures issued by the ESAs and competent authorities until the entry into force of the implementing technical standards referred in Article 25(10). Where relevant, the register of information may be constituted by records pursuant to Article 30 of Regulation (EU) 2016/79.
Amendment 590 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 25 – paragraph 1 – point 6
6. Financial entities may only enter into contractual arrangements with ICT third-party service providers that comply with high, appropriate and t security standards. The latest information security standardstandards shall also be considered when determining whether the information standards in place are appropriate.
Amendment 596 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 1 – point 8 – introductory part
Article 25 – paragraph 1 – point 8 – introductory part
8. Financial entities shall ensure that contractual arrangements on the use of ICT services are terminatedmay be wholly terminated, if no rectification is possible, and partially terminated, if a rectification is possible, at least under the following circumstances:
Amendment 601 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 1 – point 8 – point c
Article 25 – paragraph 1 – point 8 – point c
(c) ICT third-party service provider’s evidenced weaknesses inpertaining to its overall ICT risk management of its contract with the financial entity and in particular in the way it ensures the security and integrity of confidential, personal or otherwise sensitive data or non-personal information;
Amendment 602 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 1 – point 8 – point d
Article 25 – paragraph 1 – point 8 – point d
(d) verifiable circumstances where the competent authority demonstrably can no longer effectively supervise the financial entity as a result of the respective contractual arrangement.
Amendment 608 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 1 – point 9 – introductory part
Article 25 – paragraph 1 – point 9 – introductory part
9. Financial entities shall put in place exit strategies, to be reviewed periodically, in order to take into account risks that may emerge at the level of ICT third-party service provider, in particular a possible failure of the latter, a deterioration of the quality of the functions provided, any business disruption due to inappropriate or failed provision of services or material risk arising in relation to the appropriate and continuous deployment of the function.
Amendment 616 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 26 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. Where the contractual arrangement on the use of ICT services concerning critical or important functions includes the possibility that an ICT third-party service provider further sub-contracts a critical or important function to other ICT third-party service providers, financial entities shall weigh benefits and risks that may arise in connection with such possible sub- contracting, in particular in the case of an ICT sub-contractor established in a third- country.
Amendment 617 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 26 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Where contractual arrangements on the use of ICT services concerning critical or important functions are concluded with an ICT third-party service provider established in a third-country, financial entities shall consider relevant, at least the following factors:
Amendment 619 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 1
Article 27 – paragraph 1
1. The rights and obligations of the financial entity and of the ICT third-party service provider shall be clearly allocated and set out in a writing. The full contract, which includes the services level agreements, shall be documented in one written documentwriting and be available to the parties on paper or in a downloadable and accessible format.
Amendment 620 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 27 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. TheFinancial entities and ICT third party providers shall ensure that contractual arrangements on the use of ICT services shall include at least the following:
Amendment 622 #
2020/0266(COD)
2. The contractual arrangements on the use of ICT services concerning critical and important functions shall include at least the following:
Amendment 624 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 27 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) the locations(s), namely the regions or countries, where the contracted or sub- contracted functions and ICT services are to be provided and where data is to be processed, including the storage location, and the requirement for the ICT third-party service provider to notify in advance the financial entity if it envisages changing such locations; (s).
Amendment 626 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 27 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) provisions on accessibility, availability, integrity, securconfidentiality and protection of data including personal data and on ensuring access, recover and return in an easily accessible format of personal and non- personal data processed by the financial entity in the case of insolvency, resolution or discontinuation of the business operations of the ICT third-party service provider;
Amendment 633 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 2 – point h – point i a (new)
Article 27 – paragraph 2 – point h – point i a (new)
i a) the obligation to allow competent authorities to have access to all contractual arrangements;
Amendment 637 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 2 – point j
Article 27 – paragraph 2 – point j
(j) termination rights and related minimum notices period for the termination of the contract, in accordance with competent and resolution authorities’ expectations;
Amendment 639 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 2 – point k – point i
Article 27 – paragraph 2 – point k – point i
(i) during which the ICT third-party service provider will continue providing the respective functions or services with a view to reduce the risk of disruptions at the financial entity or to ensure its effective resolution and restructuring;
Amendment 641 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 2 – point k a (new)
Article 27 – paragraph 2 – point k a (new)
(k a) the processing of personal data by the ICT-third party service provider is in conformity with Regulation (EU) 2016/679;
Amendment 643 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 27 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Competent authorities shall be able to access the contractual arrangements.
Amendment 658 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 2 – point f a (new)
Article 28 – paragraph 2 – point f a (new)
(f a) the materiality and importance of the relevant service provided by the ICT third-party service provider.
Amendment 675 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 9
Article 28 – paragraph 9
9. Financial entities shall not make use ofrefrain from using an ICT third-party service provider established in a third country that would be designated as critical pursuant to point (a) of paragraph 1 if it were establisheddoes not establish a subsidiary in the Union.
Amendment 707 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 4
Article 31 – paragraph 4
4. The Lead Overseer may, in the case of whole or partial non-compliance with the appropriate measures that would need to be taken in accordance with points (a),(b) or (c) of paragraph 1, within 60 calendar days, decide to impose a periodic penalty payment to compel the critical ICT third-party service provider to comply with points (a), (b) and (c) of paragraph 1.
Amendment 709 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 7
Article 31 – paragraph 7
7. Penalty payments shall be of an administrative nature and shall be enforceable. Enforcement shall be governed by the rules of civil procedure in force in the Member State on the territory of which inspections and access shall be carried out. Courts of the Member State concerned shall have jurisdiction over complaints related to irregular conduct of enforcement. The amounts of the penalty payments shall be allocated to the general budget of the European Union. Such penalty payments shall only be imposed as a last resort in the event that the ICT third-party service provider fails to comply despite other reasonable measures being taken.
Amendment 712 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 1
Article 32 – paragraph 1
1. The Lead Overseer may by simple request or by decision require the critical ICT third-party providers to provide all information that is necessary for the Lead Overseer to carry out its duties under this Regulation, including all relevant business or operational documents, contracts, policies documentation, ICT security audit reports, ICT-related incident reports, as well as any information relating to parties to whom the critical ICT third-party provider has outsourced operational functions or activities. ICT third-party service providers shall only be required to provide that information in respect of financial entities subject to this Regulation who use the services for critical or important functions and shall give notice to the relevant financial entity of requests specific to that financial entity.
Amendment 720 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 2 – point e
Article 33 – paragraph 2 – point e
(e) request records of telephone and data traffic, in accordance with the principle of proportionality.
Amendment 724 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 4
Article 34 – paragraph 4
4. Inspections shall cover the full range of relevant ICT systems, networks, devices, information and data that the Lead Overseer deems appropriate and technologically relevant, either used for, or contributing to, the provision of services to financial entities.
Amendment 725 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 5
Article 34 – paragraph 5
5. Before any planned on-site visit, Lead Overseers shall give a reasonable notice to the critical ICT third-party service providers, unless such notice is not possible due to an emergency or crisis situation, or if it would lead to a situation where the inspection or audit would no longer be effective. On the occasion of an on-site visit, both the Lead Overseer and the ICT third-party service provider shall avoid and mitigate any disruption in services to clients of the ICT third-party service provider other than financial entities within the scope of this Regulation.
Amendment 728 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 1
Article 37 – paragraph 1
1. Within 30 calendar days after the receipt of the recommendations issued by Lead Overseers pursuant to point (d) of Article 31(1), which shall be simultaneously copied to the financial entities serviced by the latter critical ICT third-party service providers shall notify the Lead Overseer whether they intend to follow those critical recommendations. For non-critical recommendations, the time period may be extended by up to 45 days. Lead Overseers shall immediately transmit this information to competent authorities.
Amendment 734 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 3
Article 37 – paragraph 3
3. Competent authorities may, in accordance with Article 44, as a measure of last resort, require financial entities to temporarily suspend, either in part or completely, the use or deployment of a service provided by the critical ICT third- party provider until the risks identified in the recommendations addressed to critical ICT third-party providers have been addressed. Where necessary, they may require financial entities to terminate, in part or completely, the relevant contractual arrangements concluded with the critical ICT third-party service providers, after considering risks and mitigating measures and following the defined exit strategies put in place by the financial entity. Following the request for termination, the competent authorities shall allow sufficient time for financial entities to adjust their contractual arrangements with ICT third-party service providers in such a way as to not jeopardise digital operational resilience.
Amendment 739 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 4 – point d a (new)
Article 37 – paragraph 4 – point d a (new)
(d a) whether the suspension or termination introduces a discontinuity risk for the business operations of the customer of the critical ICT third-party provider.
Amendment 741 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 40 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Financial entities may exchange amongst themselveshall, whenever possible and deemed appropriate, exchange amongst themselves and ICT third-party service providers cyber threat information and intelligence, including indicators of compromise, tactics, techniques, and procedures, cyber security alerts and configuration tools, to the extent that such information and intelligence sharing:
Amendment 742 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 40 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) aims at enhancing the digital operational resilience of financial entities and ICT third-party service providers, in particular through raising awareness in relation to cyber threats, limiting or impeding the cyber threats’ ability to spread, supporting financial entities’ range of defensive capabilities, threat detection techniques, mitigation strategies or response and recovery stages;
Amendment 743 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 40 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) takes places within trusted communities of financial entities and ICT third-party service providers;
Amendment 744 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 2
Article 40 – paragraph 2
2. For the purpose of paragraph 1, a database for storing information at Union level shall be created. For the purpose of point (c) of paragraph 1, the information sharing arrangements shall define the conditions for participation and, where appropriate, shall set out the details on the involvement of public authorities and the capacity in which the latter may be associated to the information-sharing arrangements, as well as on operational elements, including the use of dedicated IT platforms.
Amendment 746 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 40 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Processing of personal data for the purposes of this Article is in accordance with point (f) of Article 6(1) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
Amendment 755 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 2
Article 48 – paragraph 2
2. The publication referred to in paragraph 1 shall include information on the type and nature of the breach, exceptionally the identity of the persons responsible and the penalties imposed, taking into account the need to avoid jeopardising the stability of financial markets or the pursuit of an ongoing criminal investigation. It may defer its publication until all reasons for non-publication cease to exist.
Amendment 758 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 6
Article 48 – paragraph 6
6. Competent authorities shall ensure that any publication referred to in paragraphs 1 to 4and 2 shall remain on their official website for at least five years after its publication. Personal data contained in the publication shall only be kept on the official website of the competent authority for the period which is necessary in accordance with the applicable data protection rules.
Amendment 759 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 50 – paragraph 2
Article 50 – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Articles 28(3) and 38(2) shall be conferred on the Commission for a period of fivthree years from [PO: insert date 53 years after the date of entry into force of this Regulation].
Amendment 761 #
2020/0266(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 56 – paragraph 2
Article 56 – paragraph 2
It shall apply from [PO: insert date - 1236 months after the date of entry into force].
Amendment 27 #
2020/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) Regulation (EU) 2017/1129 of the European Parliament and of the Council14 lays down requirements for the drawing up, approval and distribution of the prospectus to be published when securities are offered to the public or admitted to trading on a regulated market in the Union. As part of the measures to help issuers to recover from the economic shock resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic, targeted amendments to the prospectus regime are necessary. Such amendments should enable issuers and financial intermediaries to reduce costs and free up resources for the recovery phase in the immediate aftermath of the crisis, while taking full account of how the crisis has affected the present situation and the future prospects of economic and financial entities specifically as a result of the health emergency. _________________ 14Regulation (EU) 2017/1129 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 June 2017 on the prospectus to be published when securities are offered to the public or admitted to trading on a regulated market, and repealing Directive 2003/71/EC (OJ L 168, 30.6.2017, p. 12).
Amendment 33 #
2020/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) In order to swiftly address the severe economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, it is important to introduce measures to facilitate investments in the real economy, allow for a rapid recapitalisation of companies in the Union and enable issuers to tap into public markets at an early stage in the recovery process. In order to achieve those objectives, it is appropriate to create a new short-form prospectus (‘EU Recovery prospectus’) that while also addressing the economic and financial issues specifically raised by the COVID-19 pandemic is easy to produce for issuers, easy to understand for investors, especially for retail investors, who want to finance them and easy to scrutinise and approve for competent authorities.
Amendment 37 #
2020/0155(COD)
(5) Companies that have had shares admitted to trading on a regulated market or traded on an SME Growth market continuously for at least the last 18 months before the offer of shares or admission to trading, should have complied with periodic and ongoing disclosure requirements under Regulation (EU) No 596/2014 of the European Parliament and the Council15 , Directive 2004/109/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council16 or Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2017/56517 . Hence, many of the required content of a prospectus will already be publicly available and investors will be trading on the basis of that information. Therefore, the EU Recovery prospectus should only be used for secondary issuances and should only focus on essential information that investors need to make informed investment decisions, while also addressing the question regarding how the COVID-19 pandemic has affected the business since the primary issuance was launched and the pandemic’s future anticipated impact on the business activities. _________________ 15Regulation (EU) No 596/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 April 2014 on market abuse (market abuse regulation) and repealing Directive 2003/6/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Commission Directives 2003/124/EC, 2003/125/EC and 2004/72/EC (OJ L 173, 12.6.2014, p. 1). 16 Directive 2004/109/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 December 2004 on the harmonisation of transparency requirements in relation to information about issuers whose securities are admitted to trading on a regulated market and amending Directive 2001/34/EC (OJ L 390, 31.12.2004, p. 38). 17Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2017/565 of 25 April 2016 supplementing Directive 2014/65/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards organisational requirements and operating conditions for investment firms and defined terms for the purposes of that Directive (OJ L 87, 31.3.2017, p. 1).
Amendment 39 #
2020/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) The EU Recovery prospectus should include a short-form summary as a useful source of information for investors, in particular retail investors. That summary should be a self-contained part of the EU Recovery prospectus and should focus on key information that would enable investors to decide which offers and admissions to trading of securities to study further by reviewing the EU Recovery prospectus as a whole to take their decision. That key information in the summary should include information covering specifically the economic and financial impact of COVID-19 as well as the anticipated future impact.
Amendment 56 #
2020/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EU) 2017/1129
Article 7 – paragraph 12a – point b
Article 7 – paragraph 12a – point b
(b) written in a language and a style that facilitate the understanding of the information, in particular, in a language that is clear, non-technical, concise and comprehensible for investors, especially non-professional investors.
Amendment 59 #
2020/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EU) 2017/1129
Article 7 – paragraph 12a – point c – subparagraph (ii)
Article 7 – paragraph 12a – point c – subparagraph (ii)
(ii) key information on the issuer, including a specific reference of no less than 400 words to the economic and financial impact of the COVID-19 pandemic;
Amendment 62 #
2020/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EU) 2017/1129
Article 7 – paragraph 12a – point c – subparagraph (iv)
Article 7 – paragraph 12a – point c – subparagraph (iv)
(iv) key information on the offer of securities to the public or the admission to trading on a regulated market or both, including key information on the past dividend policy.;
Amendment 63 #
2020/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) 2017/1129
Article 14a – paragraph 1
Article 14a – paragraph 1
1. The following issuers may choose to draw up an EU Recovery prospectus under the simplified regime set out in this Article in case of an offer of sharequity securities to the public or an admission to trading of shares on a regulated market:
Amendment 64 #
2020/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (UE) 2017/1129
Article 14a – paragraph 1– point a
Article 14a – paragraph 1– point a
(a) issuers whose shares have been admitted to trading on a regulated market continuously for at least the last 18 months and who issue sharequity securities fungible with existing shares which have been previously issued;
Amendment 66 #
2020/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (UE) 2017/1129
Article 14a – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 14a – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) issuers whose shares have been already traded on an SME Growth market continuously for at least the last 18 months, provided that a prospectus has been published for the offer of those sharequity securities, and who issue sharequity securities fungible with existing sharequity securities which have been previously issued.
Amendment 69 #
2020/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) 2017/1129
Article 14a – paragraph 2 – subparapgraph 1 – point (a)
Article 14a – paragraph 2 – subparapgraph 1 – point (a)
(a) the prospects of the issuer and the significant changes in the financial position of the issuer that have occurred since the end of the last financial year, if any; there shall be included a specific reference of not less than 400 words to the economic and financial impact of COVID-19 on the issuer and a statement regarding the anticipated future impact of same;
Amendment 72 #
2020/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) 2017/1129
Article 14a – paragraph 2 – subparapgraph 1 – point (b)
Article 14a – paragraph 2 – subparapgraph 1 – point (b)
(b) the essential information on the sharequity securities, the reasons for the issuance and its impact on the overall capital structure of the issuer, and the use of proceeds.
Amendment 75 #
2020/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation 2017/1129
Article 14a – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 14a – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
The information contained in the EU Recovery prospectus shall be written and presented in an easily analysable, concise and comprehensible form and shall enable investors, especially non-professional investors, to make an informed investment decision. The competent authority shall also take into account whether the issuer has disclosed the regulated information to the public pursuant to Directive 2004/109/EC, where applicable, Regulation (EU) No 596/2014 and, where applicable, information referred to in Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2017/565.
Amendment 84 #
2020/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point b
Regulation (EU) 2017/1129
Article 23 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 23 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Where the investors referred to in the first subparagraph of this paragraph have the right of withdrawal referred to in paragraph 2, the financial intermediary shall contact those investors within one working day after the publication of the supplement. To avoid situations where an investor would not qualify to receive information from the financial intermediary, the information on the supplement shall be made available on the issuer’s website.;
Amendment 90 #
2020/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8
Regulation (EU) 2017/1129
Article 47a – paragraph 1
Article 47a – paragraph 1
The regimes set out in Article 14a and Article 23 (2) and (3) expires on [18 months from the date of application of this Regulation].
Amendment 95 #
2020/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9
(b) an analysis of whether the EU Growth prospectus strikes a proper balance between investor protection and the reduction of administrative burdens for the persons entitled to use it. The analysis shall focus on the way by which references to the present and future financial and economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in EU Recovery prospectuses proved to be relevant and useful to investors;
Amendment 98 #
2020/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9
Regulation (UE) 1129/2017
Article 48 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 48 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) the number of EU Recovery prospectuses approved and an analysis of the evolution of such number as well as an estimate of the actual additional market capitalisation mobilised by such prospectuses at the point of issue;
Amendment 189 #
2020/0104(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) Past experiences have shown that investment is often drastically cut during crises. However, it is essential to support investment in this particular situation to speed up the recovery and strengthen long- term growth potential. Investing in green and digital technologies, capacities and processes aimed at assisting clean energy transition, boosting energy efficiency and security in housing and other key sectors of the economic arey important to achieve sustainable growth and help create jobs. It will also help make the Union more resilient and less dependent by diversifying key supply chains.
Amendment 322 #
2020/0104(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) The Facility’s general objective should be the promotion of upward economic, social and territorial cohesion. For that purpose, it should contribute to improving the resilience and adjustment capacity of the Member States, mitigating the social and economic impact of the crisis, and supporting the green and digital transitions aimed at achieving a climate neutral Europe by 2050, thereby restoring the growth potential of the economies of the Union in the aftermath of the crisis, fostering employment creation and to promoting sustainable growth.
Amendment 1290 #
2020/0104(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 5
Article 17 – paragraph 5
5. Where the Commission gives a negative assessment to a recovery and resilience plan, it shall communicate a duly justified and detailed assessment within four months of the submission of the proposal by the Member State.
Amendment 136 #
2020/0100(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2
Article 1 – paragraph 2
The Facility shall provide support benefitting Union territories facing serious social, environmental, educational, technical, geographical and economic challenges deriving from the transition process towards a climate-neutral economy of the Union by 2050.
Amendment 209 #
2020/0100(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the projects achieve measurable impact in addressing serious social, economic or environment, geographical, environmental, educational or technical challenges deriving from the transition process towards a climate-neutral economy and benefit territories identified in a territorial just transition plan, even if they are not located in those territories;
Amendment 60 #
2020/0066(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 a (new)
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 450 a (new)
Article 450 a (new)
(1a) The following article is inserted: " Article 450a In order to enhance the resilience of the financial sector and to strengthen its capacity to lend to the real economy in the actual crisis situation, credit institutions will suspend any kind of distribution until October 2021. Until this date, credit institutions will also suspend share buy- backs and excessive bonus payments. This paragraph will apply to institutions as defined in points (7), (16), (22) and (23) of Article 2 of Regulation (EU) No 468/2014 (ECB/2014/17).”
Amendment 106 #
2020/0006(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1
1. This Regulation establishes the Just Transition Fund (‘JTF’) to provide support to territories facing serious socio-economic and geographical challenges deriving from the transition process towards a climate- neutral economy of the Union by 2050.
Amendment 190 #
2020/0006(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1
1. This Regulation establishes the Just Transition Fund (‘JTF’) to provide support to territories facing serious socio-economic and geographical challenges deriving from the transition process towards a climate- neutral economy of the Union by 2050.
Amendment 262 #
2020/0006(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point d
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point d
(d) investments in the deployment of technology and infrastructures for affordable clean energy, in greenhouse gas emission reduction including investments in sustainable mobility and decarbonisation of the transport sector, energy efficiency andor renewable energy;
Amendment 92 #
2019/2213(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes the Commission’s proposals for the European Green Deal and the Sustainable Europe Investment Plan, notably the Just Transition Fund; stresses that these are deeply linked to the negotiations on the next MFF and therefore imply a strong and credible MFF; stresses that financing for any new initiatives should be calculated in addition to the Commission’s original proposal and thus result in higher MFF ceilings; further emphasis on the importance that such funding should take into account the needs of all EU regions, not least insular ones that often lag behind in benefitting from new EU funds;
Amendment 113 #
2019/2213(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Considers, therefore, that the whole 2021 budget must comply withntribute towards the 55 % GHG emissions reduction target, as requested in its resolution of 15 January 2020 on the European Green Deal, and with the social commitments made by the President of the Commission, in order to send the right signals to EU citizens and businesses;
Amendment 9 #
2019/2211(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Considers that the European Union needs a more sustainable growth model in order to respond to environmental, social, digital and demographic challenges; welcomes the European Green Deal as the new green growth strategy for Europe with sustainability, citizen well-being and social fairness at its core;
Amendment 27 #
2019/2211(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Underlines the importance of the European Semester as an instrument to ensure policy coordination; welcomes the increased focus on environmental sustainability and on the implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals in the Country Reports; insists that more needs to be done as regards the protection and upgrading of the European Social Model;
Amendment 50 #
2019/2211(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas inequality of income in the euro area has increased and poverty levels persist since the beginning of the financial crisis; whereas there are between 50 and 100 million people affected by energy poverty in Europe;
Amendment 53 #
2019/2211(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
B a. whereas the most recent Eurostat figures from 2018 show that 21.7% of the EU population or some 109 million people was at risk of poverty or social exclusion;
Amendment 55 #
2019/2211(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Considers that the Member States and regions have different starting points when it comes to the transition; considers that the Just Transition Mechanism should ensure an adequate, inclusive and fair transition for all including not least islands;
Amendment 63 #
2019/2211(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. having regard to the need for a European Climate Law with a legally binding goal of reaching net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 at the latest and an intermediate target of at least 65 % for 2030 and that climate targets need to be accompanied by a strong social strategy that takes into account the long- established EU priority of economic and social cohesion between its regions;
Amendment 101 #
2019/2211(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes the role of the European Green Deal as the EU’s new strategy defining ecological issues and the wellbeing of citizens as principal goals for the Union; notes, with regard to the scope of the European Semester, the inclusion of the SDGs and of the principles of the European Pillar of Social Rights (EPSR), which will require the adjustment of existing indicators and the creation of new ones to monitor the implementation of EU economic, environmental and social policies, as well as coherence between policy goals and budgetary means; notes the need to implement long-term planning to tackle climate change while preventing the widening of current socioeconomic cleavages within Europe;
Amendment 107 #
2019/2211(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Calls on European Institutions to assess whether EU methodologies for the evaluation of the economic and social performance of EU Member States as well as the targets applied under the Stability and Growth Pact are still up-to-date, given that the overall socioeconomic conditions both at national and European level have changed drastically since the time when they were first drafted;
Amendment 153 #
2019/2211(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Therefore reiterates its requests for a stronger EU policy aimed at creating a more concrete stimulus towards having the right conditions to acquire higher levels of public and private investment in the Union;
Amendment 170 #
2019/2211(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Endorses the conclusion of the European Fiscal Board (EFB) that the fiscal framework has not protected the quality of public expenditure, and welcomes the EFB’s proposal for a ‘golden rule’ to protect public investment; calls, therefore, for the reform of the Stability and Growth Pact and the introduction of a golden rule aimed at implementing sound fiscal policy on an equal footing with investment within the EU’s policy objectives; whereas this shit believes that this could cover the investment foreseen for the realisation of the Green Deal, the Digital Revolution, the SDGs and the EPSR Rights, including expenditure aimed at reducing poverty and inequality related to social protection, health services and long- term care, and education and training;
Amendment 199 #
2019/2211(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Calls for a European Green Industrial Strategy that is sensitive to the social, economic and geographical characteristics of the different regions of the EU;
Amendment 267 #
2019/2211(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Is concerned about the accelerating rise in house prices despite the persistent low levels of inflation in the euro area;
Amendment 270 #
2019/2211(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14 a. Therefore stresses the importance of wage increase at European level for reducing inequalities and supporting upward convergence of living standards; believes, therefore, that this wage increase should take the following format: an increase of 5 per cent in the minimum wage of all countries that have a minimum wage, while the minimum wage system, always adapted to national circumstances, is introduced in those countries that do not have it;
Amendment 277 #
2019/2211(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Recalls the importance of thean efficient but tailor-made regulation of the banking and financial sectors in order to prevent a new crisis; believes that such regulation must integrate the ecological situation; emphasises the importance of completing the Banking Union and the need to reform the European Stability Mechanism; emphasizes that this cannot be carried out on a one-size-fits-all basis, and that the practices and banking models followed in the smaller economies have to be evaluated with full regard to their particularities and their performance record;
Amendment 309 #
2019/2211(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. CallNotes the calls from various political fronts for qualified majority voting in Council on tax matters;
Amendment 319 #
2019/2211(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Calls for the systematic inclusion of tax matters in the Country Specific Recommendations (CSRs), with the aim of ensuring economic coherence across EU Member States as well as the fairness of EU tax systems; believes that the CSRs could ensure a fair balance between sources of revenue and should also include innovative elements aiming at promoting the Green Deal; further believes that they should also support Member States in tackling tax avoidance and aggressive tax planning;
Amendment 332 #
2019/2211(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17 a. Believes that the CSRs could aim at ensuring a fair balance between sources of revenue and should also include innovative elements aiming at promoting the Green Deal within the context of a stronger and a more cohesive European Union; further believes that they should also support Member States in their efforts towards tackling tax avoidance and aggressive tax planning;
Amendment 343 #
2019/2211(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Notes that the EU-28 employment rate currently stands at 73.1 % - the highest annual average ever recorded - while unemployment stands at 7.6 % in the euro area and 6.3 % in the EU as a whole; is concerned about the high level of unemployment rates in some of the euro area countries, whereby the highest level of unemployment is at 16.8%;
Amendment 376 #
2019/2211(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)
Paragraph 22 a (new)
22 a. Underlines that EU statistics show that 24% of children in the EU were at risk of poverty or social exclusion;
Amendment 377 #
2019/2211(INI)
22 b. Notes that 18.6% of our pensioners fall within risk of poverty or social exclusion; in this regard recommends that pension systems across the European Union are made inflation proof and that they ensure that pension payments really reflect the needs of elderly families;
Amendment 395 #
2019/2211(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Highlights the time constraints on the current European semester process, which form an obstacle to full debate and the proper involvement in the process of civil society organisations, social partners, EU regions with the EU bodies representing them, and eventually national parliaments and the EP, and contribute significantly to the lack of a sense of ownership and implementation; calls for the extension of the semester cycle to a biannual or triannual period, with the possibility of revision in case of major economic shocks;
Amendment 8 #
2019/2131(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas competition policy must benefit the consumer whileall EU citizens, especially those in a weak consumer position, while also defending European businesses, in particular SMEs, against unfair competition practices, both from within as well from outside Europe;
Amendment 22 #
2019/2131(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas competition policy must be tailored to tackle digital, ecological, industrial and social challenges, in line with the objectives of the Paris Agreement and the EU green deal priority;
Amendment 40 #
2019/2131(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Calls on the Commission to develop the influence of competition policy in the worldfurther develop its competition policy towards third countries, in particular by stepping up cooperation with the USA and China;
Amendment 56 #
2019/2131(INI)
3. Calls on the Commission to ensure reciprocity with third countries in public procurement and in investment policy, state aid, data protection and investment policy; all while paying particular attention to those least developed countries, which should not be harmed due to their inability to fulfil the reciprocity requirements;
Amendment 75 #
2019/2131(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls on the Commission to ensure the balanced application of State aid control to European operators in order to avoid asymmetries with their foreign competitors, who are not subject to itat state aid control is applied equally to European and non-European operators and to prevent distortion of competition by firms receiving government subsidies abroad;
Amendment 83 #
2019/2131(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls on the Commission to adopt a more favourable approach to industrial cooperation in order to foster the emergence of European leaders that are globally competitive; stresses however that such drive should not come at the detriment of small and medium size actors that form the backbone of the European economy;
Amendment 112 #
2019/2131(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. Requests the Commission to carry out a preliminary study on the concentration of media ownership in Europe, also in the context of MNCs buying out European Mediaproviders;
Amendment 133 #
2019/2131(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Calls on the Commission to review merger rules and strengthen antitrust action, taking into account the effects of market and network power on individuals, society and democratic values associated with both personal and financial data; proposes that every merger in the market for such data should be subject to prior monitoring, regardless of thresholds;
Amendment 145 #
2019/2131(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Stresses that the buying-out of start- ups by dominant players operating according to business models, involving constant tracking, profiling and targeting of individuals which are incompatible with core European values and fundamental rights, dries up innovation and threatens sovereignty, and calls on the Commission to reverse the burden of proof with regard to such buy- outs;
Amendment 155 #
2019/2131(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 b (new)
Paragraph 9 b (new)
9 b. Stresses that concentration in digital markets for example for social media in favour of a few non-European companies has contributed to the dissemination of misinformation, online manipulation and the undermining of social cohesion and trust in democratic institutions;
Amendment 198 #
2019/2131(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Encourages the Commission to increasecontinue with its work towards protecting freedom of choice for consumers and to set up a European consumer protection authority with the aim to strengthen and expand the role of the European Consumer Network;
Amendment 222 #
2019/2131(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Stresses the damaging effect resulting from the slowness of the application of antitrust rules; stresses the financial and structural risk to which some actors are exposed if they initiate lengthy and costly proceedings; calls on the Commission to consider setting deadlines which take into account the economic timeframe of businesses;
Amendment 245 #
2019/2131(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 b (new)
Paragraph 18 b (new)
18 b. Reaffirms the need for the EC Directorate General for Competition to be fully equipped also with experts on artificial intelligence and tech engineer’s specialists in order to fully understand and evaluate the remedies that are presented by the dominant technology companies with the aim to ensure fair competition in the digital sector;
Amendment 256 #
2019/2131(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19 a. Reiterates its alarm at the concentration in the European food supply chain and emphasises that European consumers and small-scale farmers are those most negatively affected through a concentrated food market structure;
Amendment 283 #
2019/2131(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21 a. With regard to the food sector, calls on the Commission to guarantee fair competition and greater transparency in supermarket and hypermarkets chains commercial practices; European farmers should receive a fair price for their products; stresses the need for the Commission to look at hypermarkets powers in the distribution chain and commercial practices in placing competing products on the shelves;
Amendment 285 #
2019/2131(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21 a. Repeats its calls on the Commission to give particular attention to the delivery of services of general economic interest (SGEI) including energy, transport and telecommunication, when applying EU state aid rules, especially in the context of state support dedicated to isolated, remote or peripheral regions in the Union;
Amendment 286 #
2019/2131(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 b (new)
Paragraph 21 b (new)
21 b. Calls on the Commission to devote special attention to supermarkets and hypermarkets bargaining powers with their clients and suppliers; notes that supermarkets and hypermarkets actions often serve their own interests and not necessarily those of their customers; in particular, hypermarkets sovereignty may permit deliberate damage to brand value, restrict product choice, cut corners on their own brands quality, limit price comparability, restrict innovation and allow for the manipulation of prices to distort category price architectures in their favour;
Amendment 300 #
2019/2131(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 b (new)
Paragraph 22 b (new)
22 b. Calls on the Commission to bring forward a proposal requiring competition, data protection and consumer authorities to cooperate proactively with each other, including in enforcement cases raising questions of compliance with more than one area of law; in particular, the competition authorities should carefully assess antitrust and merger cases where there may be negative impact on both the interests of consumers and the democratic rights of citizens;
Amendment 310 #
2019/2131(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)
Paragraph 24 a (new)
24 a. Insists on a more regular and transparent exchange with Directorate General for competition and its responsible Commissioner beside the existing structural dialogue inter- institutional agreement; notes that the Economic committee competition working group could be an appropriate place for a deeper and more detailed cooperation; stresses that the European Parliament representing directly the500 million EU citizens should be considered a privilege partner for the Commission, precisely because competition has consumers at its heart;
Amendment 332 #
2019/2131(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28 a (new)
Paragraph 28 a (new)
28 a. Recognizes that preventing distortion of competition as the paramount objective of EU competition policy requires a measure of political independence for the Commission and public scrutiny of lobbying efforts in all EU institutions, reiterates calls for an enhanced Transparency Register;
Amendment 59 #
2019/2130(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Notes that the full implementation of the Banking Union is necessary to deliver more financing to the economy – both to households and companies, specially SMEs –, promoting investment and job creation;
Amendment 92 #
2019/2130(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Notes however that the prospect of low risk and low profitability, the deterioration of the macroeconomic scenario and geopolitical tensions as well as cyber risks and data security are among the major challenges the EU banking sector is facing;
Amendment 98 #
2019/2130(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Underlines the crucial role of the banking sector in channelling funding into sustainable and socially responsible investments and enabling the transition to a climate-neutral economy, in which the growing interest of small depositors for such sustainable investments will be key;
Amendment 105 #
2019/2130(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Underlines the importance of protecting consumer rights, namely regarding banking fees, the transparency of products costs, profitability and risks; calls, in this respect, on the European Banking Authority to devote more focus in fulfilling its mandate on properly collecting, analysing and reporting on consumer trends, and also on the review and coordination of financial literacy and education initiatives by the competent authorities;
Amendment 130 #
2019/2130(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Underlines the fact that financial markets are strongly interrelated; stresses the importance of preparedness of bBanking supervisors for all possible outcomes of Brexit as well as the importance of shared and connected financial regulations between the EU and the UK after Brexit, bearing in mind that this is not a substitute forcomplements the preparedness of private actors themselves;
Amendment 145 #
2019/2130(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8 a. Warns that the one-size-fits-it-all solution that has prevailed in the Banking Union is growingly ill-suited for the realities in some Member States; notes in that respect that Banking Union rules are not uniformly beneficial and that small and medium banks have been particularly bearing the negative consequences of new extensive regulation; further stresses the crucial importance of such non-systemic banks, whose lower profitability risks impacting on small national markets;
Amendment 151 #
2019/2130(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Notes that the ratio of non- performing loans (NPLs) held by significant institutions has fallen by more than half from the start of ECB banking supervision, in November 2014, to June 2019; underlines the need to protect customers’ rights in the context of NPL transactions and calls on Member States to put measures in place to ensure that borrowers, who might be in already vulnerable financial situations, are not subject to aggressive and unfair treatment and practices by poorly-regulated debt buyers and collectors;
Amendment 187 #
2019/2130(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Notes that innovative financial technologies are profoundly transforming the financial sector, including banking and payment services; highlights the need to address the challenges posed by these new technologies, such as ensuring sustainable business models, a level playing field in terms of regulation and supervision, and cybersecurity; underlines the financial institutions’ responsibility in ensuring clients’ data protection and security in accordance with EU law;
Amendment 162 #
2019/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Notes that the negative effects on banks’ net interest income have been partly counterbalanced so far by the benefits from more bank lending and lower costs for provisions and losses;
Amendment 170 #
2019/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Underlines that very low or negative interest rates offer opportunities to consumers, workers and borrowers, who can benefit from stronger economic momentum, lower unemployment and lower borrowing costs but is aware that savers, especially pensioners depending on their savings to supplement their pension income, have been negatively affected;
Amendment 240 #
2019/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Is extremely worried about the risks due to the delay in setting up the banking union, and calls for the swift completion of the banking union with a fully mutualised European deposit guarantee scheme; is further worried about the situation of small and medium banks, which face increased operating costs due to the introduction of new and necessary regulatory measures, leading them to impose further restrictions and financial burdens on SMEs and start-ups; asks the Board of the ECB to take into account this increasingly salient problem, especially in small EU Member States, where such banks are occupying key business niches, neglected by big banks;
Amendment 246 #
2019/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Calls for the capital markets union (CMU) project to be accelerated in order to deepen financial integration, with a view to improving resilience to shocks and making the transmission of monetary policy across the monetary union more effective; is concerned that whereas the CMU project was designed to make European private investment more reliant on capital markets and less on bank lending, the exact opposite has been achieved as of now;
Amendment 297 #
2019/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Recalls that the nominations of Executive Board members should be prepared carefully, with full transparency and together with Parliament in line with the Treaties; calls on the Council to draw up both a geographical and a gender- balanced shortlist for all current and upcoming vacancies and to share it with Parliament, thus allowing it to play a more meaningful advisory role in the appointment process; regrets that to date no satisfactory progress has been made;
Amendment 301 #
2019/2129(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20a. While acknowledging that the bank has been over the last decade experiencing a widening of its functions and the need for more personnel employed under different conditions, to carry out the tasks set for it, requests that the human resource problems that have arisen will be solved fairly, transparently and with speed for all members of staff;
Amendment 6 #
2019/2126(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Highlights the importance of the activities of the European Investment Bank (EIB) to increase the current levels of investment in the EU, which arehowever remain below historical averages, and insufficient to fulfil the EU’s sustainability, social and innovation ambitions; stresses that in order to achieve these ambitions, more risk- taking by the EIB , especially in those sectors and regions that fail to attract outside investment to their side,may be necessary in parallel to increasing equity and the development of expertise in innovative funding instruments; calls for adequate capitalisation of the EIB to allow for the use of innovative instruments in the financing of projects to trigger new meaningful investments with substantial potential sustainability, social and innovation gains;
Amendment 35 #
2019/2126(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Reiterates the need to reduce the inequalities in the geographical distribution of EIB financing, given that 57% went to six Member States in 2018; urgently calls for a fair and transparent geographical distribution of projects and investment, with a special focus on less-developed regions and those regions trailing behind in investment levels;
Amendment 44 #
2019/2126(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Stresses that the key quantitative target of the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) of mobilising EUR 500 billion of additional private and public investment should be replaced by measurable targets on sustainability, geographical coverage and social impact in future investment strategies; calls on the EIB to increase the share of EFSI and InvestEU financing to projects that substantially contribute to the EU’s sustainability and social objectives; calls on the Commission to ensure that InvestEU’s sustainability-proofing methodologies are fully consistent with the EU’s sustainability objectives;
Amendment 69 #
2019/2126(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls for the European Investment Fund (EIF) to be fully integrated into all EIB climate measures; calls on the EIF to give greater priority to innovation needs for the transition to a climate-neutral Europe; further requests the EIB to clarify whether it has the required expertise in the area of green investment;
Amendment 74 #
2019/2126(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Requests additionally that an outside review of the cost effectiveness of the EIB’s investment efforts during the last ten years be carried out, not least from the perspective of whether and how the EIB’s operations created significant value added that was directly relevant to the European Union’s growth and consolidation policies.
Amendment 105 #
2019/2126(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Welcomes the new EIB energy lending policy and the example it sets for other banks; regretnotes that exceptions are applicable to the approval of gas projects until the end of 2021 and that support for gas projects planned for the transport of low-carbon gases is set to continue; calls for this policy to be reviewed in the medium term (by the start of 2022) to close the gaps in gas infrastructure to bring it in line with the European Sustainable Finance Taxonomy and the European Green Pact, and to be consistent with the development of appropriate new external actions in the EU;
Amendment 145 #
2019/2126(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)
Paragraph 22 a (new)
22 a. In this context questions the EIB’s investment appeal towards small businesses and asks whether it is being too restricted by its limitations on funding projects with a significant risk component;
Amendment 157 #
2019/2126(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Urges the EIB, the largest multilateral lender in the world, to maintain its leading role in future EU financing mechanisms for third countries; opposes the recent initiatives to encourage the EIB to be more active in defence and security, migration management and border control;
Amendment 195 #
2019/2126(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 a (new)
Paragraph 30 a (new)
30 a. Requests additionally that an outside review of the cost effectiveness of the EIB’s investment efforts during the last ten years be carried out, not least from the perspective of whether and how the EIB’s operations created significant value added that was directly relevant to the European Union’s growth and consolidation policies;
Amendment 9 #
2019/2110(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas the vast discrepancies within the predicted growth will continue to fuel regional and social stratification within the EU;
Amendment 11 #
2019/2110(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas the drop in unemployment rates keeps on being sustained by a surge in low quality jobs based on poor working conditions, including short fixed term contracts, that leave a mass of the European population at risk of poverty;
Amendment 44 #
2019/2110(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Is therefore concerned about the low growth potentials compared to other regions in the world in recent decades and believes that a stronger policy focus needs to be provided towards strengthening the innovative element of European industry as well as the purchasing power of consumers in the internal market;
Amendment 62 #
2019/2110(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Recognises that the average level of debt-to-GDP is projected to decline; also notes, however, that the average level still remains significantly above the level required by the Stability and Growth Pact; points out the possibility of rising debt service costs; underlines, therefore, the importance of bringing down overall debt levels, in line with EU fiscal rules; outlines, however, that lowering debt levels in EU countries should not be considered as an end goal in itself; and therefore believes that the time has come for the overall targets of the SGP, drawn up under economic conditions that relate to the situation some forty years ago need to be critically evaluated in the light of experience and the more recent updates of academic scholarship in the economic field;
Amendment 76 #
2019/2110(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Notes, accordingly, with great concern that the average deficit levels appear to be increasing again and that in some Member States deficits above 3 % are projected; underlines that a significant part of the expected expansion originates in countries with high government debt-to-GDP ratios; requires that a more in-depth analysis, taking into consideration the repercussions of EMU, EU trade agreements, and the emergency of irregular migration, should be undertaken in order to get a better picture of the cause behind the recurrent increase of debt in these countries, and how this can be tackled effectively;
Amendment 90 #
2019/2110(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. RegretNotes that the aggregate fiscal stance appears to be mildly expansionary in 2019, while emphasising that the European Fiscal Board considers a neutral stance as more appropriate; believes that in the current situation, a mildly expansionary fiscal stance is appropriate and may indeed prove to be too prudent;
Amendment 102 #
2019/2110(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Underlines that the fiscal stances at national and euro area level must balance the long-term sustainability of public finances, economic growth and social cohesion in full compliance with the Stability and Growth Pact, respecting its provisions made for flexibility, with short- term macroeconomic stabilisation;
Amendment 114 #
2019/2110(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Underlines that reforms which increase competition in product markets, promote resource efficiency and, improve the business environment, strengthen purchase power in the internal market, provide for better educational facilities not least in the digital area, as well as quality of institutions, including an effective justice system, and quality and efficiency of tax collection, are essential for achieving greater economic resilience for the euro area and Member States; emphasises in this context the importance of the single market and the need for its further deepening;
Amendment 136 #
2019/2110(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
Supports shifting the tax burden away from labour and strengthening education and training systems and investment in skills; stresses the effectivenessimpact of flexible labour market policies, especially in the context of the traditional European agreement for a social market economy on which Europe has thrived for decades;
Amendment 148 #
2019/2110(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Calls on Member States to support and implement EU actions to combat Aggressive Tax Planningencourage tax transparency and coordination among Member States; notes that one size fits all arrangements in the tax field serve to heighten the advantages of regions and states which benefit from a superior geographical situation or which have superior endowments so that tax competition is necessary to enable EU Member States from the periphery or with limited endowments to stay in the competitive race;
Amendment 182 #
2019/2110(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
Agrees that the economic upswing needs to be supported by public and private investment, particularly in research innovation, ands well as cleaner energy and transport infrastructure; notes that there is still an investment gap in the euro area; welcomes the fact that in some Member States investments already exceed the pre- crisis level, and regrets that in others investment is still lagging behind or is not picking up at the necessary speed;
Amendment 230 #
2019/2110(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Notes that more than two thirds of the CSRs issued until 2018 have been implemented with at least some progress; regrets, however, that there is evidence of backtracking on elements of major reforms adopted in the past, and is concerned about Member States’ commitment to the CSRs, given that progress on the current recommendations is worse than in previous years;
Amendment 247 #
2019/2110(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. WelcomNotes the particular progress that has been achieved on recommendations concerning financial services, legislation governing labour relations and employment protection;
Amendment 21 #
2019/2028(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Strongly believes that it is imperative to rise to the climate challenge in a socially responsible way that boosts employment and strengthens competitiveness; welcomes the powerful calls for action made by EU leaders at the recent UN climate change summit and the commitments made recently by several Member States to ramp up spending in areas such as energy efficiency and transport and energy infrastructure;
Amendment 108 #
2019/2028(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Recalls that, given the persisting security threats and the deterioration of the security environment at the EU’s Eastern borders as well as the challenging reforms Eastern European partners are confronted with, it is important to provide sufficient funding in support of stability, democracy and confidence-building and to step up efforts to support poverty reduction and economic development in the region; further recalls that the countries of the Southern neighbourhood are facing enormous pressure, including the conflicts in Syria and Libya, the rise of extremism and the related refugee and migrant movements, that equally needs to be countered by sufficient funding;
Amendment 22 #
2019/2001(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Considers, therefore, that the EU budget for next year should define clear political priorities and enable the Union to further invest in innovation and research capacities for future solutions, boost competitiveness, socioeconomic cohesion, and economic growth, ensure a safe, secure and peaceful Europe, strengthen citizens’ work and living conditions, and bolster the Union in its fight against environmental challenges and climate change;
Amendment 29 #
2019/2001(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 2
Subheading 2
Innovation and research for future solutions: supporting economic growth andan inclusive and long term economic growth in order to accompany mutations and to boost competitiveness
Amendment 33 #
2019/2001(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Stresses that the transition from Horizon 2020 to Horizon Europe must be smooth to ensure stability for businesses, research facilities and academia; underlines the importance of Europe’s claim to leadership in key technologies in areas such as space, healthcare, the environment, agriculture, safety and transportation; requests an increase in financial resources to ensure that research and innovation activities continue to provide solutions for Europe’s needs and challenges and competitiveness; is alarmed by the substantial underfunding of Horizon 2020 during the entire period, resulting in a low success rate for excellent applications;
Amendment 35 #
2019/2001(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Stresses the potential for economic growth stemming from the technological transformation and calls for the EU budget to have an appropriate role in supporting the digitalisation of European industry and the promotion of digital skills and entrepreneurship;
Amendment 39 #
2019/2001(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Welcomes the extension and enhancement of the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI); recalls that the EFSI guarantee fund has been financed partly at the expense of Horizon 2020 and the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF); underlines Parliament’s long- standing position that any new initiatives must be financed by new appropriations and not by redeployments; reiterates that the cuts in those programmes should be reversed as far as possible;
Amendment 61 #
2019/2001(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8 a. Points out that the common agricultural policy and the Common Fisheries Policy are cornerstones of European integration, which aim to ensure safe, high-quality food supply for European citizens, the proper functioning of the agricultural single market, the sustainability of rural regions for many years and the sustainable management of natural resources; recalls that those policies contribute to the viability and stability of the EU; calls on the Commission to continue to support producers across Europe in coping with unexpected market volatility and in securing safe, high-quality food supplies; asks for particular attention to be paid to small-scaled agriculture and small fisheries;
Amendment 69 #
2019/2001(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. SWelcomes the fact that, at the strong request of Parliament, the result of the negotiations on the 2019 budget was to bring the Youth Employment Initiative to a total amount of EUR 350 million in 2019; stresses that the fight against youth unemployment requires substantial additional financial efforts to create opportunities for education, training and employment; underlines, in this respect, the successful implementation and the positive impact of the Youth Employment Initiative, supporting approximately 1.7 million young people until the end of 2017, thanks a; recallso to additional appropriations that Parliament secured for this programme in the EU budget over the yearshat Parliament requested that the financial envelope for this programme be doubled in the next MFF; expects the 2020 draft budget to demonstrate even higher ambition for this programme to ensure a smooth transition towards the ESF+ in the next MFF;
Amendment 77 #
2019/2001(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Reiterates that social and territorial cohesion in Europe must also contribute to sustainable solutions to long-term structural demographic change; emphasises the need for financial resources to provide ageing populations in Europe with adequate support in terms of access to mobility, healthcare and public services;
Amendment 79 #
2019/2001(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11 a. Is of the opinion that more needs to be done from the Union's budgetary side to tackle the physical and resource barriers faced by islands at the EU's periphery, thus enabling them to fully benefit from the EU's internal market; in this context stresses that for these regions to achieve social and territorial cohesion, supplementary funding needs to be made available in order to: - assist traditional businesses needing modernisation; - provide special assistance to traditional farmers and fishermen who are being squeezed out of their living by large scale operators; - improve transport connections; emphasises that this reality hits hardest those islands suffering from geographical double insularity such as the island of Gozo;
Amendment 80 #
2019/2001(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 b (new)
Paragraph 11 b (new)
11 b. Underlines that sport at all ages is an important area of great potential for increasing the overall health level of Europeans and therefore requests additional financial resources to facilitate engagement in sport and to promote a healthy lifestyle, fully exploiting the opportunities of sport, thereby reducing spending on healthcare;
Amendment 82 #
2019/2001(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Recalls the need for solidarity in the area of migration, with a focus on long- term, effective integration of migrants and refugees in the Member States, as well as fair and mutual beneficial partnerships with countries in need; welcomes the role played by the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF); calls for adequate budgeting for this fund in 2020 in order to support the dignified reception of asylum seekers in the Member States, fair return strategies, resettlement programmes, legal migration policies and promotion of effective integration of third country nationals, and to tackle irregular migration; reaffirms the importance of possessing targeted financial means to tackle the root causes of the migrant and refugee crisis; stresses, to this end, that the EU budget must fund measures in the countries of origin of migrants and in the host countries of refugees;
Amendment 85 #
2019/2001(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12 a. Recalls that the long-lasting solution to the current migration phenomenon lies in the political, economic and social development of the countries from which migration flows originate and reiterates its full commitment to this objective; calls for the European Neighbourhood Instrument and the Development Cooperation Instrument to be endowed with sufficient financial resources to support this priority; within this context, reaffirms the need to provide UNRWA with sufficient and constant financial support;
Amendment 89 #
2019/2001(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12 a. Stresses the great socially- integrating power of sport in many areas, including civic commitment and the conception of democracy, the promotion of good health, urban development, social integration, the job market, employment, skills training and education; requires substantial additional financial efforts for sport;
Amendment 92 #
2019/2001(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 b (new)
Paragraph 12 b (new)
12 b. Believes that gender-related discrimination is not only intolerable and incompatible with the values of the EU, but also constitutes a serious impediment to sustainable and inclusive growth as it disempowers women from engaging in meaningful employment; underlines the key contribution of women’s empowerment in achieving more inclusive, equitable and peaceful societies; expects the EU budget to support women’s access for to EU funding and to help women to reconcile private and professional life;
Amendment 97 #
2019/2001(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Stresses that the 2020 budget must contribute to tackling environmental challenges and climate change; recalls the Union’s pledge to make the transition to a low-carbon circular economy, but regrets that the Union might fall short of its climate goals; requests increased financial resources for LIFE, Clean energy for EU islands initiative and other programmes to support projects with European added value contributing to a socially conscious clean energy transition and resource efficiency, as well as nature conservation, with a focus on biodiversity, habitats and endangered species;
Amendment 112 #
2019/2001(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Invites the Commission to report specifically on the amounts de-committed for research programmes and to provide all relevant information and details concerning Article 15(3) of the Financial Regulation; expects this Article and its corresponding procedure to be fully respected and mobilised in the context of the 2020 budgetary procedure and expects that the 2020 draft budget will make full use of this provision to boost research and innovation on top of the financial programming;
Amendment 114 #
2019/2001(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15 a. Believes that as the arm of the budgetary authority directly elected by citizens, Parliament should fulfil its political role and put forward proposals for Pilot Projects and Preparatory Actions expressing its political vision for the future; commits itself, in this context, to proposing a package of Pilot Projects and Preparatory Actions developed in close cooperation with each of its committees so as to find the right balance between political will and technical feasibility, as assessed by the Commission;
Amendment 116 #
2019/0161(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
This Regulation shall contribute to the convergence and competitiveness of the economies of the Member States whose currency is the euro by defining a governance framework relevant for the budgetary instrument for convergence and competitiveness, while remaining coherent with the social and environmental objectives of the Union, and which sets out:
Amendment 138 #
2019/0161(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1
Article 4 – paragraph 1
1. On a recommendation from the Commission and after discussion in the Eurogroup, the Council shall establish, as part of the euro-area recommendation and on an annual basis, the strategic orientations for the reform and investment priorities of the euro area. Such orientations should keep the upward economic and social convergence of the Union as their ultimate priority.
Amendment 33 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Recalls that current international and national tax rules were mostly conceived in the early 20th century; asserts that there is an urgent need for reform of the rules, so that international, EU and national tax systems are fit for the new economic, social and technologic challenges of the 21st century; notes the broad understanding that current tax systems are not equipped to keep up with these developments and ensure that all market participants pay fair taxes; accepts that a problem with existing tax rules and the administrative approaches by which they are being implemented arise from the fact that accounting methods were designed in days when value added in economic systems was mainly attributable to manufacturing activities, while now especially in advanced economies, economic value added is in large part and increasingly, attributable to service activities, as well as latterly to a further fast development of digital services, to account for which there has been little adaptation in the accounting methods that measure and enable the evaluation of such sectors;
Amendment 56 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Welcomes the fact that during its current term the Commission has put forward 22 legislative proposals aimed at closing some of the loopholes, improving the fight against financial crimes and aggressive tax planning, and enhancing tax collection efficiency and tax fairness; calls for the swift adoption of initiatives that have not yet been finalised and for careful monitoring of the implementation to ensure efficiency and proper enforcement, in order to keep pace with the versatility of tax fraud, tax evasion and aggressive tax planning; acknowledges that the full liberalisation of capital flows on a global scale has opened up the international financial system to large scale attempts at tax evasion, avoidance, ATP and money laundering, but accepts that there is no appetite fora reintroduction of capital controls at a national or EU level, even if this would counter head on most prevalent tax abuses;
Amendment 96 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Recalls that the fight against tax evasion and fraud tackles illegal acts, whereas the fight against tax avoidance addresses situations that are a priori within the limits of the law but against its spirit; notes however that it is completely legitimate within a globally liberalised financial system for corporations (and individuals) to seek to minimise their tax dues over their global commitments, so long as they fully observe all relevant laws and regulations, which clearly can and should be amended progressively by relevant authorities to ensure that all tax dues are fully identified and really being paid and not evaded;
Amendment 104 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Recalls that ATP describes the setting of a tax design aimed at reducing tax liability by using the technicalities of a tax system or of mismatches between two or more tax systems that go against the spirit of the law; but realizes that the concept has also been used too broadly in ways that make it less than meaningful to localise convincingly illegal forms of tax evasion and potentially illegitimate tax avoidance;
Amendment 116 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Calls therefore on the Commission and the Council to propose and adopt a comprehensive definition of aggressive tax planning indicators, building on both the hallmarks identified in the fifth review of the Directive on administrative cooperation (DAC6)26 and the Commission’s relevant studies and recommendations27 ; recommends that all such indicators clearly delineate what is legitimate or not, as well as what could be illegal or not, in the natural efforts by corporation decision makers to minimise the tax liability of their corporation in its worldwide exposure, so as to maximise the returns of its shareholders; stresses equally that the chosen indicators should not be rigidly cast so that they end up as one-size-fits-all measures and check lists, but take into account industry-specific, country-specific and region-specific parameters that define how national taxation laws are framed; calls on Member States to use those indicators transparently as a basis to repeal all harmful tax practices deriving from existing tax loopholes; _________________ 26 Council Directive (EU) 2018/822 of 25 May 2018 amending Directive 2011/16/EU as regards mandatory automatic exchange of information in the field of taxation in relation to reportable cross-border arrangements, OJ L 139, 5.6.2018, p. 1. 27 https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/sites/ taxation/files/resources/documents/taxation /gen_info/economic_analysis/tax_papers/ta xation_paper_61.pdfand https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/sites/ taxation/files/tax_policies_survey_2017.pd f
Amendment 122 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Stresses the similarity between corporate tax payers and high-net-worth individuals in the use of corporate structures and similar structures such as trusts and offshore locations for the purpose of ATP; recalls the role of intermediaries in setting up such schemes; understands however that motivations for these two kinds of players in the taxation matrix can be totally disparate, so that while corporate aims will be guided by the urge to increase retained earnings within the corporate entity, high net worth individuals will be targeting a consolidation of wealth accumulation by self, family and personal dependents;
Amendment 129 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Welcomes the Commission’s assessment and inclusion of ATP indicators in its 2018 European Semester country reports; calls for such assessment to become a regular feature in order to ensure a level playing field in the EU internal market, as well as the greater stability of public revenue in the long run; requests that every year, the Commission includes in its European Semester country reports a short evaluation of how the assessment procedure including ATP indicators is shaping up and how it can be improved;
Amendment 154 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Recalls that taxes must be paid in the jurisdictions where the actual economic activity and value creation takes place or, in case of indirect taxation, where consumption takes place; recognizes however that in a continually evolving digital economy where marketable output becomes the sum of a jigsaw of cross- border inputs for which current accounting models to measure how and where value is being added are hugely complex or inoperative, rigid, one-size- fits-all methods to measure value creation can become counter-productive; understands that the same consideration applies to digital cross-border consumption;
Amendment 168 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Takes note of the statement made by the French Finance Minister at the TAX3 meeting of 23 October 2018 regarding the need to discuss the concept of minimum taxation; welcomes the readiness by France to include the debate on minimum taxation as one of the priorities of its G7 Presidency in 2019; points out however that the concept of minimum taxation could lead to a race to “the top” as contrasted to a race to “the bottom”, which would force Member States running lean tax systems to load up their tax schedules, to the benefit of Member States, such as France, which by running high taxation, high public expenditure administrative systems render their economies less competitive in the Single market compared to those Member States that run leaner tax systems and have leaner and more efficient public expenditure commitments;
Amendment 171 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16 a. Notes moreover that within the Eurozone as well as under Maastricht budgetary rules, Member States are obligated to follow deficit and national debt operational criteria sufficiently rigorous such that the imposition of any new “minimum” rules on taxation levels within government budgets could appear to be, and quite likely will be, vexatious, over intrusive, not fit for purpose and in the end helpful only to states that give low priority to increasing the tax burden on their polities;
Amendment 181 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Notes that an exit tax was adopted by the EU in ATAD I, allowing Member States to tax the economic value of capital gain created in its territory even when that gain has not yet been realised at the time of exit; considers that the principle of taxing profits made in Member States before they leave the Union should be strengthened, for example through coordinated withholding taxes on interests and royalties; calls on the Council to resume negotiations on the interest and royalties proposal28 ; insists however that such measures should not apply on a one size fits all basis, that they should be proportional to the tasks at hand and that the manner by which they are established and implemented are totally transparent as well as subject to quick recall when it is found that they are not fulfilling the aims that led to their establishment; _________________ 28 Proposal for a Council directive of 11 November 2011 on a common system of taxation applicable to interest and royalty payments made between associated companies of different Member States, COM(2011)0714 - 2011/0314(CNS).
Amendment 190 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Acknowledges that the G20/OECD- led BEPS project was meant to tackle in a coordinated manner the causes and circumstances creating BEPS practices, by improving the coherence of tax rules across borders, reinforcing substance requirements and enhancing transparency and certainty; again clarifies that coherence of tax rules across borders need not and should not imply one size fits all remedies applied across the board, that in the end benefit high taxation economies which arguably maintain excessive levels of uneconomic and non- social public expenditure;
Amendment 195 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Notes that the G20/OECD 15-point BEPS action plan is being implemented and monitored and further discussions are taking place, in a broader context than just the initial participating countries, through the Inclusive Framework; calls on Member States to support a reform of both the mandate and the functioning of the Inclusive Framework to ensure that remaining tax loopholes and unsolved tax questions such as the allocation of taxing rights among countries are covered by the current international framework to combat BEPS practices; expresses the hope that efforts to achieve the desired elimination of tax loopholes and unsolved tax questions does not degenerate into a political practice by which tax malpractices in the larger European economies get offloaded onto the smaller peripheral economies of the EU;
Amendment 208 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Welcomes the adoption by the EU of ATAD I and ATAD II; takes note that they provide a minimum level of protection against corporate tax avoidance throughout the EU, while ensuring a fairer and more stable environment for businesses, from both demand and supply perspectives; welcomes the provisions on hybrid mismatches to prevent double non-taxation in order to eliminate existing mismatches and refrain from creating further mismatches, between Member States and with third countries; insists that such measures can be fully effective only if they are applied proportionately and in full transparency by all parties;
Amendment 215 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Welcomes the provisions on Controlled Foreign Corporation (CFC) included in ATAD I to ensure that profits made by related companies parked in low or no-tax countries are effectively taxed; acknowledges that they prevent the absence or diversity of national CFC rules within the Union from distorting the functioning of the internal market beyond situations of wholly artificial arrangements as called for repeatedly by Parliament; deplores the coexistence of two approaches to implement CFC rules in ATAD I and calls on Member States to implement only the simpler and most efficient CFC rules as in ATAD I Article 7(2)(a); again insists that such measures can be fully effective only if they are applied in full transparency by all parties;
Amendment 221 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Welcomes the general anti-abuse rule for the purposes of calculating corporate tax liability included in ATAD I, allowing Member States to ignore arrangements that are not genuine and having regard to all relevant facts and circumstances aimed at obtaining a tax advantage; reiterates its repeated call for the adoption of a general and common anti- abuse rule, following wideranging consultations with all public and private stakeholders, namely in existing legislation and in particular in the parent-subsidiary directive, the merger directive and the interest and royalties directive;
Amendment 224 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Reiterates its call for a clear definition of permanent establishment so that companies cannot artificially avoid having a taxable presence in a Member State in which they have economic activity, always taking into account the problems posed by the ambiguities inherent in a digital presence; recalls nonetheless that healthy tax competition should be preserved in the EU as the European Commission in its Communication (2007/785) had recognised that "it is quite legitimate for tax considerations to play a role in the decision on whereto establish a subsidiary" and that "the objective of minimising one's tax burden is in itself a valid commercial consideration as long as the arrangements entered into with a view to achieving it do not amount to artificial transfers of profits";
Amendment 231 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Recalls its concerns relating to the use of transfer prices in ATP and consequently recalls the need for adequate action and improvement of the transfer pricing framework to address the issue; recognizes that subjective and contingent factors related to the competitive strategies followed by MNCs and the product/service mix of their final cross- border output, influence how internally within these conglomerates, and independently of tax finalities, transfer prices are defined; stresses the need to ensure that they reflect the economic reality, provide certainty, clarity and fairness for Member States and for companies operating within the Union, and reduce the risk of misuse of the rules for profit-shifting purposes, taking into account the OECD Transfer Pricing Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises and Tax Administration 2010;
Amendment 237 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Emphasises that the EU actions aimed at addressing BEPS and ATP have equipped tax authorities with an updated toolbox to ensure fair tax collection; stresses that tax authorities should be responsible for making effective use of the tools without imposing an additional burden on responsible taxpayers, particularly SMEs; regrets that practices being adopted in this regard are creating excessive operational problems for SMEs;
Amendment 243 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Recognises that the new flow of information to tax authorities following the adoption of ATAD I and DAC4 creates the need for adequate resources to ensure the most efficient use of such information and to effectively reduce the current tax gap; calls upon national tax authorities to ensure that their human, material and financial capabilities are sufficiently in line with the growing requirements placed on them;
Amendment 253 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Welcomes the fact that Member States’ tax systems and overall tax environment have become part of the European Semester in line with Parliament’s call to that effect29 ; welcomes the studies and data drawn up by the Commission30 that allow situations that provide economic ATP indicators to be better addressed, and give a clear indication of the exposure to tax planning as well as furnishing a rich data base for all Member States on the phenomenon; recommends that in its presentations on the aforementioned issues, in the context of the European semester, the Commission clearly distinguishes between effects that relate to macroeconomic and macro-financial issues, and effects that follow from issues related to taxation policies; _________________ 29 European Parliament resolution of 25 November 2015 on tax rulings and other measures similar in nature or effect, OJ C 366, 27.10.2017, p. 51, paragraph 96. 30 Referred to above. The studies provide an overview of Member States’ exposure to ATP structures affecting their tax base (erosion or increase), although there is no stand-alone indicator of the phenomenon, a set of indicators seen as a ‘body of evidence’ nevertheless exists.
Amendment 283 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
Paragraph 33
33. Welcomes the re-launch of the CCCTB project in a two-step approach, with the Commission’s adoption of interconnected proposals on CCTB and CCCTB; calls on the Council to swiftly adopt them, taking into consideration Parliament’s opinion that already includes the concept of virtual permanent establishment that would close the remaining loopholes allowing tax avoidance to take place and level the playing field in light of digitalisation; notes that among Member States there is resistance to the introduction of CCTB on the grounds that it represents the first step towards tax harmonisation which such states disagree with and on the grounds that there exist material doubts regarding whether its application would respect the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality; further emphasizes that, despite the agreement about the fact that the global economy is digitalising, any chosen solution shall apply to the economy broadly and not to narrow segments of the economy;
Amendment 299 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
34. Notes that the phenomenon of digitalisation has created a new situation in the market, whereby digital and digitalised companies are able to take advantage of local markets without having a physical, and therefore taxable, presence in that market, creating a non-level playing field and putting traditional companies at a disadvantage; noteremarks that digital businesses models in the EU face a lower effective average tax burden than traditional business models31 ; _________________ 31 As evidenced in the ithe theoretical effective rates used in the Commission's Impact aAssessment of 21 March 2018 accompanying the digital tax package (SWD(2018)0081), according to which on average, digitalised businesses face an effective tax rate of only 9.5 %, compared to 23.2 % for traditional business models. do not stand up to empirical evidence, since the methodology used in this IA, by setting such rates at only 8.9 percent, is underestimating by about 20 percentage points (if average tax rates were taken into consideration) the effective corporate taxes for digital companies (Sources: The proposed EU digital services tax: Effects on welfare, growth and revenues, study by Copenhagen Economics ; Digital Companies and Their Fair Share of Taxes: Myths and misconceptions, Dr Matthias Bauer, Senior Economist, ECIPE 03/2018);
Amendment 341 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37
Paragraph 37
37. Stresses that since June 2014 the DAC has been amended four times; believes that the time has now come for a wide-ranging intergovernmental conference and treaty on taxation issues that would bring together the EU, the US, Japan, China, India, Russia among others, also with a view to streamlining and strengthening cooperative procedures to monitor tax avoidance;
Amendment 397 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45
Paragraph 45
45. Stresses that the proposal for public CBCR was submitted to the co-legislators just after the Panama papers scandal on 12 April 2016, and that Parliament adopted its position on it on 4 July 2017; recalls that the latter called for an enlargement of the scope of reporting and protection of commercially sensitive information; notes that during the first half of 2017, five working parties were established at Council level to tackle tax issues and deplores the lack of progress and cooperation from the Council since 2016then; urges for progress to be made in the Council so that it enters into negotiations with Parliament;
Amendment 410 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 46
Paragraph 46
46. Recalls that the area of direct business taxation falls within the scope of State aid34 when arbitrary fiscal measures discriminate between taxpayers within the same tax jurisdiction, contrary to fiscal measures of a general nature that apply to all undertakings without distinction; _________________ 34 As the Court of Justice of the European Union stated as early as 1974.
Amendment 431 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 50
Paragraph 50
50. Is concerned by the magnitude of tax unpaid for all Member States over long periods39 ; recalls that the aim of the recovery of unlawful aid is to restore the position to the status quo, and that calculating the exact amount of aid to be repaid is part of the implementation obligation incumbent on the national authorities; calls on the Commission to assess possible countermeasures, including fines, to prevent Member States from offering selective favourable tax treatment which constitutes State aid that is non- compliant with EU rules; _________________ 39 As in the case of decision of 30 August 2016 (SA.38373) on State aid implemented by Ireland to Apple. The tax rulings in question were issued by Ireland on 29 January 1991 and 23 May 2007.
Amendment 458 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 54
Paragraph 54
54. Highlights that the high level of inward and outward foreign direct investment as a percentage of GDP in seven Member States (Belgium, Cyprus, Hungary, Ireland, Luxembourg, Malta, and the Netherlands) can only be partially explained by real economic activities taking place in these Member States;40 notes that no factual evidence is available to link this phenomenon to the existence or otherwise of letterbox companies in the Member States cited; notes moreover that by its very nature, the provision from within a given country of financial services to companies and individuals running significant cross border business, frequently involves on a fully legitimate basis the keeping on their behalf of funds, “parked” within a jurisdiction on a short or even long term basis, and this would account for the fact that countries where such financial services are provided, hold what is recorded as incoming or outgoing foreign direct investment that exceeds greatly the investment carrying capacity based on estimates of the “real” economy; _________________ 40 Kiendl Kristo I. and Thirion E., An overview of shell companies in the European Union, EPRS, European Parliament, October 2018, p.23.
Amendment 464 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 55
Paragraph 55
55. Underlines that subject to the observation raised in paragraph 54 above, a high share of foreign direct investment held by special purpose entities exists in several Member States, particularly in Malta, Luxembourg and the Netherlands; 41 notes as well that special purpose entities resident in the EU reinforced their major role in FDI, accounting for 54.5 percent of the total EU FDI stocks held abroad and for 63.9 percent of the FDI stocks held by the rest of the world in the EU (Source : Eurostat 201/2017 - 21 December 2017); _________________ 41 Kiendl Kristo I. and Thirion E., op. cit., p.23.
Amendment 472 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 56
Paragraph 56
56. Notes that, subject to the observation raised in paragraph 54 above, economic indicators such as an unusually high level of foreign direct investment, as well as foreign direct investment held by special purpose entities are ATP indicators42 ; _________________ 42 IHS, Aggressive tax planning indicators, prepared for the European Commission, DG TAXUD Taxation papers, Working paper No 71, October 2017.
Amendment 479 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 57
Paragraph 57
57. Notes that the ATAD anti-abuse rules (artificial arrangements) cover letterbox companies, and that the CCTB and CCCTB would ensure that the income is attributed to where the real economic activity takes place, but without prejudice to the claim by number of Member States that CCTB and CCCTB are meant to function as enabling procedures for the harmonisation of tax rates within the EU, for which there is no agreement between Member States, and even less consensus;
Amendment 487 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 58
Paragraph 58
58. Urges the Commission and the Member States to establish coordinated substantial economic activity requirements as well as expenditure tests as soon as meaningful and proportional methods for how which this can be done have been devised, discussed and agreed;
Amendment 512 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 64
Paragraph 64
64. Takes note that according to the Commission, businesses trading on a cross- border basis currently suffer from compliance costs which are 11 % higher compared to those incurred by companies that only trade domestically; also notes that such tax compliance costs weigh heaviest on SMEs which is one reason why most SMEs have remained wary of reaping the advantages of the Single market;
Amendment 541 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 71
Paragraph 71
71. Welcomesithout prejudging the issue since for Malta at least the tax treatment being applied for yachts was initially approved by the Commission itself, takes note of the opening of infringement procedures by the Commission on 8 March 2018 against Cyprus, Greece and Malta to ensure that they stop offering unlawful favourable tax treatment for private yachts, which distorts competition in the maritime sector; is compelled to note the discrimination demonstrated by the European Commission, which took action against smaller Member States, whereas such practices have been introduced in the yachting industry and continued by Member States like France and Italy;
Amendment 589 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 82
Paragraph 82
82. Regrets that mainly as a result of the elimination of capital controls, high net worth individuals (HNWI) and ultra HNWI (UHNWI) continue to have the possibility to shift their earnings and funds or their purchases through different tax jurisdictions to obtain substantially reduced or zero liability by using the services of wealth managers and other intermediaries;
Amendment 591 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 83
Paragraph 83
83. Notes with regret that corporate tax fraud, tax evasion and aggressive tax planning contribute to shifting the tax burden on to honest and fair taxpayers; notes though that this shift is also being achieved by budgetary policies that as in France, remain anchored on high taxation and high public expenditure levels which fail to deliver adequate returns that benefit the welfare of citizens;
Amendment 602 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 84
Paragraph 84
84. Deplores the fact that some Member States have created tax regimes allowing non-nationals to obtain income tax benefits, hereby undermining other Member States’ tax base and fostering harmful policies which discriminate against their own citizens; proclaims that on a Europe-wide basis, a register should be established by the European Commission to list and publicise objectively all such policies;
Amendment 610 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 85
Paragraph 85
85. Observes that a majority of Member States have adopted citizenship by investment (CBI) or residency by investment (RBI) schemes57 , generally known as visa or investor programmes, by which citizenship or residence is granted to non-EU citizens in exchange for financial investment; observes that these programmes do not necessarily require applicants to spend time on the territory in which the investment is madaccepts that on the record of how citizenship and/or residency has been accorded in the past by European states, these schemes – whether one wants to approve them or not – are completely legal and legitimate; notes that in international economic practice, such schemes have a long history, such as for the US system by which green permanent residence cards were granted to non- citizens in exchange for investing and creating jobs in the US; observes that these programmes do not necessarily require applicants to spend time on the territory in which the investment is made; notes that as an ongoing arrangement, Member States also regularly grant citizenship on grounds that are not publicised because they are carried out on an “in camera” and “private” basis, and are justified as following from considerations related to national security, acknowledgement of an individual's contribution to a country’s welfare (even if the value of such a contribution is never publicly quantified), another arbitrary reasons that are basically of a political or economic nature; _________________ 57 18 Member States have some form of RBI scheme in place, including four Member States that operate CBI schemes in addition to RBI schemes: Bulgaria, Cyprus, Malta, Romania. 10 Member States have no such schemes: Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Hungary, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia and Sweden. Source: study entitled ‘Citizenship by investment (CBI) and residency by investment (RBI) schemes in the EU‘, EPRS, October 2018, PE: 627.128; ISBN: 978-92-846-3375-3.
Amendment 619 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 86
Paragraph 86
86. Observes that at least 5 000 non-EU citizens have obtained EU citizenship through citizenship by investment schemes58 ; recognizes from a security point of view, as this figure refers to citizenship granted over a number of years, it is quite puny compared to the residence citizenship influx within the EU from outside that ran into the millions into the same period; _________________ 58 See the above-mentioned study.
Amendment 625 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 87
Paragraph 87
87. Stresses that CBI and RBI schemes carry significantmight carry risks, including a devaluation of EU citizenship and the potential for corruption, money laundering and tax evasion unless due diligence procedures are followed to vet applicants ; reiterates its concern that citizenship or residence could be granted through these schemes without proper or indeed any customer due diligence (CDD) having been carried out; notes that several formal investigations into corruption and money laundering have been launched at national and EU level directly related to CBI and RBI schemes; underlines that, at the same time, the economic sustainability and viability of the investments provided through these schemes remain uncertain, but accepts that no evidence has been presented that such due diligence is not being carried out or that when it fails, appropriate corrective action is not being taken, such as by the revocation of the grant of citizenship; notes that several formal investigations into corruption and money laundering have been launched at national and EU level directly related to CBI and RBI schemes; requests that similar investigations are carried out with regard to the granting of citizenship by Member States on the basis of “private” ad hoc arrangements, which are never publicised ; understands that for some states, CBI and RBI schemes are seen as tools by which to attract investment and counter the disadvantages of small size and/or peripherality when operating within a continental single market; underlines that, at the same time, the economic sustainability and viability of the investments provided through these schemes remain uncertain but that indeed it might be premature to factually launch wide-ranging and dogmatic conclusions, positive or negative, about CBI/RBI arrangements;
Amendment 637 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 88
Paragraph 88
88. Notes that these programmes regularly involve tax privileges or special tax regimes for the beneficiaries; understands that such tax treatment if and when given, has to be evaluated against the background of the financial commitment that applicant beneficiaries are being asked to make; is concerned that these privileges could hamper the objective of making all citizens contribute fairly to the tax system but accepts that no factual evidence that such is the case has been made available;
Amendment 642 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 89
Paragraph 89
89. Worries that there is very little transparency in relation to the number and origin of applicants, the numbers of individuals granted citizenship or residency by these schemes and the amount invested through these schemes; worries too about the total lack of transparency about the granting of citizenship by countries that on the side of CBI/RBI schemes or without operating such schemes, grant citizenship on an ad hoc, “private” manner; appreciates the fact that some Member States make explicit the name and nationalities of the individuals who are granted citizenship or residency under these schemes;
Amendment 652 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 90
Paragraph 90
90. Is concerned that according to the OECD, CBI and RBI schemes could be misused to undermine the common reporting standard (CRS) due diligence procedures, leading to inaccurate or incomplete reporting under the CRS, in particular when not all jurisdictions of tax residence are disclosed to the financial institution; notes that in the OECD’s view, the visa schemes which are potentially high-risk for the integrity of the CRS are those that give a taxpayer access to a low personal income tax rate of less than 10 % on offshore financial assets, and do not require a significant physical presence of at least 90 days in the jurisdiction offering the golden visa scheme; is concerned that Malta and Cyprus have schemes59 among those that potentially pose a high risk to the integrity of CRS; accepts however that proper grounds for such concerns need to be evidence based and recognizes that no such evidence has been presented at this stage for Malta, apart from allegations and conjectures, for otherwise that evidence would have been appended to this report; notes that Maltese authorities have provided information about the multi-stage due diligence and assessment processes they follow when processing applications for citizenship and that no evidence has been presented to show that it is defective; accepts too that policy directions in the taxation area cannot be solely pinned to statements based on “coulds” but need to make definitive statements on outcomes that have actually been recorded; _________________ 59 The Cypriot Citizenship by Investment: Scheme for Naturalisation of Investors by Exception, the Cypriot Residence by Investment, the Maltese Individual Investor Programme, and the Maltese Residence and Visa programme.
Amendment 658 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 91
Paragraph 91
91. Concludes that the potential economic benefits of CBI and RBI schemes do not offset the serious money laundering and tax evasion risks they present; calls on Member States to phase out all existing CBI or RBI schemes as soon as possible but understands that contrary views also prevail, especially given the lack of evidence based claims about such risks; stresses that, in the meantime, Member States should properly ensure that enhanced CDD on applicants for citizenship or residence through these schemes is duly carried out, as required by AMLD5; calls on the Commission to monitor rigorously and continuously the proper implementation and application of CDD within the framework of CBI and RBI schemes until they are repealed in each Member State;
Amendment 669 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 92
Paragraph 92
92. Calls on Member States to prevent conflicts of interest linked to CBI and RBI schemes, which might arguably arise when private firms which assisted the government in the design, management and promotion of these schemes, also advised and supported individuals by screening them for suitability and filing their applications for citizenship or residence;
Amendment 676 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 93
Paragraph 93
93. Urges the Commission to finalise its study on CBI and RBI schemes in the Union as well as to include in its study all other arrangements by which citizenship is granted, especially on an ad hoc, “private” and hidden basis for political economic or security or other reasons; urges the Commission to examine whether, and, if so, which of these schemes posed a threat to EU legislation;
Amendment 690 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 96
Paragraph 96
96. Recalls that free ports are warehouses in free zones, which were – originally – intended as spaces to store merchandise in transit; deplores the fact that they have since become popular for the storage of substitute assets, including art, precious stones, antiques, gold and wine collections – often on a permanent basis;60 but recalls that in the past this practice was part of the operating profile of major banks and financial institutions, as well as of leading European ministries and foundations; _________________ 60 EPRS study entitled ‘Money Laundering and tax evasion risks in free ports‘, October 2018, PE: 627.114; ISBN: 978-92- 846-3333-3.
Amendment 696 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 98
Paragraph 98
98. Underlines that there are over 80 free zones in the EU61 and many thousands of other warehouses under ‘special storage procedures’ in the EU, notably ‘customs warehouses’, which can or could offer the same degree of secrecy and (indirect) tax advantages;62 _________________ 61 European Commission list of EU free zones. 62 EPRS study entitled ‘Money Laundering and tax evasion risks in free ports’, October 2018, PE: 627.114; ISBN: 978-92- 846-3333-3.
Amendment 698 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 100
Paragraph 100
100. Notes that money laundering risks in free ports arcould be directly associated with money laundering risks in the substitute assets market;
Amendment 723 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 105
Paragraph 105
105. Takes the view that the CoC Group should mandatorily screen and clear each tax amnesty programme before its implementation by a Member State; takes the view that a taxpayer or ultimate beneficial owner of a company who has already benefited from one or more tax amnesties should never be entitled to benefit from another one; calls for national authorities managing the data on persons who have benefited from tax amnesties to engage in an effective exchange of the data from law enforcement or other competent authorities investigating crimes other than tax fraud or tax evasion;
Amendment 740 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 109
Paragraph 109
109. Deplores the fact that a large number of Member States have failed to fully or partially transpose AMLD4 into their domestic legislation within the set deadline, and thatthough it queries whether such deadline was set realistically, given the huge burden of regulatory provisions that national financial authorities have been needing in past years to assimilate, promulgate and monitor, even if for this reason, infringement procedures have had to be opened by the Commission against them, including referrals before the Court of Justice of the European Union67 ; calls on these Member States and the European Commission to swiftly remedy this situation; reminds with circumspection Member States of their legal obligation to respect the deadline of 10 January 2020 for the transposition of AMLD5 into their domestic legislation; _________________ 67 On 19 July 2018, the Commission referred Greece and Romania to the Court of Justice of the European Union for failing to transpose the fourth Anti-Money Laundering Directive into their national law. Ireland had transposed only a very limited part of the rules and was also referred to the Court of Justice.
Amendment 750 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 111
Paragraph 111
111. Condemns the fact that systemic failures in the enforcement of AML requirements, coupled with inefficient supervision, has led to a number of recent high-profile cases of ML in European banks linked to systematic breaches of the most basic KYC and CDD requirements; regrets the unequal treatment of the alleged system failures, such that large scale breaches of AML requirements that happened over the long term by the bigger financial institutions in the larger Member States went unobserved while relatively smaller scale, shorter-term failures in smaller economies were slapped with the full weight of sanctions on a European scale, and opines that this undermines the thrust of AML provisions;
Amendment 770 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 114
Paragraph 114
114. Notes that in the case of Danske Bank, transactions worth upwards of EUR 200 billion flowed in and out of its Estonian branch71 over a number of years not just for one or two years as for instance in the case of Pilatus bank without the bank having put in place adequate internal AML and KYC procedures, as subsequently admitted by the bank itself and confirmed by both the Estonian and Danish Financial Supervisory Authorities; considers that this failure shows a complete lack of responsibility on the part of both the bank and the competent national authorities; calls on the competent authorities to carry out urgent evaluations of the adequacy of AML and KYC procedures in all European banks to ensure proper enforcement of the Union’s AML legislation; _________________ 71queries why Danske Bank and its supervisory authority have not yet been held up for systemic breaches of EU regulations as in the case of Pilatus bank; Ibid.
Amendment 775 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 116
Paragraph 116
116. Highlights that the European Central Bank (ECB) has withdrawn the banking licence of Malta’s Pilatus Bank following the arrest in the United States of Ali Sadr Hashemi Nejad, Chairman of Pilatus Bank and its sole shareholder, on, among other things, charges of money laundering with respect to sanctions applied by the US to Iran and Venezuela and following a request made by the Malta Financial Services Authority to do so, submitted in June 2018; stresses that the European banking Authority (EBA) concluded that the Maltese Financial Intelligence Analysis Unit had breached EU law because it had failed to conduct an effective supervision of Pilatus Bank due to, among other things, procedural deficiencies and lack of supervisory actions; expresses surprise that while the Maltese financial intelligence analysis unit was stigmatised by the EBA for lack of effective supervision over Pilatus bank, a relatively minor investment vehicle, a similar procedure was not followed with respect to the relevant supervisory and investigative authorities in the cases of ING bank, Danske Dank, Latvian ABLV, or Deutsche Bank, etc. where money laundering activities were much more important in value and volume, and of much longer standing;
Amendment 789 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 117
Paragraph 117
117. Is aware that the current AML legal framework has so far consisted of directives and is based on minimum harmonisation, which has led to different national supervisory and enforcement practices in the Member States; calls on the Commission to assess, in the context of a future revision of the AML legislation, in the required impact assessment, whether a regulation would be a more appropriate legal act than a directive; calls, in this context, for a swift transformation into a regulation of the AML legislation if the impact assessment so advises but subject to a full understanding about how this should be done proportionately and with full awareness of the need to attract new direct investment by the smaller Member States, especially those having a peripheral status;
Amendment 839 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 127
Paragraph 127
127. Highlights that in order to fight effectively against money laundering activities, cooperation is essential not only between Member States’ FIUs but also between Member States’ FIUs and the FIUs of third countries; calls on the Commission to engage actively with Member States to find mechanisms to improve and enhance the cooperation of Member States’ FIUs with the FIUs of third countries; calls on the Commission to take opportune action in this regard at the relevant international forums, such as the OECD and the Financial Action Task Force (FATF); recommends that in all such initiatives, top priority be given to the tracking of illegal financial flows organised and powered by organised crime; considers that in any resulting agreement proper consideration should be given to the protection of personal data;
Amendment 893 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 138
Paragraph 138
138. Underlines the positive potential of new distributed ledger technologies, such as blockchain technology; notes at the same time the increasing abuse of new payment and transfer methods based on these technologies to launder criminal proceeds or to commit other financial crimes; acknowledges the need to monitor technological developments to ensure that legislation addresses in an effective manner the abuse of new technologies and anonymity, which facilitates criminal activity, without curtailing its positive aspects; stresses that among the latter, there have been the emerging opportunities to develop a decentralised digitalised world, with notably the progress of crowdfunding, results in time and money savings for smaller enterprises and peer-to-peer cheap secure transactions;
Amendment 1043 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 161
Paragraph 161
161. Believes that supporting developing countries in combating tax evasion and aggressive tax planning, as well as corruption and secrecy that facilitate illicit financial flows, is of the utmost importance for strengthening policy coherence for development in the EU and improving developing countries’ tax capacities and domestic resource mobilisation; believes that the EU should encourage and insist with European companies having a mining, manufacturing, touristic, construction, farming or processing facility in Africa that they should subscribe to a code of good behaviour that among others, bans participation in schemes that involve corruption, money laundering, tax avoidance, tax evasion and ATP;
Amendment 1112 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 172
Paragraph 172
172. Calls on the Commission to review all tax treaties in force and signed by Member States with third countries to ensure that they are all compliant with new global standards such as the Multilateral Convention to Implement Tax Treaty Related Measures to Prevent Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (‘MLI’); asks the Commission to release recommendations to Member States regarding their existing bilateral tax treaties to ensure that they include general anti-abuse rules, looking at genuine economic activity and value creation; stresses nevertheless that such issues should remain within the remit of national tax sovereignty exercised in compatibility with OECD rules;
Amendment 1161 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 179 c (new)
Paragraph 179 c (new)
179 c. Pays tribute to the brave actions of whistle-blowers and recognizes their fundamental role in a democratic and accountable society;
Amendment 1167 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 180 a (new)
Paragraph 180 a (new)
180 a. Calls for a general EU fund to be set up to give appropriate financial support to whistle-blowers whose livelihood is put at risk as a result of disclosures of criminal activity or facts with clear public interest;
Amendment 1185 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 184
Paragraph 184
184. Acknowledges the difficulties faced by journalists when investigating or reporting on cases of money laundering, tax fraud, tax evasion and aggressive tax planning; worries that investigative journalists are often subject to physical threats and intimidation; calls for adapted protection to be given at national levels to journalists involved in the investigation of activities with a money laundering component;
Amendment 1187 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 185
Paragraph 185
185. Strongly condemns acts of violence against journalists; recalls with dismay that in recent years journalists involved in the investigation of dubious activities with a money laundering component have been murdered in Malta and Slovakia85 though there is no evidence as yet that there is any connection between the murder that took place in Malta and revelations about alleged money laundering offences; _________________ 85 Daphne Caruana Galizia, killed in Malta on 16.10.2017; Ján Kuciak, killed together with his partner Martina Kušnírová, in Slovakia on 21.2.2018.
Amendment 1190 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 186
Paragraph 186
186. Urges the Maltese authorities to make progress in identifying the instigator of the murder of Daphne Caruana Galizia, even while acknowledging that the pace, tempo and outcome of criminal investigations can hardly be determined by political urgings, no matter where they come from; notes as well that the Maltese Government has engaged with international institutions such as Europol, FBI, and also the Dutch Forensic Institute, to strengthen its expertise;
Amendment 1200 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 188
Paragraph 188
188. Deplores the fact that investigative journalists are often victims of abusive lawsuits intended to censor, intimidate and silence them by burdening them with the costs of legal defence until they are forced to abandon their criticism or opposition; recalls that these abusive lawsuits constitute a threat to fundamental democratic rights, such as to freedom of expression, freedom of the press and freedom to disseminate and receive information; calls on the Member States to put in place mechanisms to prevent strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPP); considers that these mechanisms should take duly into consideration the right to a good name and reputation; understands that wideranging allegations backed by no proof except the say-so of unidentified sources can have devastating and unwarranted political, economic and social effects on the individuals or companies that they target, especially when publicised on social media; accepts that those who indulge in wilfully irresponsible or malicious attacks of this sort should be held to be accountable for the damage they inflict; calls on the Commission to assess the possibility of taking legislative action in this area;
Amendment 1207 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 188 a (new)
Paragraph 188 a (new)
188 a. Highlights that trade unions should have a greater role in the negotiation of whistleblowing policies and channels in the workplace; calls on Member States to allow, in national law, for whistle-blowers to report wrongdoing to a union representative if they feel they cannot report it internally;
Amendment 1215 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 189
Paragraph 189
189. Welcomes the work done by the Platform for Tax Good Governance; notes that the mandate of the Platform applies until 16 June 2019; calls for it to be extended or renewed to ensure that genuine and transparent civil society concerns and expertise are heard by Member States and the Commission; encourages the Commission to broaden the scope of the experts invited to the Expert Group on Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing (EGMLTF) to include experts from the private sector (business and NGOs);
Amendment 1244 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 203
Paragraph 203
203. Considers that it is vital for the exercise of democratic control over the executive that Parliament be empowered with investigative and inquiry powers that match those of Member States’ national parliaments; believes that in order to exercise this role Parliament must have the power to summon and compel witnesses to appear and to compel the production of docu although care must be taken to ensure that any investigative and inquiry powers at a European level should not overlap with or duplicate the investigative and inquiry powers held by national parliaments; believes that in order for these rights to be exercised Member States must agree to implement sanctions against individuals for failure to appear or produce documents in line with national law governing national parliamentary inquiries and investigations; urges the Council and the Commission to engage in the timely conclusion of the negotiations on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament on the detailed provisions governing the exercise of Parliament’s right of inquiry;
Amendment 1248 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 204
Paragraph 204
Amendment 1260 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 205
Paragraph 205
Amendment 1271 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 206
Paragraph 206
Amendment 26 #
2018/2119(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas economic growth remains vulnerable to continued geopolitical tensions, which have an impact on global trade, widespread political and social disaffections with policies considered to be unfair or unintelligible, and persisting uncertainties surrounding the Union’s future relations with the UK;
Amendment 30 #
2018/2119(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas the economic recovery is uneven across the EU; whereas there are still significant imbalances within the euro area and the EU as a whole, with the EU objective to close the economic and social gap between Northern and Southern countries far to be reached;
Amendment 46 #
2018/2119(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas the persistent low level of public investment in the EU, and in particular investment by local and regional authorities, which in 2017 remained lower than its 2007 level expressed as a share of GDP;
Amendment 55 #
2018/2119(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas unemployment rates in some Member States are still too high, particularly among young people;
Amendment 87 #
2018/2119(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Urges Member States to prepare for these demographic developments by: 1) building fiscal buffers to arm against rising fiscal costs; 2) implementing structural reforms to reduce these costs; and 3) enhancing productivity growth, which is essential to ensuring sustainable economic growth in the future; 4) developing a coherent European policy on migration; and 5) taking full account of how digitalisation and artificial intelligence will be supplementing manpower in the creation of value added that contributes to fiscal receipts;
Amendment 92 #
2018/2119(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Welcomes the Commission’s Annual Growth Survey 2019, which reaffirms the importance of: 1) high quality investments; 2) reforms that increase productivity growth, inclusiveness and institutional quality; and 3) macro-financial stability and sound public finances; shares the Commission’s view that persistent vulnerabilities include low productivity growth; persisting income inequality and slow reduction in poverty; territorial disparities; high public and private debt and other remaining macroeconomic imbalances, notably within the Euro area.
Amendment 115 #
2018/2119(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Notes that a higher proportion of elderly people entails higher healthcare, old-age care and pension spending; notes, moreover, that in an ageing society the proportion of working-age people is falling in relation to the proportion of elderly people, meaning that there are fewer working-age contributors per elderly person; highlights that this places a massive burden on public finances, threatening their sustainability; notes however, that the developments outlined will also be accompanied by an increase in demand for labour in the caring professions and that this, if properly managed, will create new sources of public revenue;
Amendment 132 #
2018/2119(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Stresses the importance of wage increase at European level for reducing inequalities and supporting upward convergence of living standards; believes, therefore, that this wage increase should take the following format: an increase of 5 per cent in the minimum wage of all countries that have a minimum wage, while the minimum wage system, always adapted to national circumstances, is introduced in those countries that do not have it;
Amendment 135 #
2018/2119(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
Amendment 145 #
2018/2119(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Urges Member States to build fiscal buffers for future generations; calls for improvements to the enforcement of the Stability and Growth Pact (SGP), with a focus on debt reduction; calls on the European Institutions to assess whether the EU methodologies for the evaluation of the economic and social performance of EU Member States as well as the targets applied under the Stability and Growth Pact are still up-to-date, given that the overall economic and social conditions both at national and European level have changed drastically since the time when they were first drafted;
Amendment 156 #
2018/2119(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Welcomes the European Fiscal Board’s proposal for a radical simplification of the budgetary rules to overcome the weaknesses of the current EU fiscal framework; stresses that flexibility, as built into the SGP rules, should strike a good balance between the objective of ensuring prudent fiscal policy and allowing for productive investments; notes however, that given how SGP rules are currently drafted and implemented, there is an inbuilt tendency for public investment commitments to be scraped in order to safeguard recurrent outlays, and believes that this is contributing to the depressed levels of public investment recorded in recent years in the EU;
Amendment 165 #
2018/2119(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Recalls that workforce ageing is likely to be a significant drag on European productivity growth over the next few decades; urges Member States, therefore, to implement productivity-enhancing structural reforms, while taking into account the impact that digitalisation and artificial intelligence will be having on the growth dynamics of European economies;
Amendment 170 #
2018/2119(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Stresses the importance of reviewing national public pension schemes, largely financed on a pay-as-you-go basis, in order to reduce their budgetary burden; recommends that pension systems across the European Union are made inflation proof and that they ensure that pension payments really reflect the needs of elderly families;
Amendment 194 #
2018/2119(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Underlines that digitalisation, globalisation and technological change are radically transforming our labour markets; notes that if properly managed, these developments would be beneficial and would require a deep revaluation of assumptions we are making with regard to labour productivity, shift in the age structure of the economically active population as well as pension rights;
Amendment 235 #
2018/2119(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Highlights that a transition to a new risk weight regime for banks’ sovereign exposures will help to weaken the ‘doom loop’ between banks and sovereigns; emphasizes that this cannot be carried out on a one-size-fits-all basis, and that the practices and banking models followed in the smaller economies have to be evaluated with full regard to their particularities and their performance record;
Amendment 240 #
2018/2119(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20a. Notes that in some Member States the length of stay of foreign workers in the labour market is short, with EU nationals, younger individuals, and lower- skilled foreign workers exhibiting a relatively shorter length of stay; underlines that the increasing reliance on a transient labour force poses a number of economic challenges and may limit economic assimilation and labour productivity growth; calls on the Commission and Member States to address these challenges characterising the EU labour market;
Amendment 244 #
2018/2119(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. HNotes that public investments are often the most affected by fiscal consolidation policies despite such investments having a direct impact on local economies and on the daily lives of citizens; highlights that to ensure intergenerational fairness, Member States must increase productivity through productive investments, such as in growth- enhancing infrastructure projects, in order to stimulate much-needed potential economic growth;
Amendment 268 #
2018/2119(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)
Paragraph 22 a (new)
22a. Notes that the lack of administrative capacity of the public administration at local and regional level is an obstacle to the implementation of structural reforms and to the long-term investments needed to bridge the investment gap; urges Member States to remove existing obstacles which hinder private and public investment at local and regional level;
Amendment 269 #
2018/2119(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 b (new)
Paragraph 22 b (new)
22b. Recalls the importance of a business-friendly administrative and regulatory environment to make it easier for companies to access finance and raise funds cross-border; welcomes the AGS 2019 emphasis on the need to improve the effectiveness of the public administration, which should involve all levels of government;
Amendment 273 #
2018/2119(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Stresses that increasing productivity growth requires investment in R&D, innovation, and digitalisation, as well as in the modernisation and decarbonisation of Europe’s industry, transport and energy systems with an emphasis on increasing both physical and human capital;
Amendment 22 #
2018/2102(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the Commission’s activities and efforts to ensure the effective application of competition rules in the Union for the benefit of all EU citizens, especially those in a weak consumer position;
Amendment 94 #
2018/2102(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Considers that the jurisdictional thresholds setting the starting point for an EU merger review, which are based on the turnovers of the target and acquiring entities, are not appropriate for the digital economy, in which value is often, for advertising purposes, represented by the number of visitors to a website; suggests that these thresholds be revised and adapted to the number of consumers impacted by mergers, the possibility of competitors to enter and/or compete in a given market, and the value of the related transactions;
Amendment 102 #
2018/2102(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Underlines the fact that barriers to entry in the digital economy are becoming increasingly insurmountable, as the more that unjust behaviour is perpetuated, the harder it gets to revert to anti-competitive effects; affirms, in this regard, that the Commission should act in accordance with the speed of the market when making effective use of interim measures, while ensuring due process and the right of defence of undertakings under investigation;
Amendment 157 #
2018/2102(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Is deeply alarmed at the far- reaching concentration of the food supply chain, whereby four companies, all with close financial ties, own and sell up to 60 % of the global seed market and 75 % of global pesticides, to the detriment of consumers, farmers, the environment and biodiversity alike; points out that such an oligopoly will make farmers and consumers even more technologically and economically dependent on a few globally integrated one-stop-shop platforms, produce limited seed diversity, re-direct trends in innovation away from the adoption of a production model which is respectful of the environment and biodiversity and ultimately, as a result of reduced competition, generate less innovation and a lower quality of end products; notes that small-scale farmers are those most negatively affected through a concentrated food market structure;
Amendment 180 #
2018/2102(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Calls on the Commission to continue giving particular attention to the delivery of services of general economic interest (SGEI) including energy, transport and telecommunication, when applying EU state aid rules, especially in the context of state support dedicated to isolated, remote or peripheral regions in the Union;
Amendment 190 #
2018/2102(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Underlines the need for improved transparency when private public partnerships are being envisaged to undercut the possibility that these will be used by private sector partners to secure competitive advantages over their competitors;
Amendment 31 #
2018/2100(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Amendment 84 #
2018/2100(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Highlights that sovereign debt is not risk-free; takes note of the on-going work of the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) on sovereign risk; is concerned by the fact that some financial institutions are heavily invested in their own sovereign debt; calls on the Commission to assess whether to introduce risk weighting on sovereign bonds or exposure limits in the EU;
Amendment 172 #
2018/2100(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)
Paragraph 22 a (new)
22a. Welcomes the progress made in developing minimum requirement for own funds and eligible liabilities (MREL) targets in the framework of institution- specific resolution strategies; underlines that MREL should be mindful of institutions’ business models, as in many countries there are banks that are predominantly funded via deposits of retail and SME customers and that are not active on capital markets; notes that for these institutions the issuance of eligible liabilities could be a burdensome exercise and that MREL compliance can be mostly reached via a strengthening of equity, which requires time; stresses that MREL targets should be realistic and proportionate to the different banking business models in the EU Member States;
Amendment 178 #
2018/2100(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. TConsiders that risk reduction and risk sharing measures should go in parallel in view of the establishment of an EDIS; takes note of the agreement reached at the Euro Summit meeting of 29 June 2018 on the European Deposit Insurance Scheme (EDIS); underlines the necessity of EDIS as the third pillar of the Banking Union; believes it should be fully implemented once significant risk reduction has taken place;urges all negotiators to work towards the establishment of the European Deposit Insurance Scheme.
Amendment 2 #
2018/2046(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses that Parliament's reading of the 2019 Budget fully reflects the political priorities adopted by an overwhelming majority in its abovementioned resolutions of 15 March 2018 on general guidelines and of 5 July 2018 on a mandate for the trilogue; recalls that at the core of those priorities are:is the socioeconomic convergence of all EU territories based on sustainable growth, innovation, competitiveness, security, the fight against climate change and the transition to renewable energy and migration, and a particular focus on young people;
Amendment 4 #
2018/2046(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Calls for the 2019 budget to focus on the priorities outlined in the European Semester, and on addressing the main concerns of EU citizens that are within EU full or partial responsibility as outlined e.g. in the Eurobarometer 2018; underlines that the most pressing issues lie especially boosting a socially balanced and sustainable economic development, addressing economic and social pressures stemming the area of security and defence, while economic development, growth andrough irregular migration, fostering convergence between EU regions, and tackling youth unemployment are among other most crucial areas to be addressed;
Amendment 13 #
2018/2046(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Points out that Europe's citizens expect the Union to strain every sinew to ensure economic growth and foster job creation evenly within all its regions; recalls that meeting those expectations requires investments in research and innovation, education, infrastructure, SMEs and employment, particularly among the young people of Europe, and that any failure in that regard will foster disillusionment with the European ideal; expresses wonderment that the Council yet again proposes cuts to the very programmes that are designed to make the Union economy more competitive and innovative; stresses moreover that many of these programmes, for example Horizon 2020, are heavily oversubscribed, which constitutes a poor use resources and means that many excellent projects do not receive funding; highlights also the fact that programmes such as Erasmus +, Horizon 2020 and the Programme for the Competitiveness of Enterprises and small and medium-sized enterprises (COSME) provide a vivid demonstration of the advantages of working together across the Union and help create a feeling of European belonging; decides therefore to reinforce considerably Erasmus + and to strengthen programmes that contribute to growth and job creation, including Horizon 2020, Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) and COSME;
Amendment 15 #
2018/2046(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Underlines the importance of ensuring sufficient resources for the coordination and surveillance of macroeconomic policies andwhich should prioritise on reducing poverty and lifting citizens out of the risk of poverty, a sector which has been growing in recent years, as well as on boosting the purchasing power of all citizens across all EU regions; transparent communication and outreach to citizens and stakeholders with regard to the future of the EMU including the euro should continue;
Amendment 19 #
2018/2046(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Highlights that youth unemployment remains unacceptably high in certain Member States especially in the economically lagging regions situated at the EU’s periphery, and that the situation of young people in NEET (not in education, employment or training) situations and the long-term unemployed is particularly worrying; stresses that young people along with pensioners and people with special needs are the most at risk of poverty and social and economic exclusion; decides therefore to reinforce the Youth Employment Initiative (YEI) beyond the level proposed by the Commission; stresses that such reinforcement should in no way be seen as a frontloading of the YEI allocation endorsed in the context of the MFF mid- term revision;
Amendment 23 #
2018/2046(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Underlines that the European Supervisory Authorities (ESAs) role is essential in fostering consistent application of Union law and better coordination between national authorities, ensuring financial stability, promoting better functioning of financial markets and assuring consumer protection; calls on the Committee on Budgets to ensure adequatthat the resources for the ESAallocated would allow ESAs to be adequately staffed and to have secure and efficient IT systems;
Amendment 26 #
2018/2046(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Recalls that cohesion policy plays a primary role in the development and growth of the Union; emphasises Parliament’s commitment to ensuring adequate appropriations for those programmes that represent one of thea core policiesy of the Union;
Amendment 37 #
2018/2046(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Underlines that Heading 3 has been largely mobilized in the recent years to address the migratory and refugee crisis and that such actions should continue and be reinforced as much and for as long as needed; calls on the Commission to actively monitor the adequacy of allocations under Heading 3 and make full use of all available instruments to respond in a timely manner to any unforeseen event that might require additional funding in the area of migration with a special attention to the case of island regions falling under the scope of Article 174 TFEU; decides to reinforce the Asylum Migration and Integration Fund to fully cover the needs of the Union in the field of migration, notably to support Members States in improving integration measures and practices for migrants; notes, once again, that the Heading 3 ceiling is inadequate to provide appropriate funding to the internal dimension of those priorities, as well as to other priority programmes, for example in the field of culture; considers that willingness of local authorities to do more than planned in their National Programme under shared management, to support the Union Resettlement Programme, should be further supported through the direct management strand of the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF);
Amendment 38 #
2018/2046(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Emphasises that ESAs should continuously strive to increase their efficiency without compromising on the quality of their work with a focus on continuous re-assessment of working methods and of, transfer of knowhow and other forms of mutual assistance between ESAs, as well as on the effective use of human and financial resources.
Amendment 64 #
2018/2046(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Recalls that youth unemployment rates remain unacceptably high in the Union, not least in its peripheral regions; emphasises that, in order to address this issue, it is of importance to ensure proper funding of the Youth Guarantee schemes through YEI and the European Social Fund (ESF); welcomes the agreement on the need to provide fresh funding for YEI, and the inclusion of the corresponding appropriations in the DB 2019; considers nevertheless that, given the challenges and risks posed by youth unemployment, YEI should benefit from increased appropriations and therefore decides to bring YEI to EUR 580 million in commitments in 2019; considers that this increase is in addition to the amount for YEI currently programmed for the 2014- 2020 period;
Amendment 82 #
2018/2046(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
32. Expects the pressure on some Member States’ migration and asylum systems, as well as on their borders, to remain high in 2019, and iss in the years that will follow, and is therefore of the opinion that additional funding is needed in the field of migration, also in view of any future, unpredictable needs in this area; reinforces therefore the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund as regards supporting legal migration to the Union and promoting the effective integration of third-country nationals and enhancing fair and effective return strategies, in particular to support Member States in improving integration measures for migrants, especially children and unaccompanied minors;
Amendment 121 #
2018/2046(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 54
Paragraph 54
54. Expects the pressure on some Member States’ migration and asylum systems, as well as on their borders, to remain high in 2019 and possibly escalate, stresses that while the budgetary resources and the number of posts for the European Border and Coast Guard Agency (FRONTEX) and the European Asylum Support Office (EASO), proposed by the Commission and supported by the Council, seem adequate for the time being, the future needs of the agencies in terms of operational resources and staff will have to be closely monitored;
Amendment 50 #
2018/2037(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. CNotes the calls for a fair and different distribution of direct payments between the Member States, so that the gaps between the different regions of the Union can be closed sooner; emphasizes that a new system would need to take into account the diverse specificities of the farming landscape of each individual Member State so that where micro agricultural systems such as on peripheral islands depend on tailor made support, it should be ensured that this support is retained in the future;
Amendment 21 #
2018/2033(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas there are still significant economic and social divergences between euro area Member States with the EU objective to close the economic and social gap between Northern and Southern countries far to be reached;
Amendment 145 #
2018/2033(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Recalls the importance of efficient regulation of the banking and financial sectors to forestall any new crises; welcomes the Commission proposals to facilitate the SMEs access to financing through public markets and calls for the swift completion of the Banking Union;
Amendment 153 #
2018/2033(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Insists on the need for the CSR to take due account of the impact of the activities related to the coordination and management of migration flows on the euro area countries budgets;
Amendment 195 #
2018/2033(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Encourages stronger coordination and harmonisation of taxation with the objective of reducing the differences among Member States over a ten-year period, thus making any possible company relocation unattractivtax transparency and coordination among Member States; notes that tax competition is necessary to enable EU Member States from the periphery or with limited endowments to stay in the competitive race;
Amendment 200 #
2018/2033(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Takes note of the set of proposals aiming at having online businesses contributing to public finances at the same level as companies with a physical commercial presence; assumes that these initiatives shall not constitute new European taxes; stresses that they shall establish complementary tools to traditional taxes and they shall be designed to support Member States in their collection process from digital companies operating on their markets;
Amendment 202 #
2018/2033(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 b (new)
Paragraph 13 b (new)
13b. Calls on the need to improve the definition of virtual permanent establishment in the Directive on the corporate taxation of a significant digital presence which currently favours large markets over small ones due to asymmetric thresholds; takes note of the short-term solution set up through a Digital Services Tax (DST) at EU level at a rate of 3% on gross revenue resulting from advertising and the transmission of data; asks the Commission for further clarifications regarding the specific rules to determine when a user is deemed to be located in a Member State;
Amendment 230 #
2018/2033(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Notes with concern the recent rise in oil prices which generally weakens growth and raises inflation; sStresses that, rather than relying on seasonal factors for its recovery, the only way to make the European economy an area of prosperity is to encourage public investment and promote domestic demand;
Amendment 251 #
2018/2033(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Recalls the need for stronger surveillance of the employment and social situation in Europe and appropriate and constant follow-up at every step of the European Semester in order to boost quality job creation and thus achieve smart, sustainable and inclusive growth; in this regard an increased role should be given to social indicators in the European Semester; moreover, considers that the CSRs should give a more prominent place to the issues related to demographic change;
Amendment 289 #
2018/2033(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)
Paragraph 22 a (new)
22a. Notes that the lack of administrative capacity of the public administration at local and regional level is an obstacle to the implementation of structural reforms and to the long-term investments needed to bridge the investment gap; urges Member States to remove existing obstacles which hinder private and public investment at local and regional level;
Amendment 310 #
2018/2033(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)
Paragraph 24 a (new)
24a. Recalls the importance of a business-friendly administrative and regulatory environment to make it easier for companies, and particularly for scale- ups, to access finance and raise funds cross-border;
Amendment 43 #
2018/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the power of finance can and should be used to facilitate the transition to a sustainable economy in the EU which extends beyond the climate transition into other areas of ecological crisialso includes the financing of rural and (former) industrial areas with the contribution of local banks;
Amendment 64 #
2018/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses the potential of a faster green transition as an opportunity for orienting capital markets towards long- term, innovative and efficient investments; notes that environmental, social and governance (ESG) benefits and risks aremay not be reflected in prices and that this provides a market advantagincentive to unsustainable and short-termist geared finance for certain market participants that focus on fast returns; stresses that a political and regulatory framework to govern sustainable finance is overdue;
Amendment 135 #
2018/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 – introductory part
Paragraph 6 – introductory part
6. Recommends that this taxonomy includetakes into account the principles of flexibility and proportionality and sets minimum parameters including three levels:
Amendment 155 #
2018/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Welcomes the recent inclusion of sustainability issues in the PRIIPs and STS Regulations, as well as in Shareholders Rights Directive and the NFRD; applauds the inclusion in the IORPs Directive of recognition of stranded assets; asks for the transversal integration of sustainable finance criteria in allthe relevant legislation related to the financial sector;
Amendment 171 #
2018/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Asks the Commission to adopt a regulatory strategy aimed inter alia at measurassessing sustainability risks within the framework of capital adequacy rules; stresses that capital adequacy rules must be based on and fully reflect demonstrated risks; aims to initiate an EU pilot project within the next annual budget to begin developing methodological benchmarks for that purpose;
Amendment 184 #
2018/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Emphasises that disclosure is a critical enabling condition for sustainable finance; applauds the work of the Taskforce on Climate-related Financial Disclosure (TCFD) and calls on the Commission and the Council to explicitly endorse its recommendations; urges the Commission to include mandatory disclosure in the framework of the revision of the Accounting Directive and the NFRD by creating a framework for a voluntary, consistent disclosure framework able to improve both producing and using climate related financial disclosure; stresses in this respect that the reporting framework should be proportionate to the actual risks incurred by the institution, its complexity and degree of sophistication;
Amendment 191 #
2018/2007(INI)
9 a. Stresses that regulatory complexity might raise barriers to entry, undermine progress in sustainable lending and banking services and unduly impair credit support to the real economy; in this context stresses that proportionality should be duly accounted when designing new policies;
Amendment 226 #
2018/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Notes the lack of a robust, reliable and uniform definition for reportingroom for improvement in the framework of the NFRD and the need to define the most strategic ESG metrics for each sector or sub-sector; calls on the Commission to create EU-wide multi- stakeholder groups to establish a list of metrics covering the most significant sustainability risks for each industry as part of a pilot project on this matter;
Amendment 261 #
2018/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Calls on the Commission to establish a legally bindingvoluntary labelling system for personal bank accounts, investment funds, insurance, and financial products indicating their level of conformity with the Paris Agreement and ESG goals;
Amendment 10 #
2018/2001(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas the credibility of Parliament as one arm of the budgetary authority depends to a largen extent on its ability to bringmanage its own spending under control and on its ability to develop democracy at Union level;
Amendment 56 #
2018/2001(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Takes note of the updated mission statement for the Information Offices, which are now to be known as“Liaison Offices”, in accordance with the the Bureau Decision of November 2017; notes that the main function of the Liaison Offices is to inform and communicate locally on behalf of Parliament in a politically neutral manner, in order to provide information about the Union and its policies through the activities of external stakeholders on local, regional and national levels;
Amendment 109 #
2018/2001(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
Paragraph 31
31. NoteSupports the ongoing dialogue between the European Parliament and national parliaments; calls on this to be strengthened in order to develop a better understanding of the contribution of the Parliament and the Union in Member States;
Amendment 18 #
2018/0254(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) In the European Defence Action Plan, adopted on 30 November 2016, the Commission committed to complement, leverage and consolidate collaborative efforts by Member States in developing defence technological and industrial capabilities to respond to security challenges, as well as to foster a competitive, innovative and efficient European defence industry. It proposed in particular to launch a European Defence Fund (the 'Fund') to support investments in joint research and the joint development of defence products and technologies, thus fostering synergies and cost-effectiveness, and to promote the Member States’ joint purchase and maintenance of defence equipment. This Fund would complement national funding already used for this purpose and should act as an incentive for Member States to cooperate and invest more in defence. The Fund would support cooperation during the whole cycle of defence products and technologies. Security challenges shall especially take into account the fact that Member States do not uniformly benefit from a well- developed defence industry. To ensure that all Member States are benefitting from the programme on an equal footing, it is necessary to fully include those which are less advanced and which are found at the external borders of the EU.
Amendment 36 #
2018/0254(COD)
(26a) As secure seas and oceans are crucial to European prosperity, maritime and coastal security represents too a further crucial challenge. Synergies between this Fund and the actions identified under the coordinated civil military maritime security research agenda and with maritime transport shall be fortified. Maritime security shall notably include the protection of critical maritime infrastructure such as ports and ships.
Amendment 67 #
2018/0254(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 3 – point a
Article 11 – paragraph 3 – point a
(a) activities aiming to create, underpin and improve new knowledge and defence technology which can achieve significant effects in the area of defence, maritime and coastal security, as well as cybersecurity;
Amendment 26 #
2018/0231(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Citation 2
Citation 2
Article 43(2), Article 168(4)(b) and Articles 114, 173, 195 and 338 thereof,
Amendment 30 #
2018/0231(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) The substantial body of Union legislation underpins the functioning of the internal market. This concerns, in particular, competitiveness, standardisation, consumer protection, market surveillance and food chain regulation but also rules concerning business, trade and financial transactions and the promotion of fair competition providing for a level playing field essential for the functioning of the internal market with the aim of benefiting all EU citizens.
Amendment 35 #
2018/0231(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) The development, production and dissemination of European statistics are subject to a separate European Statistical Programme established by Regulation (EU) No 99/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council47 . In order to provide continuity of producing and disseminating European statistics, the new programme should also include activities covered by the European Statistical Programme by providing a framework for the development, production and dissemination of European statistics. The new programme should establish the financial framework for European statistics to provide high-quality, comparable and reliable statistics on Europe, as well as on pertinent issues that impact the internal market, such as those related to trade and migration, in order to underpin the design, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of all Union policies. _________________ 47 Regulation (EU) No 99/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 January 2013 on the European statistical programme 2013-17 (OJ L 39, 9.2.2013, p 12).
Amendment 38 #
2018/0231(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) The Programme should support the design, implementation and enforcement of Union legislation underpinning the proper functioning of the internal market. The Programme should support the creation of the right conditions to empower all actors of the internal market: businesses, citizens including consumers, businesses, civil society and public authorities. To that end, the Programme should aim to ensure the competitiveness of businesses, notably SMEs, but also based across all EU regions, notably SMEs, including in the tourism sector, and with that, supporting the enforcement of consumer protection and safety rules and by raising the awareness of businesses and individuals by providing them with the right tools, knowledge and competence to make informed decisions and strengthen their participation in Union’s policy- making. Furthermore, the Programme should aim to enhance regulatory and administrative cooperation as well as capability, notably through exchange of best practices, building of knowledge and competence bases, including the use of strategic and transparent public procurement. The Programme should also aim to support the development of high- quality international standards that underpin the implementation of Union legislation. This also includes standard setting in the field of financial reporting and audit, thereby contributing to the transparency and well-functioning of the Union’s capital markets and to enhancing investor protection. The Programme should support rulemaking and standard setting also by ensuring the broadest possible stakeholder involvement, as well as through investment in market surveillance tools for Member States. The objective of the Programme should also be to support the implementation and enforcement of Union legislation providing for a high level of health for humans, animals and plants along the food chain and the improvement of the welfare of animals.
Amendment 40 #
2018/0231(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) A modern internal market promotes competition and benefits consumers, businesses and employees. Making better use of the ever evolving internal market in services should help European businesses create better jobs and grow across borders, offer wider choice of services at better prices, andwhile maintaining high standards for consumers and workers. To achieve this, the Programme should contribute to the removal of remaining barriers, and to ensure a regulatory framework that can accommodate new innovative business models ,such as social entrepreneurship.
Amendment 46 #
2018/0231(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) In order to meet the objectives of the Programme and to facilitate the lives of citizens and businesses, high-quality user- centric public services need to be put in place. This implies that public administrations will need to start working in new ways, bring down silos between the different parts of their administrations, and to engage in the co-creation of these public services with citizens and businesses. Moreover, the continuous and steady increase of cross-border activities in the internal market requires provision of up-to- date information on the rights of businesses and citizencitizens and businesses, but also information explaining the administrative formalities. In addition, provision of legal advice and helping to solve problems which occur at cross national level becomes essential. Furthermore, connecting national administrations in a simple and efficient manner as well as evaluating how the internal market works on the ground is necessary. The Programme should therefore support the following existing internal market governance tools: the Your Europe Portal which should be a backbone of the upcoming Single Digital Gateway, Your Europe Advice, SOLVIT, the Internal Market Information system and the Single Market Scoreboard in order to improve citizens' daily lives and businesses' ability to trade across borders.
Amendment 49 #
2018/0231(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) The implementation and development of the internal market in the area of financial services, financial stability and the Capital Markets Union including sustainable finance, highly depends on the evidence based policy measures taken by the Union. In order to achieve this objective, the Commission should have an active role in constantly monitoring financial markets and financial stability, where relevant assessing the implementation of Union legislation by Member States, evaluating whether the existing legislation is fit for purpose and identifying potential areas of action where new risks emerge, with a continuous involvement of stakeholders throughout the policy cycle. Such activities rely on the production of analyses, studies, training materials, surveys, conformity assessments, evaluations and statistics and are supported by secured IT systems and communication tools.
Amendment 51 #
2018/0231(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) Considering that the internal market as set out in Article 3 of the Treaty on European Union includes a system of rules ensuring that competition is not unnecessarily distorted, the Programme should support the Union’s competition policy, networks and cooperation with national authorities and courts, as well as outreach to a wider group of stakeholders in communicating and explaining the rights, benefits and obligations of Union competition policy.
Amendment 53 #
2018/0231(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) The Programme in particular needs to tackle the radical implications for competition and the functioning of the internal market resulting from the ongoing transformation of the economy and business environment the digital economy, in particular through the exponential growth and use of data, taking account of the increasing recourse to artificial intelligence and other IT tools and expertise by companies and their advisors. It is also essential that the Programme supports networks and cooperation with Member State authorities and courts, considering that undistorted competition and the functioning of the internal market depend critically also on action by those entities. In view of the particular role of competition policy in preventing harm to the internal market resulting from anticompetitive conduct beyond the Union’s border, the Programme should alsoin addition support cooperation with third country authorities, aswhere appropriate. Finally, widening outreach activities is necessary in order to allow more citizens and businesses to reap the full benefits of fair competition in the internal market. Given that a number of initiatives in the Programme are new and that the competition part of the Programme is particularly affected by dynamic developments in the conditions of competition in the internal market, notably relating to the digital economy, including Artificial Intelligence, algorithms, big data, cybersecurity and forensic technology, the pace and magnitude of which are difficult to estimate, it is anticipated that flexibility will be required to face the evolving needs under this part of the Programme.
Amendment 57 #
2018/0231(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24
Recital 24
(24) Many of the Union's competitiveness problems involve SMEs' difficulties in obtaining access to finance because they struggle to demonstrate their credit-worthiness and have insufficient collateral. This is especially the case for social enterprises. Additional financing challenges arise from SMEs' need to stay competitive by engaging e.g. in digitization, internationalization and innovation activities and skilling up their workforce. Limited access to finance has a negative effect on businesses creation, growth and survival rates, as well as on the readiness of new entrepreneurs to take over viable companies in the context of a business succession.
Amendment 58 #
2018/0231(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
Recital 25
(25) To overcome these market failures and to ensure that SMEs continue to play their role as the foundation for the Union economy´s competitiveness, small and medium sized enterprises need extra support also through debt and equity instruments to be established under the SME window of the InvestEU Fund established by Regulation […] of the European Parliament and of the Council52 . The loan guarantee facility put in place under Regulation (EU) No 1287/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council53 has a proven added value and is expected to bring a positive contribution to at least 500 000 SMEs; a successor will be established under the SME window of the InvestEU Fund. _________________ 52 COM(2018) 439 final 53 Regulation (EU) No 1287/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2013 establishing a Programme for the Competitiveness of Enterprises and small and medium-sized enterprises (COSME) (2014 - 2020) and repealing Decision No 1639/2006/EC (OJ L 347 of 20.12.2013, p. 33).
Amendment 59 #
2018/0231(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26
Recital 26
(26) The policy objectives of this Programme will be also addressed through grants, financial instruments and budgetary guarantee under the SME window of the InvestEU Fund. Financial support should be tailor-made to the economic needs of the different regions of Europe, and used to address market failures or sub- optimal investment situations, in a proportionate manner and actions should not duplicate or crowd out private financing or distort competition in the internal market. Actions should have a clear European added value, particularly in relation to market size and risk appetite of regional development and promotional banks, and financial institutions. Actions should not duplicate or crowd out private financing or distort competition in the internal market. Actions ,including those aimed at dealing with access to finance market gaps, should have a clear European added value reflected in an expected impact which goes in line with EU policy objectives.
Amendment 60 #
2018/0231(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27
Recital 27
(27) The Programme should provide effective support for SMEs throughout their life-cycle. It should build on the unique knowledge and expertise developed with regard to SMEs and, industrial sectorsand service sectors, including tourism, and on a long experience in working with European, national and regional stakeholders. This support should build on the successful experience of the Enterprise Europe Network as a one-stop-shop to improve SMEs competitiveness and develop their business in the Single Market and beyond. The Network plans to continue delivering services on behalf of other Union programmes, notably for the Horizon2020 programme, using the financial resources of these programmes. Also the mentoring scheme for new entrepreneurs should remain the tool to enable new or aspiring entrepreneurs to gain business experience by matching with an experienced entrepreneur from another country and thus allow strengthening entrepreneurial talents. The Programme should further strive to grow and fully extend its geographical coverage and thus offer wider range of matching possibilities to entrepreneurs in complementarity with other Union initiatives where relevant.
Amendment 64 #
2018/0231(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28
Recital 28
(28) Clusters are a strategic tool for supporting the competitiveness and scaling-up of SMEs as they offer favourable business environments. Joint Cluster Initiatives should achieve critical mass to accelerate the growth of SMEs. By connecting specialised eco-systems, clusters create new business opportunities for SMEs and integrate them better in European and global strategic value chains. Support should be provided for the development of transnational partnership strategies and the implementation of joint activities with special attention to businesses facing a geographical handicap, supported by the European Cluster Collaboration Platform. Sustainable partnering should be encouraged with continuation funding if performance and participation milestones are reached. Direct support to SMEs should be channelled through cluster organisations for the following: uptake of advanced technologies, new business models, low- carbon and resource-efficient solutions, creativity and design, skills upgrading, talent attraction, entrepreneurship acceleration, and internationalisation. Other specialised SME support actors should be associated to facilitate industrial transformation and implementations of smart specialisation strategies. The Programme should thus contribute to growth and build linkages with the Union's (digital) innovation hubs and investments made under Cohesion Policy and Horizon Europe. Synergies with the Erasmus programme can also be explored.
Amendment 66 #
2018/0231(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36
Recital 36
(36) The Union contributes to ensuring a high level of consumer protection, empowering consumers and putting them at the heart of the internal market by supporting and complementing Member States’ policies in seeking to ensure that citizens when acting as consumers can fully reap the benefits of the internal market and that, in so doing, their safety and legal and economic interests are properly protected by means of concrete actions. The Union has also to ensure that consumer and product safety laws are properly and equally enforced on the ground and that businesses enjoy a level playing field with fair competition in the internal market. Moreover, it is necessary to empower, encourage and assist consumers in making sustainable choices, thus contributing to a sustainable, energy and resource efficient and circular economy which follows the goals set under the UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.
Amendment 67 #
2018/0231(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 41
Recital 41
(41) Citizens are particularly affected by the functioning of financial services markets and should, therefore, be further informed on pertinent rights, risks and benefits. These are a key component of the internal market and require a solid framework for regulation and supervision which ensures not only financial stability and a sustainable economy, but also provides a high level of protection to consumers and other financial services end users, including retail investors, savers, insurance policyholders, pension fund members and beneficiaries, individual shareholders, borrowers and SMEs. It is important to enhance their capacity to participate in policy making for the financial sector.
Amendment 71 #
2018/0231(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 49
Recital 49
(49) European statistics are indispensable for Union decision-making and for the measurement of the performance and impact of Union initiatives. Therefore, the continued provision and development of European statistics, taking a Union-wide approach and going beyond an internal market perspective should be ensured in order to cover all Union activities and policy areas, including empowering businesses and citizens to take informed decisioncitizens and businesses to take informed decisions, specifically in the framework of the programme dealing with the social dimension of Europe and its stated objective to support the European Pillar of Social Rights.
Amendment 72 #
2018/0231(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 52
Recital 52
(52) The Union and Member States are committed to the implementation of the United Nations 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. By contributing to the achievement of the 2030 Agenda, the Union and Member States will foster a stronger, more sustainable, inclusive, secure and prosperous Europe. Internal Market policies should be predetermined by this guided principle. The Programme should contribute to the implementation of the 2030 Agenda, including by balancing the economic, social and environmental dimensions of sustainable development.
Amendment 74 #
2018/0231(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 60
Recital 60
(60) Considering the increasing interconnectivity of the world economy, including the digital economy, the Programme should continue to provide the possibility of involving external experts, such as officials of third countries, representatives of international organisations or economic operators in certain activities.
Amendment 75 #
2018/0231(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 63
Recital 63
(63) This Programme should contribute to the overall support addressing specific needs of outermost regions and their integration in the internal market, as recently reconfirmed in the Commission's Communication "A stronger and renewed strategic partnership with the EU's outermost regions66 . _________________ 66The same approach should be applied to geographical areas which suffer from permanent natural or demographic handicaps as referred to in Article 174 TFEU. _________________ 66 COM(2017) 623 final COM(2017) 623 final
Amendment 77 #
2018/0231(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 71
Recital 71
(71) Where relevant the Programme's actions should be used to address market failures or sub-optimal investment situations, with special consideration to the peripheral regions of the EU, in a proportionate manner, without duplicating or crowding out private financing and have a clear European added value.
Amendment 78 #
2018/0231(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 74
Recital 74
(74) To ensure regular monitoring and reporting, a proper framework for monitoring the actions and results of the Programme should be put in place from the very beginning. Such monitoring and reporting should be based on indicators, measuring the effects of the actions under the Programme against pre-defined baselines founded on the market size where potential beneficiaries are located.
Amendment 79 #
2018/0231(COD)
(81) Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council90 governs the processing of personal data carried out in the Member States in the context of this Regulation and under the supervision of the Member States competent authorities. Regulation (EC) 45/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council91 governs the processing of personal data carried out by the Commission within the framework of this Regulation and under the supervision of the European Data Protection Supervisor. Any exchange or transmission of information by competent authorities, including in the process of developing and disseminating statistics where the principle of statistical confidentiality is also recognised through Regulation (EC) No223/2009, is to comply with the rules on the transfer of personal data as laid down in Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and any exchange or transmission of information by the Commission is to comply with the rules on the transfer of personal data as laid down in Regulation (EC) No 45/2001. _________________ 90 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). 91 Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2000 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data by the Community institutions and bodies and on the free movement of such data (OJ L 8, 12.1.2001, p. 1).
Amendment 80 #
2018/0231(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1
This Regulation establishes the programme for improving the functioning of the internal market andto the benefit of all EU citizens and, in this respect, the competitiveness of enterprises, including micro, small and medium-sized enterprises, financial services, and the framework for financing of development, production and dissemination of European statistics within the meaning of Article 13 of Regulation (EC) No 223/2009 (the 'Programme').
Amendment 84 #
2018/0231(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) to provide high-quality, comparable and, reliable, and well- timed statistics on Europe, as well as on pertinent issues that impact the internal market, such as those related to trade and migration, which underpin the design, monitoring and evaluation of all the Union policies and help citizens, policy makers, businesses, academia, citizens and media to make informed decisions and actively participate in the democratic process.
Amendment 86 #
2018/0231(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) making the internal market more effective, facilitating the prevention and removal of obstacles, including those related to geographical handicaps, supporting the development, implementation and enforcement of the Union law in the areas of the internal market for goods and services, public procurement, market surveillance as well as in the areas of company law and contract and extra- contractual law, anti- money laundering, free movement of capital, financial services and competition, including the development of governance tools;
Amendment 87 #
2018/0231(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) improving the competitiveness of enterprises with special emphasis on SMEs and achieving additionality through the provision of measures that provide various forms of support to SMEs, access to markets including the internationalisation of SMEs, favourable business environment for SMEs, the competitiveness of sectors, such as the tourism sector, the modernisation of industry and the promotion of entrepreneurship;
Amendment 89 #
2018/0231(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point c – point ii
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point c – point ii
(ii) support the development of high- quality international financial reporting and auditing standards, facilitate their integration into the Union law and promote the innovation and development of best practices in corporate reporting for both small and big companies;
Amendment 95 #
2018/0231(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 6
Article 4 – paragraph 6
6. Resources allocated to Member States under shared management may, at their voluntary request, be transferred to the Programme. The Commission shall implement those resources directly in accordance with point (a) of Article 62(1) of the Financial Regulation or indirectly in accordance with point (c) of that Article. Where possible those resources shall be used for the benefit of the Member State concerned.
Amendment 98 #
2018/0231(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) creation of the right conditions to empower all actors of the internal market, including businesses, citizens and consumers, businesses, civil society and public authorities through transparent information and awareness raising campaigns, best practice exchange, promotion of good practices, exchange and dissemination of expertise and knowledge and organization of trainings;
Amendment 100 #
2018/0231(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point d
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point d
(d) support for the effective enforcement and modernisation of the Union legal framework and its rapid adaptation to the ever-changing environment, particularly in the digital context, including through data gathering and analyses; studies, evaluations and policy recommendations; organization of demonstration activities and pilot projects; communication activities; development of dedicated IT tools ensuring transparent and efficient functioning of the internal market.
Amendment 102 #
2018/0231(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – point b
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) facilitating SMEs' access to EU and global markets, supporting them in addressing global and societal challenges and business internationalisation, and strengthening Union industrial leadership in global value chains, including the Enterprise Europe Network;
Amendment 103 #
2018/0231(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – point c
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – point c
(c) addressing market barriers, including geographical barriers, administrative burden and creating a favourable business environment to empower SMEs tofrom all EU regions to be able to equally benefit from the internal market;
Amendment 104 #
2018/0231(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – point d
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – point d
(d) facilitating the growth of businesses in line with the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, including skills development, digital, and industrial transformation across manufacturing and service sectors;
Amendment 107 #
2018/0231(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 1
1. For actions implementing the specific objective referred to in Article 3(2)(a) of this Regulation with reference to market surveillance authorities of the Member States and of the third countries associated to the Programme and with reference to Union testing facilities as referred to in Article 20 of [Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down rules and procedures for compliance with and enforcement of Union harmonisation legislation on products], the Programme may finance up to a maximum of 100% of eligible costs of an action, provided that the co-financing principle as defined in the Financial Regulation is not infringed.
Amendment 109 #
2018/0231(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – indent 5
Annex II – indent 5
– better measuring of trade in goods and services, foreign direct investment, global value chains and the impact of globalisation on the Union economies.
Amendment 110 #
2018/0231(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – indent 8
Annex II – indent 8
– providing high quality, timely and reliable statistics to support the European Pillar of Social Rights and the Union Skills Policy, including, but not exclusive to, statistics on the labour market, employment, education and training, income, living conditions, poverty, inequality, social protection, undeclared work and satellite accounts on skills;
Amendment 111 #
2018/0231(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – indent 19
Annex II – indent 19
– providing timely and comprehensive statistical indicators on regions, including the Union outermost regions, islands, cities and rural areas to monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of territorial development policies, and to evaluate the territorial impacts of sectoral policies;
Amendment 112 #
2018/0231(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – indent 22
Annex II – indent 22
– systematically promoting European statistics as a trustworthy source of evidence and facilitating fact checkers, especially in the context of an ongoing fake news climax, researchers and public authorities to use it in tackling disinformation online;
Amendment 113 #
2018/0231(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – indent 32
Annex II – indent 32
– building on the ongoing cooperationg with international organisations and third countries for the benefit of global official statistics.
Amendment 164 #
2018/0229(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) The InvestEU Fund should contribute to improving the competitiveness and socioeconomic convergence of the Union, including in the field of innovation and digitisation, the sustainability of the Union's economic growth, the social resilience and inclusiveness and the integration of the Union capital markets, including solutions addressing their fragmentation and diversifying sources of financing for the Union enterprises. To that end, it should support projects that are technically and economically viable by providing a framework tailor-made on the basis of the different regional needs in the EU for the use of debt, risk sharing and equity instruments underpinned by a guarantee from the Union's budget and by contributions from implementing partners. It should be demand-driven while support under the InvestEU Fund should at the same time focus on contributing to meeting policy objectives of the Union.
Amendment 176 #
2018/0229(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) The InvestEU Fund should support investments in tangible and intangible assets to foster growth, investment and employment, and thereby contributing to improved well-being and fairer income distribution in the Union. Intervention through the InvestEU Fund should complement Union support delivered through grants, and thus, the same EU state-aid rules should apply..
Amendment 213 #
2018/0229(COD)
(14) Whereas the level of overall investment in the Union is increasing, investment in higher-risk activities such as social enterprise, research and innovation is still inadequate. The resulting underinvestment in research and innovation is damaging to the industrial and economic competitiveness of the Union and the quality of life of its citizens. The InvestEU Fund should provide the appropriate and suited financial products to cover different stages in the innovation cycle and a wide range of stakeholders, in particular to allow the upscaling of and deployment of solutions at a commercial scale in the Union, in order to make such solutions competitive on world markets.
Amendment 234 #
2018/0229(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) Each policy window should be composed of two compartments, that is to say an EU compartment and a Member State compartment. The EU compartment should address Union-wide market failures or sub-optimal investment situations in a proportionate manner; supported actions should have a clear European added value. The Member State compartment should give Member States the possibility to contribute a share of their resources of Funds under shared management to the provisioning of the EU guarantee to use the EU guarantee for financing or investment operations to address specific market failures or sub-optimal investment situations in their own territory, including in vulnerable and remote areas such as the outermost regions as well as insular and peripheral regions of the Union, to deliver objectives of the Fund under shared management. Actions supported from the InvestEU Fund through either EU or Member State compartments should not duplicate or crowd out private financing or distort competition in the internal market.
Amendment 257 #
2018/0229(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24
Recital 24
(24) The EU guarantee underpinning the InvestEU Fund should be implemented indirectly by the Commission relying on implementing partners with outreach to final recipients. A guarantee agreement allocating guarantee capacity from the InvestEU Fund should be concluded by the Commission with each implementing partner, to support its financing and investment operations meeting the InvestEU Fund objectives and tailor made eligibility criteria. The InvestEU Fund should be provided with a specific governance structure to ensure the appropriate use of the EU guarantee.
Amendment 289 #
2018/0229(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29
Recital 29
(29) In selecting implementing partners for the deployment of the InvestEU Fund, the Commission should consider the counterpart's capacity to fulfil the objectives of the InvestEU Fund and contribute its own resources, in order to ensure adequate geographical coverage and diversification, to crowd-in private investors and to provide sufficient risk diversification as well as new solutions to address market failures and sub-optimal investment situations. Given its role under the Treaties, its capacity to operate in all Member States and the existing experience under the current financial instruments and the EFSI, the European Investment Bank (‘EIB’) Group should remain a privileged implementing partner under the InvestEU Fund's EU compartment. In addition to the EIB Group, national promotional banks or institutions should be able to offer a complementary financial product range given that their experience and capabilities at regional level could be beneficial for the maximisation of the impact of public funds on all the territory of the Union. Moreover, it should be possible to have other international financial institutions as implementing partners, in particular when they present a comparative advantage in terms of specific expertise and experience in certain Member States. It should also be possible for other entities fulfilling the criteria laid down in the Financial Regulation to act as implementing partners.
Amendment 297 #
2018/0229(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30
Recital 30
(30) In order to ensure that interventions under the EU compartment of the InvestEU Fund focus on market failures and sub- optimal investment situations at Union level, but, at the same time, satisfy the objectives of best possible geographic outreach, the EU guarantee should be allocated to implementing partners, which alone or together with other implementing partners, can cover at least threedifferent Member States. However, it is expected that around 75 % of the EU guarantee under the EU compartment would be allocated to implementing partner or partners that can offer financial products under the InvestEU Fund in all Member States.
Amendment 337 #
2018/0229(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5
(5) 'Funds under shared management' means funds that foresee the possibility of voluntarily allocating an amount thereof to the provisioning of a budgetary guarantee under the Member State compartment of the InvestEU Fund, namely the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), the European Social Fund+ (ESF+), the Cohesion Fund, the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF) and the European Agriculture Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD);
Amendment 539 #
2018/0229(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
For the EU compartment, the eligible counterparts shall have expressed their interest and shall be able to cover financing and investment operations in at least threone Member States. The implementing partners may also cover together financing and investment operations in at least three number of Member States by forming a group.
Amendment 701 #
2018/0229(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 4
Article 20 – paragraph 4
4. Fees may be charged for the services referred to in paragraph 2 to cover part of the costs for providing those services. Such fees would need to be proportionate to the potential access to funding.
Amendment 813 #
2018/0229(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – point 2 – point 2.1 a (new)
Annex III – point 2 – point 2.1 a (new)
2.1a Geographical distribution covered by projects.
Amendment 56 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 85 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 85 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) 780% of the eligible public expenditure in the outermost regions and in the smaller Aegean islands within the meaning of Regulation (EU) No 229/2013;
Amendment 57 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 85 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Article 85 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b
(b) 780% of the eligible public expenditure in the less developed regions;
Amendment 58 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 85 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point c a (new)
Article 85 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point c a (new)
(ca) 75% of the eligible public expenditure for transition regions
Amendment 61 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 86 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
Article 86 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
By way of derogation from the first sub- paragraph, Member States that in accordance with Article 53(4) of Regulation (EU) No 1307/2013 used for the purpose of voluntary coupled support more than 13% of their annual national ceiling set out in Annex II to that Regulation, may decide to use for the purpose of coupled income support more than 10% of the amount set out in Annex VII. As an alternative to those percentages, Member States may choose to use up to EUR 3 million per year for financing coupled income support. The resulting percentage, or financing amount shall not exceed the percentage that approved by the Commission for voluntary coupled support in respect of claim year 2018.
Amendment 22 #
2018/0210(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) The multiannual financial framework set out in Regulation (EU) xx/xx6 provides that the Union budget must continue to support fisheries and maritime policies. The EMFF budget should amount, in current prices, to EUR 6 140 000 000. EMFF resources should be split between shared, direct and indirect management. EUR 5 311 000 000 should be allocated to support under shared management and EUR 829 000 000 to support under direct and indirect management. In order to ensure stability in particular with regard to the achievement of the objectives of the CFP, the definition of national allocations under shared management for the 2021- 2027 programming period should be based on the EMFF 2014-2020 shares. Specific amounts should be reserved for the outermost regions and small-scale coastal fisheries based in islands falling under Article 174 TFEU, control and enforcement and collection and processing of data for fisheries management and scientific purposes, while amounts for permanent cessation and extraordinary cessation of fishing activities should be capped. _________________ 6 OJ C […], […], p. […].
Amendment 23 #
2018/0210(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) The EMFF should be based on fourive priorities: fostering sustainable fisheries and the conservation of marine biological resources; contributing to food security in the Union through competitive and sustainable aquaculture and markets; enabling the growth of a sustainable blue economy and fostering prosperous coastal communities; strengthening international ocean governance and enabling safe, secure, clean and sustainably managed seas and oceans; protecting the social and economic survival of small fishing communities and their culture. Those priorities should be pursued through shared, direct and indirect management.
Amendment 28 #
2018/0210(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) Fisheries are vital to the livelihood and cultural heritage of many coastal communities in the Union, in particular where small-scale coastal fishing plays an important role. With the average age in many fishing communities being over 50, generational renewal and diversification of activities remain a challenge. It is therefore essential to allocate specific funding countering this matter.
Amendment 32 #
2018/0210(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27
Recital 27
(27) Given the high level of unpredictability of fishing activities, exceptional circumstances may cause significant economic losses to fishers. In order to mitigate those consequences, it should be possible for the EMFF to support a compensation for the extraordinary cessation of fishing activities ,with a special dedication to small-scale coastal fisheries, caused by the implementation of certain conservation measures, i.e. multiannual plans, targets for the conservation and sustainable exploitation of stocks, measures to adapt the fishing capacity of fishing vessels to available fishing opportunities and technical measures, by the implementation of emergency measures, by the interruption, due to reasons of force majeure, of the application of a sustainable fisheries partnership agreement, by a natural disaster or by an environmental incident. Support should be granted only if the impact on fishers of such circumstances is significant, i.e. if the commercial activities of the vessel concerned are stopped during at least 90 consecutive days, 45 consecutive days in the case of small-scale coastal fisheries, and if the economic losses resulting from the cessation amount to more than 30%, or 15% in the case of small-scale coastal fisheries, of the average annual turnover of the business concerned during a specified period of time. The specificities of eel fisheries should be taken into account in the conditions for granting such support.
Amendment 34 #
2018/0210(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28
Recital 28
(28) Small-scale coastal fishing is carried out by fishing vessels below 12 metres and not using towed fishing gears. That sector represents nearly 75% of all fishing vessels registered in the Union and nearly half of all employment in the fishery sector. Operators from small-scale coastal fisheries are particularly dependant on healthy fish stocks for their main source of income. The EMFF shouldwill therefore give them a preferential treatment through a 100% aid intensity rate, including for operations related to control and enforcement, with the aim of encouraging sustainable fishing practices. In addition, certain areas of support should be reserved for small-scale fishing in fleet segment where the fishing capacity is balanced with the available fishing opportunities, i.e. support for the acquisition of a second- hand vessel and for engine replacement or modernisation. Furthermore, Member States should include in their programme an action plan for small-scale coastal fishing, which should be monitored on the basis of indicators for which milestones and targets should be set.
Amendment 38 #
2018/0210(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 38
Recital 38
(38) Under direct and indirect management, the EMFF should focus on the enabling conditions for a sustainable blue economy through the promotion of an integrated governance and management of the maritime policy, the enhancement of the transfer and uptake of research, innovation and technology in the sustainable blue economy, the improvement of maritime skills, ocean literacy and sharing of socio-economic data on the sustainable blue economy, the promotion of a low-carbon and climate resilient sustainable blue economy and the development of project pipelines and innovative financing instruments. Due consideration to the outermost regions' specific situationspecific situation of the outermost regions and islands falling under Article 174 TFEU should be given in relation to the above mentioned fields.
Amendment 41 #
2018/0210(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 43
Recital 43
(43) Under shared management, each Member States should prepare one single programme that should be approved by the Commission. In the context of regionalisation and with a view to encouraging Member States to have a more strategic approach during the preparation of programmes, the Commission should develop an analysis for each sea basin indicating the common strengths and weaknesses with regard to the achievement of the objectives of the CFP. That analysis should guide both the Member States and the Commission in negotiating each programme taking into account regional challenges and needs. When assessing the programmes, the Commission should take into account the environmental and socio- economic challenges of the CFP, the socio- economic performance of the sustainable blue economy, particularly as regards small-scale coastal fisheries, the challenges at sea basin level, the conservation and restoration of marine ecosystems, the reduction of marine litter and climate change mitigation and adaptation.
Amendment 42 #
2018/0210(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 4 a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 4 a (new)
(4 a) Protecting the social and economic survival of small fishing communities and their culture.
Amendment 43 #
2018/0210(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
(c a) EUR 316 000 000 for small-scale coastal fisheries based in islands falling under Article 174 TFEU
Amendment 44 #
2018/0210(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 4
Article 6 – paragraph 4
4. At least 150% of the Union financial support allocated per Member State shall be allocated to the areas of support referred to in Articles 19 and 20. Member States with no access to Union waters may apply a lower percentage with regard to the extent of their control and data collection tasks.
Amendment 45 #
Amendment 46 #
2018/0210(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 5 – point b
Article 6 – paragraph 5 – point b
(b) 120% of the Union financial support allocated per Member State.
Amendment 47 #
2018/0210(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – point i a (new)
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – point i a (new)
(i a) protection of cultural heritage of small-scale coastal fisheries.
Amendment 48 #
2018/0210(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) the commercial activities of the vessel concerned are stopped during at least 90 consecutive days, 45 consecutive days in the case of small-scale coastal fisheries; and
Amendment 49 #
2018/0210(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) the economic losses resulting from the cessation amount to more than 30%, or 15% in the case of small-scale coastal fisheries, of the annual turnover of the business concerned, calculated on the basis of the average turnover of that business over the preceding three calendar years.
Amendment 50 #
2018/0210(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – title
Article 21 – title
Compensation for additional costs in the outermost regions and small-scale coastal fisheries based in islands falling under Article 174 TFEU for fishery and aquaculture products
Amendment 51 #
2018/0210(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1
Article 21 – paragraph 1
1. The EMFF may support the compensation of additional costs incurred by beneficiaries in the fishing, farming, processing and marketing of certain fishery and aquaculture products from the outermost regions and small-scale coastal fisheries based in islands falling under Article 174 TFEU referred to in Article 6(2).
Amendment 52 #
2018/0210(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 5
Article 21 – paragraph 5
5. Point (b) of paragraph 4 shall not apply if the existing capacity of the processing industry in the outermost region concerned exceeds the quantity of raw material supplied.
Amendment 53 #
2018/0210(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 6 – introductory part
Article 21 – paragraph 6 – introductory part
6. The compensation paid to the beneficiaries carrying out activities referred to in paragraph 1 in the outermost regionsregions concerned or owning a vessel registered in a port of these regions shall, in order to avoid overcompensation, take into account:
Amendment 57 #
2018/0210(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 3
Article 23 – paragraph 3
Amendment 21 #
2018/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) TAsa main instrument in the EU’s promotion of social, economic and territorial cohesion, the ESF+ should provide support to improving the quality, effectiveness and labour market relevance of education and training systems in order to facilitate the acquisition of key competences notably as regards digital skills which all individuals need for personal fulfilment and development, employment, social inclusion and active citizenship. The ESF+ should help progression within education and training and transition to work, support lifelong learning and employability, and contribute to competitiveness and societal and economic innovation by supporting scalable and sustainable initiatives in these fields. This could be achieved for example through work-based learning and apprenticeships, lifelong guidance, skills anticipation in cooperation with industry, up-to-date training materials, forecasting and graduate tracking, training of educators, validation of learning outcomes and recognition of qualifications.
Amendment 22 #
2018/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) The ESF+ should support Member States’ efforts to tackle poverty with a view to breaking the cycle of disadvantage across generations and promote social inclusion by ensuring equal opportunities for all, tackling discrimination and addressing health inequalities. This implies mobilising a range of policies, adapted to the different levels of development between and within EU regions, aimed at targeting the most disadvantaged people regardless of their age, including children, marginalised communities such as the Roma, and the working poor. The ESF+ should promote the active inclusion of people far from the labour market with a view to ensuring their socio-economic integration. The ESF+ should be also used to enhance timely and equal access to affordable, sustainable and high quality services such as healthcare and long-term care, in particular family and community- based care services. The ESF+ should contribute to the modernisation of social protection systems with a view in particular to promoting their accessibility.
Amendment 27 #
2018/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) The ESF+ should support policy and system reforms in the fields of employment, social inclusion, healthcare and long-term care, and education and training. In order to strengthen alignment with the European Semester, Member States should allocate an appropriate amount of their resources of the ESF+ strand under shared management to implement relevant country-specific recommendations relating to structural challenges which it is appropriate to address through multiannual investments falling within the scope of the ESF+. The Commission and the Member States should ensure coherence, coordination and complementarity between the shared- management and Health strands of ESF+ and the Reform Support Programme, including the Reform Delivery Tool and the Technical Support Instrument, as well as the European Pillar of Social Rights and the Sustainabale Development Goals. In particular, the Commission and the Member State should ensure, in all stages of the process, effective coordination in order to safeguard the consistency, coherence, complementarity and synergy among sources of funding, including technical assistance thereof.
Amendment 32 #
2018/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
Recital 25
(25) In accordance with Article 349 and 174 TFEU and Article 2 of Protocol No 6 to the 1994 Act of Accession, the outermost regions, islands, and the northern sparsely populated regions, are entitled to specific measures under common policies and EU programmes. Due to the permanent constraints these regions require specific support.
Amendment 40 #
2018/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1
The ESF+ aims to support Member States to achieve high employment levels, fair social protection and a skilled and resilient workforce ready for the future world of work, in line with the principles set out in the European Pillar of Social Rights proclaimed by the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on 17 November 2017, and thus aim towards the strengthening of economic, social and territorial cohesion in the EU..
Amendment 42 #
2018/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point i
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point i
(i) improving access to employment of all jobseekers, in particular youth and long- term unemployed, students approaching the end of their study cycle, and of inactive people, promoting self-employment and the social economy;
Amendment 46 #
2018/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point vii
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point vii
(vii) fostering active social and economic inclusion with a view to promoting equal opportunities and active participation, and improving employability;
Amendment 48 #
2018/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Member States shall concentrate the ESF+ resources under shared management on interventions that address the challenges identified in their national reform programmes, in the European Semester as well as in the relevant country-specific recommendations adopted in accordance with Article 121(2) TFEU and Article 148(4) TFEU, and take intoensure the implementation of the account principles and rights set out in the European Pillar of Social Rights.
Amendment 63 #
2018/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1
Article 11 – paragraph 1
The actions addressing the challenges identified in relevant country-specific recommendations and in the European Semester as referred to in Article 7(2) shall be programmed under one or more dedicated priorities, ensuing coherence with the European Pillar of Social Rights and the Sustinable Development Goals.
Amendment 69 #
2018/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 23 – paragraph 1 – point d
d) to provide specific support services to employers and job-seekers, as well as students approaching the end of their study cycle, with a view to the development of integrated European labour markets, ranging from pre- recruitment preparation to post-placement assistance to fill vacancies in certain sectors, professions, countries, border regions or for particular groups (e.g. vulnerable people);
Amendment 54 #
2018/0199(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) Article 176 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union ('TFEU') provides that the European Regional Development Fund ('ERDF') is intended to help to redress the main regional imbalances in the Union. Under that Article and the second and third paragraphs of Article 174 of the TFEU, the ERDF is to contribute to reducing disparities between the levels of development of the various regions and to reducing the backwardness of the least favoured regions, among which particular attention is to be paid to certain categories of regions, among which cross-border regions or regions which suffer from severe and permanent natural or demographic handicaps such as northernmost regions, island, cross- border regions, mountain regions and rural areas are explicitly listed.
Amendment 60 #
2018/0199(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) In order to support the harmonious development of the Union's territory at different levels, the ERDF should support cross-border cooperation, transnational cooperation, maritime cooperation, outermost regions’ cooperation and interregional cooperation under the European territorial cooperation goal (Interreg).
Amendment 69 #
2018/0199(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) The cross-border cooperation component should aim to tackle common challenges identified jointly in the border regions, and to exploit the untapped growth potential in border areas as evidenced in the Communication of the Commission 'Boosting Growth and Cohesion in EU Border Regions’23 ('Border Regions Communication'). Consequently, the cross-border component should be limited to cooperation on land borders and cross- border cooperation on maritime borders should be integrated into the transnational component. _________________ 23 Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament 'Boosting growth and cohesion in EU border regions' - COM(2017) 534 final, 20.9.2017. Consequently, the cross-border component should include cooperation on land and maritime borders.
Amendment 84 #
2018/0199(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) The transnational cooperation and maritime cooperation component should aim to strengthen cooperation by means of actions conducive to integrated territorial development linked to the Union's cohesion policy priorities, and should also include maritime cross-border cooperation. Transnational cooperation should cover larger territories on the mainland of the Union, whereas maritime cooperation should cover territories around sea-basins and integrate cross-border cooperation on maritime borders during the programming period 2014-2020. Maximum flexibility should be given to continue implementing previous maritime cross-border cooperation within a larger maritime cooperation framework, in particular by defining the territory covered, the specific objectives for such cooperation, the requirements for a project partnership and the setting-up of sub-programmes and specific steering committeesooperation.
Amendment 97 #
2018/0199(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) Based on the experience with the interregional cooperation programmes under Interreg and the lack of such cooperation within programmes under the Investment for jobs and growth goal during the programming period 2014-2020, the interregional cooperation component should focus more specifically on boosting the effectiveness of cohesion policy. That component should therefore be limited to twoinclude three programmes, one to enable all kind of experience, innovative approaches and capacity building for programmes under both goals and to promote European groupings of territorial cooperation ('EGTCs') set up or to be set up pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1082/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council24 , one to offer opportunities for regional and local public authorities across Europe to share ideas and experiences on public policy in practise, therefore improving synergies for their citizens and communities and one to improve the analysis of development trends. Project- based cooperation throughout the Union should be integrated into the new component on interregional innovation investments and closely linked to the implementation of the Communication from the Commission 'Strengthening Innovation in Europe's Regions: Strategies for resilient, inclusive and sustainable growth'25 , in particular to support thematic smart specialisation platforms on fields such as energy, industrial modernisation or agrifood. Finally, integrated territorial development focusing on functional urban areas or urban areas should be concentrated within programmes under the Investment for jobs and growth goal and in one accompanying instrument, the ‘European Urban Initiative”. The two programmes under the interregional cooperation component should cover the whole Union and should also be open for the participation of third countries. _________________ 24 Regulation (EC) No 1082/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2006 on a European grouping of territorial cooperation (EGTC) (OJ L 210, 31.7.2006, p. 19). 25 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions 'Strengthening Innovation in Europe's Regions: Strategies for resilient, inclusive and sustainable growth' - COM(2017) 376 final, 18.7.2017.
Amendment 114 #
2018/0199(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) It is necessary to continue supporting or, as appropriate, to establish cooperation in all its dimensions with the Union's neighbouring third countries, as such cooperation is an important regional development policy tool and should benefit the regions of the Member States which border third countries. To that effect, the ERDF and the external financing instruments of the Union, IPA27, NDICI28 and OCTP29, should support programmes under cross-border cooperation, transnational cooperation and maritime cooperation, outermost regions’ cooperation and interregional cooperation. The support from the ERDF and from the external financing instruments of the Union should be based on reciprocity and proportionality. However, for IPA III CBC and NDICI CBC, the ERDF support should be complemented by at least equivalent amounts under IPA III CBC and NDICI CBC, subject to a maximum amount set out in the respective legal act, that is to say, up to 3 % of the financial envelope under IPA III and up to 4 % of the financial envelope of the Neighbourhood geographic programme under Article 4(2)(a) of the NDICI. _________________ 27 Regulation (EU) XXX establishing the Instrument for Pre-accession Assistance (OJ L xx, p. y). 28 Regulation (EU) XXX establishing the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument (OJ L xx, p. y). 29 Council Decision (EU) XXX on the association of the Overseas Countries and Territories with the European Inion including relations between the European Union on the one hand and Greenland and the Kingdom of Denmark on the other (OJ L xx, p. y).
Amendment 120 #
2018/0199(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10 a (new)
Recital 10 a (new)
(10 a) appropriate consideration should be paid to regions becoming new external borders of the European Union to ensure the adequate continuity of on-going cooperation programmes.
Amendment 129 #
2018/0199(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) It is necessary to set out the resources allocated to each of the different components of Interreg, including each Member State's share of the global amounts for the cross-border cooperation, the transnational cooperation and maritime cooperation, the outermost regions’ cooperation and the interregional cooperation, the potential available to Member States concerning flexibility between those components. Compared to the programming period 2014-2020, the share for cross-border cooperation should be reduced, while the share for transnational cooperation and maritime cooperation should be increased because of the integration of maritime cooperation, and a new outermost regions’ cooperation component should be created.
Amendment 158 #
2018/0199(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27
Recital 27
(27) Member States should be encouraged to assign, where appropriate, delegate the functions of the managing authority to an EGTC or to make such a grouping, like other cross-border legal bodies, responsible for managing a sub-programme, an integrated territorial investment or one or more small project funds, or to act as sole partner. Member States shall enable regional and local authorities and other public bodies from different Member States to set up such cooperation groupings with a legal personality and shall involve local and regional authorities in their functioning in order to enhance the territorial ownership of these initiatives;
Amendment 188 #
2018/0199(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point a
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point a
(a) internal cross-border cooperation between adjacent land and maritime border regions of two or more Member States or between adjacent land and maritime border regions of at least one Member State and one or more third countries listed in Article 4(3); or
Amendment 195 #
2018/0199(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b – introductory part
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b – introductory part
(b) external cross-border cooperation, between adjacent land and maritime border regions of at least one Member State and of one or more of the following:
Amendment 200 #
2018/0199(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 2
(2) transnational cooperation and maritime cooperation over larger transnational territories or around sea- basins, involving national, regional and local programme partners in Member States, third countries and partner countries and in Greenland, with a view to achieving a higher degree of territorial integration ('component 2'; where referring only to transnational cooperation: 'component 2A'; where referring only to maritime cooperation: ‘component 2B’);
Amendment 225 #
2018/0199(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1
Article 4 – paragraph 1
1. For cross-border cooperation, the regions to be supported by the ERDF shall be the NUTS level 3 regions of the Union along all internal and external land and maritime borders with third countries or partner countries.
Amendment 242 #
2018/0199(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 4
Article 4 – paragraph 4
4. For external cross-border cooperation, the regions to be supported by IPA III or NDICI shall be NUTS level 3 regions of the respective partner country or, in the absence of NUTS classification, equivalent areas along all land or maritime borders between Member States and partner countries eligible under IPA III or NDICI.
Amendment 247 #
2018/0199(COD)
1. For transnational cooperation and maritime cooperation, the regions to be supported by the ERDF shall be the NUTS level 2 regions of the Union covering contiguous functional areas, taking into account, where applicable, macro-regional strategies or sea basin strategies.
Amendment 253 #
2018/0199(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Transnational cooperation and maritime cooperation Interreg programmes may cover:
Amendment 272 #
2018/0199(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2
Article 8 – paragraph 2
2. The implementing act referred to in paragraph 1 shall also contain a list specifying those NUTS level 3 regions of the Union taken into account for the ERDF allocation for cross-border cooperation at all internal land and maritime borders and those external borders covered by the external financing instruments of the Union as well as a list specifying those NUTS level 3 regions taken into account for allocation purposes under component 2B referred to in point (a) of Article 9(3).
Amendment 338 #
2018/0199(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 – introductory part
Article 9 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 – introductory part
The allocation of resources per Member State, which covers cross-border and transnational cooperation, and includes the contribution from the ERDF to the European Neighbourhood Instrument and the Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance, shall be determined by the weighted sum of the share of the population of border regions and of the share of the total population of each Member State. The weighting shall be as follows: cross-border component (77.9%), transnational component (22.1%). Population size in the following regions shall be used as the criterion for the breakdown by Member State:
Amendment 339 #
2018/0199(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 – point a
Article 9 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 – point a
(a) NUTS level 3 regions for component 1 and those NUTS level 3 regions for component 2B listed in the implementing act under Article 8(2);
Amendment 382 #
2018/0199(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 4 – point a – introductory part
Article 14 – paragraph 4 – point a – introductory part
(a) under component 1 and 2B Interreg programmes:
Amendment 463 #
2018/0199(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 1
Article 19 – paragraph 1
1. The Member State hosting the managing authority may submit a motivated request for an amendment of an Interreg programme together with the amended programme, and after consultation of the regional and local authorities and in accordance with Article 6 of the CPR, setting out the expected impact of that amendment on the achievement of the objectives.
Amendment 477 #
2018/0199(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1
Article 19 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1
The Member State may transfer during the programming period an amount of up to 5% of the initial allocation of a priority and no more than 3% of the programme budget to another priority of the same Interreg programme., and after consultation of the regional and local authorities and in accordance of the Article 6 of the CPR,
Amendment 642 #
2018/0199(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 5
Article 44 – paragraph 5
5. With regard to an Interreg programme under component 2B or under component 1 where the latter covers long borders with heterogenous development challenges and needs, Member States and, where applicable, third countries, partner countries and OCTs participating in an Interreg programme may define sub- programme areas.
Amendment 28 #
2018/0197(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c – point iv a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c – point iv a (new)
(iva) promote transport connections, including maritime connection, for the peripheral and insular regions of the EU;
Amendment 35 #
2018/0197(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) those with a gross national income ratio equal to or above 100 5% of the EU average ('group 1');
Amendment 37 #
2018/0197(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point b
(b) those with a gross national income ratio equal to or above 75 % and below 1005 % of the EU average ('group 2');
Amendment 56 #
2018/0197(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) investment in airport infrastructure except for outermost regions and regions which suffer from severe and permanent natural or demographic handicaps in line with Article 174 TFEU;
Amendment 58 #
2018/0197(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point j – point ii
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point j – point ii
(ii) provision of rail transport services on lines fully opened toin compliance with EU competition rules, and the beneficiary is a new entrant eligible for funding under Regulation (EU) 2018/xxxx [Invest EU regulation].
Amendment 59 #
2018/0197(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2
Article 6 – paragraph 2
2. In addition, the Cohesion Fund shall not support investment in housing unless related to the promotion of energy efficiency or, renewable energy use, or water usage.
Amendment 474 #
2018/0197(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3
With regard to programmes under the Investment for Jobs and growth goal for the outermost regions and all NUTS level 2 regions consisting solely of island Member States or of islands which form part of Member States, they shall be classified as falling within group 3.
Amendment 611 #
2018/0197(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) investment in airport infrastructure except for outermost regions and island Member States or islands which form part of Member States;
Amendment 3 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) In order to contribute to Union priorities, the Funds should focus their support on a limited number of policy objectives in line with their Fund-specific missions pursuant to their Treaty-based objectives. The policy objectives for the AMIF, the ISF and the BMVI should be set out in the respective Funds-specific regulations, giving special priority to EU peripheral and island regions falling under the scope of Article174 TFEU, and that are being hit by the immigration challenge.
Amendment 25 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) a more connected Europe by enhancing , both land and maritime, mobility and regional ICT connectivity;
Amendment 26 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) a Europe closer to citizens by fostering the sustainable and integrated development of urban, rural and coastal and island areas, and local initiatives.;
Amendment 27 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
(ea) a Europe which aims at the equal socio-economic development of all its territories.
Amendment 31 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 4
Article 4 – paragraph 4
4. Member States and the Commission shall ensure the coordination, complementarity and coherence between the Funds and other Union instruments such as the Reform Support Programme, including the Reform Delivery Tool and the Technical Support Instrument. They shall optimise mechanisms for coordination between those responsible to avoid duplication during planning and implementation.
Amendment 33 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) In order to contribute to Union priorities, the Funds should focus their support on a limited number of policy objectives in line with their Fund-specific missions pursuant to their Treaty-based objectives. The policy objectives for the AMIF, the ISF and the BMVI should be set out in the respective Funds-specific regulations, giving special priority to EU peripheral and island regions falling under the scope of Article 174 TFEU, and that are being hit by the immigration challenge.
Amendment 45 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) a more connected Europe by enhancing, both land and maritime, mobility and regional ICT connectivity;
Amendment 47 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) a Europe closer to citizens by fostering the sustainable and integrated development of urban, rural and, coastal and island areas, and local initiatives.
Amendment 48 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
(e a) a Europe which aims at the equal socio-economic development of all its territories.
Amendment 50 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 4
Article 4 – paragraph 4
4. Member States and the Commission shall ensure the coordination, complementarity and coherence between the Funds and other Union instruments such as the Reform Support Programme, including the Reform Delivery Tool and the Technical Support Instrument. They shall optimise mechanisms for coordination between those responsible to avoid duplication during planning and implementation.
Amendment 75 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3
For programmes supported by the AMIF, the ISF and the BMVI, a programme shall consist of specific objectives. In the case of AMIF specifically, EU peripheral and island regions falling under the scope of Article 174 TFEU, and that are being hit by the immigration challenge, are to be given utmost priority.
Amendment 76 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point a – point i
Article 17 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point a – point i
(i) economic, social and territorial disparities, except for programmes supported by the EMFF, as well as territorial challenges based on permanent natural or demographic handicaps as referred to in Article 174 TFEU;
Amendment 78 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point d – point iv
Article 17 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point d – point iv
(iv) specific territories targeted, including arrangements to address key challenges of insular and peripheral regions and the planned use of integrated territorial investment, community-led local development or other territorial tools;
Amendment 82 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1
Article 21 – paragraph 1
1. A Member States may, upon its voluntary decision, request the transfer of up to 5 % of programme financial allocations from any of the Funds to any other Fund under shared management or to any instrument under direct or indirect management.
Amendment 83 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 5
Article 23 – paragraph 5
5. Support may be provided for the preparation and design of territorial strategies, especially as regards technical assistance towards geographical areas which suffer from permanent natural or demographic handicaps as referred to in Article 174 TFEU.
Amendment 87 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 37 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
The managing authority shall electronically transmit to the Commission cumulative data for each programme by 31 January, 31 March, 31 May, 31 July, 30 SeptemberJuly, and 30 November of each year in accordance with the template set out in Annex VII.
Amendment 91 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3
For programmes supported by the AMIF, the ISF and the BMVI, a programme shall consist of specific objectives. In the case of AMIF specifically, EU peripheral and island regions falling under the scope of Article 174 TFEU, and that are being hardest hit by the immigration challenge, are to be given utmost priority.
Amendment 92 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point a – point i
Article 17 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point a – point i
(i) economic, social and territorial disparities, except for programmes supported by the EMFF, as well as territorial challenges based on permanent natural or demographic handicaps as referred to in Article 174 TFEU;
Amendment 93 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 62 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 62 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Operations financed under the programs covered by this Regulation shall be considered as complying with EU state aid rules.
Amendment 99 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point d – point iv
Article 17 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point d – point iv
(iv) specific territories targeted, including arrangements to address key challenges of insular and peripheral regions and the planned use of integrated territorial investment, community-led local development or other territorial tools;
Amendment 99 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 84 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 84 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) 2021: 03.5 %;
Amendment 101 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 84 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Article 84 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b
(b) 2022: 03.5 %;
Amendment 104 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 84 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point c
Article 84 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point c
(c) 2023: 03.5 %;
Amendment 109 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 84 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point d
Article 84 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point d
(d) 2024: 03.5 %;
Amendment 110 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 84 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point e
Article 84 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point e
(e) 2025: 03.5 %;
Amendment 113 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 84 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point f
Article 84 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point f
(f) 2026: 03.5 %
Amendment 115 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1
Article 21 – paragraph 1
1. A Member States may, upon its voluntary decision, request the transfer of up to 5 % of programme financial allocations from any of the Funds to any other Fund under shared management or to any instrument under direct or indirect management.
Amendment 121 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 104 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 6
Article 104 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 6
Rules applicable for the transport sector under Regulation (EU) [new CEF Regulation] shall apply to the specific calls referred to in the first subparagraph. Until 31 December 2023, the selection of projects eligible for financing shall respect the national allocations under the Cohesion Fund with regard to 7100% of the resources transferred to the CEF.
Amendment 123 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 5
Article 23 – paragraph 5
5. Support may be provided for the preparation and design of territorial strategies, especially as regards technical assistance towards geographical areas which suffer from permanent natural or demographic handicaps as referred to in Article 174 TFEU;.
Amendment 127 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 106 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 106 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) 790 % for the less developed regions;
Amendment 129 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 106 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Article 106 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point b
(b) 575 % for the transition regions;
Amendment 131 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 106 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point c
Article 106 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point c
(c) 460 % for the more developed regions.
Amendment 133 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 37 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
The managing authority shall electronically transmit to the Commission cumulative data for each programme by 31 January, 31 March, 31 May, 31 July, 30 SeptemberJuly, and 30 November of each year in accordance with the template set out in Annex VII.
Amendment 133 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 106 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
Article 106 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
The co-financing rates for all island and outermost regions falling under Articles 174 and 349 TFEU shall not be higher than 90%.
Amendment 134 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 106 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3
Article 106 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3
The co-financing rate for the Cohesion Fund at the level of each priority shall not be higher than 790 %.
Amendment 135 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 62 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 62 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Operations financed under the programs covered by this Regulation shall be considered as complying with EU state aid rules.
Amendment 137 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 106 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Article 106 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
The co-financing rate for Interreg programmes shall be no higher than 790 %.
Amendment 157 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 84 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 84 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) 2021: 03.5 %;
Amendment 159 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 84 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Article 84 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b
(b) 2022: 03.5 %;
Amendment 161 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 84 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point c
Article 84 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point c
(c) 2023: 03.5 %;
Amendment 163 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 84 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point d
Article 84 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point d
(d) 2024: 03.5 %;
Amendment 165 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 84 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point e
Article 84 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point e
(e) 2025: 03.5 %;
Amendment 167 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 84 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point f
Article 84 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point f
(f) 2026: 03.5 %
Amendment 171 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 102 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Article 102 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b
(b) transition regions, whose GDP per capita is between 75 % and 1005% of the average GDP of the EU-27 ('transition regions');
Amendment 172 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 102 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point c
Article 102 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point c
(c) more developed regions, whose GDP per capita is above 1005 % of the average GDP of the EU-27 ('more developed regions').
Amendment 184 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 104 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 6
Article 104 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 6
Rules applicable for the transport sector under Regulation (EU) [new CEF Regulation] shall apply to the specific calls referred to in the first subparagraph. Until 31 December 2023, the selection of projects eligible for financing shall respect the national allocations under the Cohesion Fund with regard to 7100% of the resources transferred to the CEF.
Amendment 186 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 106 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 106 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) 790 % for the less developed regions ;
Amendment 187 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 106 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Article 106 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point b
(b) 575 % for the transition regions;
Amendment 188 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 106 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point c
Article 106 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point c
(c) 460 % for the more developed regions.
Amendment 189 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 106 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
Article 106 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
The co-financing rates for all island and outermost regions falling under Articles 174 and 349 TFEU shall not be higher than 90%.
Amendment 190 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 106 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3
Article 106 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3
The co-financing rate for the Cohesion Fund at the level of each priority shall not be higher than 790 %.
Amendment 191 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 106 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Article 106 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
The co-financing rate for Interreg programmes shall be no higher than 790 %.
Amendment 95 #
2018/0135(CNS)
Proposal for a decision
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) The retention, by way of collection costs, of 20 % of the amounts collected by the Member States for traditional Own Resources constitutes a high share of Own Resources not being made available to the Union Budget. The collection costs retained by Member States from the traditional Own Resources should be restored from 20% to the original level of 10% to better align financial support for customs equipment, staff and information with the actual costs and needs. However, the overhead costs of running tax systems being proportionately greater for small member states than for larger economies, an audit of costs and tax outturn should be carried out in all Member States to determine variances in collection costs. The results of such audit will be taken into account when implementing the stated adjustment. Or. en (NOTE: the text comes from COM(2018)0325)
Amendment 214 #
2018/0114(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Directive (EU) No 2017/1132
Article 86 c – paragraph 3
Article 86 c – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall ensure that the competent authority of the departure Member State shall not authorise the cross- border conversion where it determines, after an examination of the specific case and having regard to all relevant facts and circumstances, that it constitutes an wholly artificial arrangement aimed at obtaining undue tax advantages or at undulys defined in Article 6 of the Council Directive 2016/1164 or is aimed at prejudicing the legal or contractual rights of employees, creditors or minority members.
Amendment 51 #
2018/0073(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) Given the problem of taxing the digital economy is of a global nature, the ideal approach would be to find a multilateral, international solution to it. The Commission is actively engaged in the international debate for that reason. Work at the OECD is currently ongoing. However, progress at international level is challenging. Hence, action is being taken to adapt the corporate tax rules at Union level27 and to encourage agreements to be reached with non-Union jurisdictions28 , so that the corporate tax framework can be made to fit the new digital business models. There is a common interest in maintaining a coherent yet relevant set of international rules. Therefore, coherence with the BEPS Inclusive Framework should be ensured, given the absence of consensus on the merits for interim measures. _________________ 27 Proposal for a Council Directive laying down rules relating to the corporate taxation of a significant digital presence (COM(2018) 147 final). 28 Commission Recommendation relating to the corporate taxation of a significant digital presence (C(2018) 1650 final).
Amendment 78 #
2018/0073(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) Services consisting in the placing on a digital interface of a client's advertising targeted at users of that interface should not be defined by reference to who owns the digital interface through which the advertising appears on a user's device, but rather by reference to the entity responsible for enabling the advertising to appear on that interface. This is because the value for a business placing a client's advertising on a digital interface lies with user traffic and the user data which is typically taken into account for the purposes of the placement, regardless of whether the interface belongs to the business itself or to a third party who is renting out the digital space where the advertisement will appear. However, it should be clarified that in cases where the supplier of the advertising service and the owner of the digital interface are different entities, the latter should not be considered to have provided a taxable service for DST purposes. This is in order to avoid possible cascading effects and double taxation. Moreover, the DST as proposed will require companies to keep significant volume of user data to be able to commute tax in each Member State, an approach that could not be in compliance with data protection safeguards.
Amendment 127 #
2018/0073(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 41
Recital 41
(41) The objectives of this Directive aim at protecting the integrity of the Single Market, ensuring its proper functioning and avoiding distortion of competition. Should Member States consider the interim measure, the scope shall be kept targeted in order to mitigate the impact on investment, innovations and growth in the European Digital Single Market. Since those objectives, by their very nature, cannot be sufficiently achieved by Member States but can rather 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 of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Directive does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve those objectives,
Amendment 30 #
2018/0072(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) The Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS) Action 1 report on "Addressing the Tax Challenges of the Digital Economy" released by the OECD in October 2015 set out various different approaches for taxing the digital economy which were further examined in the OECD "Tax challenges Arising from Digitalisation – Interim Report 2018". As the digital transformation of the economy accelerates there is a growing need to find solutions to ensure a fair and effective taxation of digital companies. There is indeed a common interest in maintaining a coherent yet relevant set of international rules. Therefore, the EU shall continue to work towards a consensus-based solution in the BEPS Inclusive Framework.
Amendment 44 #
2018/0072(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 8
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. 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. Specific attention should be given to ensure that the approach is not risking to favour an EU solution skewed against smaller markets. 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.
Amendment 16 #
2018/0064(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) The establishment of the Authority should notis not meant to directly create new rights and obligations for individuals or employers, including economic operators or non-profit organisations, as the activities of the Authority should cover them to the extent to which they are covered by the Union law within the scope of this Regulation. It should however strengthen workers’ rights under the current set of Union legislation.
Amendment 21 #
2018/0064(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) The Member States and the Commission should be represented on a Management Board, in order to ensure the effective functioning of the Authority. The composition of the Management Board, including the selection of its Chair and Deputy-Chair, should respect the principles of gender and geographical balance, experience and qualification. In view of the effective and efficient functioning of the Authority, the Management Board, in particular, should adopt an annual work programme, carry out its functions relating to the Authority’s budget, adopt the financial rules applicable to the Authority, appoint an Executive Director, and establish procedures for taking decisions relating to the operational tasks of the Authority by the Executive Director. Representatives from countries other than Union Member States, which are applying the Union rules within the scope of the Authority, may participate in the meetings of the Management Board as observers.
Amendment 29 #
2018/0064(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
(ca) aim at protecting the share of Union citizens who move to work in another Member State and become vulnerable to exploitation and indecent working conditions, including bogus self- employment, particularly due to difficulties in accessing adequate public support.
Amendment 30 #
2018/0064(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) facilitate access to information by individuals, employees, and employers on rights and obligations in cross-border situations as well as access to cross-border labour mobility services, in accordance with Articles 6 and 7;
Amendment 32 #
2018/0064(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point g
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point g
(g) facilitate cooperation between relevant stakeholders in the event of cross- border labour market disruptions, in accordance with Article 14., as well as in supporting individuals who, within the framework of cross-border labour mobility, experience precarious working conditions, including bogus self- employment and, as a consequence, are vulnerable to penury;
Amendment 34 #
2018/0064(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point g a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point g a (new)
(ga) monitor Member States’ voluntary return programmes that support individuals who want to return to their countries of origin after having been engaged in cross-border labour mobility.
Amendment 35 #
2018/0064(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) provide relevant information on the rights and obligations of individuals in cross-border labour mobility situations, including information on their social rights such as administrative, employment, health and housing services;
Amendment 36 #
2018/0064(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3
Article 10 – paragraph 3
3. TUpon request, the Authority shall provide logistical and technical support, which may include translation and interpretation services, to Member States carrying out concerted or joint inspections.
Amendment 37 #
2018/0064(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 3
Article 11 – paragraph 3
3. The Authority shall regularlyissue semi- annual reports on its findings to the Commission, as well as directly to the Member States concerned, outlining possible measures to address identified weaknesses. These reports shall be made publicly available.
Amendment 39 #
2018/0064(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1
Article 18 – paragraph 1
1. The Management Board shall be composed of one senior representative from each Member State, two representatives of the European Economic and Social Committee, and two representatives of the Commission, all of whom have voting rights.
Amendment 40 #
2018/0064(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 20 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
The Management Board shall elect a Chairperson and a Deputy Chairperson from among the members with voting rights, and shall strive for gender and geographical balance. The Chairperson and the Deputy Chairperson shall be elected by a majority of two-thirds of the members of the Management Board with voting rights.
Amendment 41 #
2018/0064(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 4
Article 24 – paragraph 4
4. The Stakeholder Group shall be composed of six representatives of Union- level social partners equally representing trade unions and employer’s organisations, two representatives of the European Economic Social Committee, and two representatives of the Commission.
Amendment 42 #
2018/0064(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 5
Article 24 – paragraph 5
5. The members of the Stakeholder Group shall be nominated by their respective organisations and appointed by the Management Board. The Management Board shall also appoint alternate members, in accordance with the same conditions as members, who shall automatically replace any members who are absent or indisposed. To the extent possible, an appropriate gender and geographical balance shall be respected, as well as adequate representation of SMEs.
Amendment 44 #
2018/0064(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 1
Article 34 – paragraph 1
1. In addition to the National Liaison Officers, the Authority may make use in any areas of its work of other seconded national experts or other, and in exceptional cases, staff not employed by the Authority.
Amendment 45 #
2018/0064(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 38 – paragraph 1
Article 38 – paragraph 1
1. In order to facilitate the combating of fraud, corruption and other unlawful activities in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 883/2013, within six months from the day that the Authority becomes operational, it shall accede to the Interinstitutional Agreement of 25 May 1999 concerning internal investigations by OLAF and adopt appropriate provisions applicable to all employees of the Authority using the template set out in the Annex to that Agreement.
Amendment 88 #
2018/0043(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 15 a (new)
Recital 15 a (new)
(15 a) Debt instruments covered by strategic assets of importance for growth, innovation and sustainability, which are riskier than government debt and mortgages and do not fall within Article 6 of this Directive should be eligible for European Secured Notes (ESNs). ESNs might provide a useful additional source of funding to the real economy for banks. The Commission shall carry out an assessment on the possibility to introduce a dual recourse instrument named ESNs and present the appropriate EU legal framework and regulatory treatment by one year after the entry into force of this Directive.
Amendment 89 #
2018/0043(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) Covered bonds have specific structural features that aim to protect investors at all times. Those features include the requirement that investors in covered bonds have a claim not only on the issuer but also on assets in a dedicated cover pool. To ensure that those assets are of good quality, specific requirements on the quality of assets that can be included in the pool should be laid down. Those structural product related requirements differ from the prudential requirements applicable to a credit institution issuing covered bonds. The former should not focus on ensuring the prudential health of the issuing institution, but rather aim at protecting investors by imposing specific requirements on the covered bond itself. In addition to the specific requirement to use high quality assets in the cover pool, it is also appropriate to regulate the general requirements of the features of the cover pool to further strengthen investor protection. Those requirements should include specific rules aimed at protecting the cover pool, including rules on the segregation (including by means of a Special Purpose Vehicle, an SPV) and location of the assets in the cover pool to ensure the fulfilment of the investor's rights including in case of resolution or insolvency of the issuer. It is also important to regulate the composition of the cover pool to ensure its homogeneity and facilitate a fair risk assessment by the investor. Furthermore, requirements for coverage should be defined in this Directive, without prejudice to the right of Member States to allow different means of mitigating e.g. currency and interest rate risks. The calculation of the coverage and the conditions under which derivatives contracts can be included in the cover pool should also be defined by Member States to ensure that cover pools are subject to common high quality standards across the Union.
Amendment 94 #
2018/0043(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 33
Recital 33
(33) Covered bonds are currently marketed in the Union under national denominations and labels, some of which are well-established. In several Member States however such denominations or labels do not exist. It seems therefore necessary to allow credit institutions which issue covered bonds in the Union to use the specific 'EuropeanU Covered Bonds' label when selling covered bonds to both Union and third countries' investors under the condition that those covered bonds comply with the requirements set out in Union lawthis Directive. If covered bonds also comply with the requirements set out in Article 129 of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013, credit institutions should be allowed to use the label 'Premium EU Covered Bonds'. It is necessary to establish such label in order to make it easier for those investors to assess the quality of the covered bonds and hence make them more attractive as an investment vehicle both inside and outside the Union. The use of that label should however be facultative and Member States should be able to keep their own national denominations and labelling framework in place in parallel to the 'European Covered Bonds' label.
Amendment 134 #
2018/0043(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point d a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point d a (new)
(d a) for physical assets, international valuation standards or a public register to record ownership and claims are available.
Amendment 135 #
2018/0043(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Loans to public undertakings as defined in Article 2(b) of Commission Directive 2006/111/EC shall be considered eligible to serve as collateral in the cover pool if guaranteed by the national authority or Ministry responsible for public finance.
Amendment 146 #
2018/0043(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 4 a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 4 a (new)
For the purposes of point (da), Member States may decide for legal opinions to replace the registration in a public register, provided that the legal opinions ensure investor protection by confirming the enforceability of the claim. The credit institution issuing covered bonds shall provide, upon request of the competent authority, the most recent version of the independent, written and reasoned legal opinion or opinions that it used to replace the registration in a public register.
Amendment 178 #
2018/0043(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 1
Article 10 – paragraph 1
Member States shall ensure investor protection by providing for a sufficient level of homogeneity of the assets in the cover pool so that they shall be of a similar nature in terms of structural features, lifetime of assets or risk profilelaying down rules on the composition of cover pool, which would provide for a sufficient level of homogeneity of the assets in the cover pool.
Amendment 207 #
2018/0043(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b
(b) all assets in the cover pool are subject to legally binding and enforceable separgregation by the credit institution issuing covered bonds;
Amendment 237 #
2018/0043(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point c – point iv
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point c – point iv
(iv) derivative contracts held in accordance with Article 11 or outside the cover pool but segregated or otherwise secured to the benefit of the covered bondholders and in compliance with the segregation requirements set out in Article 12 of this Directive;
Amendment 251 #
2018/0043(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) assets qualifying as level 1, level 2A and level 2B assets pursuant to Articles 10, 11 and 12 of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2015/61, valuated in accordance with Article 9 of that Delegated Regulation and segregated in accordance with Article 132 of this Directive;
Amendment 255 #
2018/0043(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point b
(b) exposures to credit institutions that qualify for the credit quality step 1, credit quality step 2 or credit quality step 3, in accordance with Article 129(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013.
Amendment 265 #
2018/0043(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 4
Article 16 – paragraph 4
4. Where the credit institution issuing covered bonds is subject to liquidity requirements set out in other acts of Union law, resulting in overlapping with the cover pool liquidity buffer, Member States may decide that the national rules transposing paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 do not apply throughout the period foreseen in those acts of Union law. Member States shall ensure that the cover pool liquidity buffer is maintained from the calendar day after the expiry of the period foreseen in those acts of the Union law and shall cover any calendar days remaining under the requirement set out in paragraph 2.
Amendment 281 #
2018/0043(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 27 – paragraph 1
Article 27 – paragraph 1
Member States shall allow credit institutions to use the label Europeanensure that the label ‘Premium EU Covered Bonds’ is used only for covered bonds which meet the requirements laid down in the provisions transposing this Directive and do not fall below the requirements set by Article 129 (1) of Regulation (EU) No575/2013. Member States shall ensure that the label 'EU Covered Bonds' in respect ofs used only for covered bonds which meet the requirements laid down in the provisions transposing this Directive.
Amendment 286 #
2018/0043(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 32 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 32 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Member States shall adopt and publish, by [to be inserted – entry into force + 12 years] at the latest, the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive. They shall forthwith communicate to the Commission the text of those provisions.
Amendment 20 #
2018/0042(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point a – point i – indent 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point a – point i – indent 2
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 129 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 129 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) exposures to credit institutions that qualify for the credit quality step 1 or credit quality step 2 as set out in this Chapter.;, credit quality step 2 or exposures in the form of derivative contracts in accordance with Article 11 of Directive (EU) 20xx/xxxx [OP: Please insert reference to Directive (EU) on the issue of covered bonds and covered bond public supervision and amending Directive 2009/65/EC and Directive 2014/59/EU] to credit institutions that qualify for the credit quality step 3 if permitted by the competent authorities, as set out in this Chapter. Short-term exposures to credit institutions that qualify credit quality step 3 shall be allowed if their residual maturity does not exceed three months.
Amendment 24 #
2018/0042(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 129 – paragraph 1a – point ba (new)
Article 129 – paragraph 1a – point ba (new)
(b a) for exposures in the form of derivative contracts to credit institutions that qualify for the credit quality step 3 and short-term exposures as referred to in point (c) of paragraph 1, the exposures shall not exceed 10 % of the total exposure of the nominal amount of outstanding covered bonds of the issuing credit institution; The competent authorities designated under Article 18 of Directive (EU) 20xx/xxxx [OP: Please insert reference to Directive (EU) on the issue of covered bonds and covered bond public supervision and amending Directive 2009/65/EC and Directive 2014/59/EU] may allow exposures in the form of derivative contracts to credit institutions that qualify for the credit quality step 3.
Amendment 28 #
2018/0042(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 129 – paragraph 1a – point c
Article 129 – paragraph 1a – point c
(c) the total exposures to credit institutions that qualify for the credit quality step 1 or the, credit quality step 2 or credit quality step 23 shall not exceed 15 % of the total exposure of the nominal amount of outstanding covered bonds of the issuing credit institution.
Amendment 20 #
2018/0006(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) Small enterprises may only benefit from the exemption where their annual turnover is below the threshold applied by the Member State in which the VAT is due. In setting their threshold, Member States should abide by the rules on thresholds laid down by Directive 2006/112/EC. Those rules, most of which were put in place in 1977, are no longer suitable. For the sake of flexibility, it is essential to set only maximum thresholds at Union level. Setting only maximum thresholds at Union level would ensure that each Member State could set appropriate lower thresholds proportional to the size and the needs of its economy.
Amendment 28 #
2018/0006(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) To reduce the compliance burden of small enterprises that are not exempted, Member States should be required to simplify VAT registration and record keeping and it should be possible for them to prolong tax periods so as to provide for less frequent filing of VAT returns.
Amendment 31 #
2018/0006(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) The objective of this Directive is to reduce the compliance burden of small enterprises, which cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States and can therefore be better achieved at Union level. As a result, the Union may adopt measures in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on the European Union. In accordance with the principle of proportionality as set out in Article 5, this Directive does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve these objectives. Nonetheless, VAT controls induced by compliance processes are solid anti-tax fraud instruments. It must therefore be underlined that easing processes for SMEs should not be done at the expense of the fight against VAT fraud.
Amendment 41 #
2018/0006(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 15
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 15
Directive 2006/112/EC
Article 288a
Article 288a
Where during a subsequent calendar year the Member State annual turnover of a small enterprise exceeds the exemption threshold referred to in Article 284(1), the small enterprise shall be able to continue to benefit from the exemption for thatwo more years, provided that its Member State annual turnover during thatose two years does not exceed the threshold set out in Article 284(1) by more than 50%.;
Amendment 47 #
2018/0006(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18
Directive 2006/112/EC
Article 294c – paragraph 1
Article 294c – paragraph 1
Member States shallmay release exempt small enterprises from the obligation to issue an invoice pursuant to Article 220.
Amendment 48 #
2018/0006(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18
Directive 2006/112/EC
Article 294c – paragraph 2
Article 294c – paragraph 2
Member States shallmay not impose an obligation on exempt small enterprises to issue an invoice pursuant to Article 221.
Amendment 53 #
2018/0006(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18
Directive 2006/112/EC
Article 294i
Article 294i
For small enterprises the tax period to be covered in a VAT return shallmay be the period of a calendar year. However, small enterprises may opt for application of the tax period set in accordance with Article 252.
Amendment 56 #
2018/0006(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18
Directive 2006/112/EC
Article 294j
Article 294j
Notwithstanding Article 206, Member States shallmay not require interim payments to be made by small enterprises.;
Amendment 16 #
2017/2286(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas years of austerity policies based on a policy of internal devaluation of the internal market factors of production, have reinforced the mistrust of citizens towards the EU;
Amendment 28 #
2017/2286(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses that the slow recovery from the consequences of the financial, economic and social crisis has fallen short of influencing positively the day-to-day lives of EU citizens, while social inequalities keep on growing; considers also that more could have been done and could be done to reverse growing inequalities within and between the regions of the EU especially with regard to people at risk of poverty as well as elderly people living on low incomes;
Amendment 36 #
2017/2286(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Emphasises that, contrary to populist narrative, EU citizens expect the Union to do more, and to protect them from the consequences of global competition, climate change and international security threats; believes that in order to fulfil these expectations, the EU must, within the remit of its competences, perform better, so as to narrow the gap in living standards between EU citizens within all its regions, to prepare the European economy and EU citizens to face up to the challenge of digitalisation, to manage migration flows, and to put an end to various kinds of discrimination, such as discrimination against women or LGBTI people, while fully adhering to the EU 2020 strategy and UN Sustainable Development Goals;
Amendment 46 #
2017/2286(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Believes that the 2019 EU budget must primarily answer to the challenges the EU youth is facingeducational, employment and lifestyle challenges the EU youth is facing, especially in the economically lagging regions of the Union;
Amendment 91 #
2017/2286(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. WelcomNotes the Member States’ recent commitment to a renewed EU defence agenda, which seeks to enhance both hard and soft power, and considers it to be in line with the concerns of citizens, in the light of rising global instability that is exacerbated by new types of threats; supports the recent Commission initiative to launch the European Defence Industrial Development Programme, as a first stage of the European Defence Fund; recognizes that three Member States have opted out of the referred commitment;
Amendment 123 #
2017/2286(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Stresses that the Member States’ strong social protection systems of many Member States have helped them to mitigate the consequences of the crisis; believes that the EU can support the Member States, while fully respecting their competences, by budgeting properly programmes which set out to fight inequalities, alleviate the worst forms of poverty, including child poverty, and overcome the negative effects of digitalisation on working conditions and social protection systems;
Amendment 136 #
2017/2286(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13 a. Given the arising resource constraints and the demands for the EU to assume greater responsibilities, expects that in the implementation of the budget, ongoing procedures and measures are enhanced to ensure that financial commitments are met in a timely and cost effective manner, with a view to achieving more with the same or with less;
Amendment 152 #
2017/2286(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Expects the negotiations on the 2019 budget to be based on shared political ambition and solidarity, and to take into account the added value of EU programmes and policies; believes that this objective can only be realised if the negotiating parties are promptly informed of one another’s positions and start the negotiations at the earliest possible stage;
Amendment 9 #
2017/2280(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 – indent 1 a (new)
Paragraph 3 – indent 1 a (new)
- be projected and assessed beyond line items that specifically refer to foreign affairs, but also through emerging horizontal and vertical effects of foreign affairs on the EU financial framework, such as migration and trade realignments following Brexit and the protectionist policies advocated bythe Trump administration in the US;
Amendment 5 #
2017/2226(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 20
Citation 20
— having regard to the proposal for a regulationRegulation (EU) 2017/825 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the establishment of the Structural Reform Support Programme for the period 2017 to 2020 and amending Regulations (EU) No 1303/2013 and (EU) No 1305/2013 (COM(2015)0701),
Amendment 23 #
2017/2226(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
B a. whereas the economic recovery is uneven across the EU; whereas there are still significant imbalances within the euro area and the EU as a whole, with the EU objective to close the economic and social gap between Northern and Southern countries far to be reached;
Amendment 52 #
2017/2226(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas both employment and unemployment rates are still higher than in 2008too high, particularly among young people; whereas hidden unemployment (unemployed, willing to work, but not actively searching for employment) stood at 20 % in 2016;
Amendment 98 #
2017/2226(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Highlights, however, the persistent structural problem of insufficient growth of potential output and productivity, flanked by too low a level of investments and wages, leading to persistent social and regional inequalities;
Amendment 99 #
2017/2226(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Believes that given the improvement in the economic situation of the EU and the Eurozone, it no longer makes sense to use the arguments of austerity to deny to working and middle classes as well as to pensioners, an improvement in their purchasing power while applauding the increased profitability of corporations;
Amendment 115 #
2017/2226(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses the importance of a wage increase at European level in order to boost private consumption as the main support for growth; points out the need to focus on the interaction between monetary, fiscal and incomes (including wage and profit development) policies rather than only fiscal issues; believes, therefore, that this wage increase should take the following format: an increase of 5 per cent as of mid-2018 in the minimum wage of all countries that have a minimum wage, while the minimum wage system, always adapted to national circumstances, is introduced in those countries that do not have it;
Amendment 122 #
2017/2226(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Recommends that pension systems across the European Union are made inflation proof and that they ensure as of now, that pension payments really reflect the needs of elderly families;
Amendment 156 #
2017/2226(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Recalls the importance of public investment for boosting and leveraging investment in the EU; considers that the policy mix proposed in the AGS 2018 should be further developed to remedy the current decrease in public investment in the EU; highlights that this decrease also affects local and regional authorities, threatening their ability to deliver quality public services; notes that the lack of administrative capacity of the public administration at local and regional level is an obstacle to the implementation of structural reforms and to the long-term investments needed to bridge the investment gap; urges Member States to remove existing obstacles which hinder private and public investment at local and regional level;
Amendment 161 #
2017/2226(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Recalls the importance of a business-friendly administrative and regulatory environment to make it easier for companies, and particularly for scale- ups, to access finance and raise funds cross-border; welcomes the AGS 2018 emphasis on the need to improve the quality of the public administration, which should involve all levels of government;
Amendment 184 #
2017/2226(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Underlines that the European Semester and the Country-Specific Recommendations (CSRs) should achieve the objectives set out in the Pillar of Social Rights; in this regard an increased role should be given to social indicators in the European Semester; moreover, considers that the CSRs should give a more prominent place to the issues related to demographic change;
Amendment 219 #
2017/2226(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Welcomes the fact that the AGS 2018 acknowledges the need for efficient and fair tax systems to ensure sustainable finance and reverse the current fall in capital income taxation; supports the Commission’s initiatives to achieve increased transparency, a reformed VAT system and a common consolidated corporate tax base; notes however:
Amendment 220 #
2017/2226(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 – indent 1 (new)
Paragraph 9 – indent 1 (new)
- that care must be taken not to let a new form of tax populism distort the fact that the European Union needs to extend support to financial services that enable individuals and corporations to transparently manage their own funds flexibly in a globalised world;
Amendment 221 #
2017/2226(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 – indent 2 (new)
Paragraph 9 – indent 2 (new)
- that tax competition is necessary to enable EU Member States from the periphery or with limited endowments to stay in the competitive race;
Amendment 222 #
2017/2226(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 – indent 3 (new)
Paragraph 9 – indent 3 (new)
- that one size fits all measures are neither desirable nor effective; and
Amendment 223 #
2017/2226(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 – indent 4 (new)
Paragraph 9 – indent 4 (new)
- that the admirable urges for tax purity within the European Institutions do not end up pandering to the aggressive tax policies being developed by extreme right ideologues in the US;
Amendment 249 #
2017/2226(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. IUnderlines that innovation and R&D are key drivers for growth productivity and competitiveness; insists on a common effort to bring euro area expenditure on R&D closer to the EU2020 targets; calls for proper policies and investment to ensure equal access to higher education and training in order to adapt them to the new skills and knowledge demand of the EU labour market;
Amendment 349 #
2017/2226(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Highlights the importance of an improved European Semester process, including the formalisation of the euro area aggregate fiscal stance as a key tool for policy formulation and implementation across the EMU; calls for a broader reform of the Stability and Growth Pact (SGP) in order to improve its flexibility, to incorporate the differentiated treatment of investments and to introduce the concept of aggregate fiscal stance; calls on the European Institutions to assess whether the EU methodologies for the evaluation of the economic and social performance of EU Member States as well as the targets applied under the Stability and Growth Pact are still up-to-date, given that the overall economic and social conditions both at national and European level have changed drastically since the time when they were first drafted;
Amendment 368 #
2017/2226(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Underlines that any further step towards a deepening of the EMU must go hand in hand with stronger democratic controls; insists that, to this end, the role of the European Parliament and national parliaments must be strengthened; asks to include trade unions, local and regional authorities in the negotiation process at both national and European level; urges the launch of the long-awaited negotiation of an interinstitutional agreement (IIA) on the Semester;
Amendment 370 #
2017/2226(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19 a. Stresses that the implementation level of the CSRs is still very low; believes that the national, regional and local authorities should be better involved in the European Semester process; calls on the Council and the Commission to closely monitor the implementation of CSRs;
Amendment 1 #
2017/2191(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 1
Citation 1
– having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), in particular Articles 39, 42 and 101 to 109 as well as Article 174 thereof,
Amendment 7 #
2017/2191(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 11 a (new)
Citation 11 a (new)
– having regard to the European Parliament resolution of 4 February 2016 on the special situation of islands (2015/3014(RSP);
Amendment 16 #
2017/2191(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Strongly supports the independence of the Commission in its mission of shaping and enforcing the EU competition rules for the benefit of EU consumersitizens, especially those in a weak consumer position;
Amendment 24 #
2017/2191(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Welcomes and further encourages the efforts of the Commission to maintain regular contact with the members of Parliament’s competent committee;
Amendment 31 #
2017/2191(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls on the Commission to monitor the implementation of directives linked to the completion of the single market, particularly in the energy and transport sector, and to enhance the enforcement of EU competition rules in order to avoid uneven application thereof in the Member Stateswhere applicable;
Amendment 38 #
2017/2191(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Notes that State aid can be a necessary tool to ensure the needed infrastructure and supply for both the energy and transport sectors, particularly in regards to the situation in Europe where a transition towards cleaner and more climate friendly energy supply and transportation systems is taking place;
Amendment 40 #
2017/2191(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Notes that State aid can be necessary to ensure the delivery of services of general economic interest (SGEI) including energy, transport and telecommunication; emphasises that state intervention is often the best policy tool to ensure services crucial for the support of isolated, remote or peripheral regions and islands in the Union;
Amendment 43 #
2017/2191(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 c (new)
Paragraph 5 c (new)
5c. Emphasises that the connectivity of peripheral island or regions is essential for sustaining and developing acceptable levels of economic and social initiative by maintaining vital business connections;
Amendment 47 #
2017/2191(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls on the Commission to reallocate adequate financial and human resources to its Directorate-General for Competition in order to cope with this DG’s increasing workload; notes that such an increase should go hand-in-hand with a strict separation of the DG’s organisational structures, between the departments that draw up guidelines and those that have the responsibility to apply those guidelines in specific cases avoiding a situation in which the Competition DG acts as the prosecutor, jury, judge and executioner;
Amendment 61 #
2017/2191(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Calls on the Commission to adopt guidelines to limitreduce the duration of antitrust investigations, in order to avoid uncertainty or excessive burden for businesses and shape a competitive landscape which is not detrimental to consumers;
Amendment 70 #
2017/2191(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
Amendment 75 #
2017/2191(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Takes note that most of the decisions concerning antitrust issues and State aid are taken at national level, and believes that, while respecting the principle of subsidiarity, the Commission should guarantee the global consistency and independence of competition policy measures within the internal market, with the support of the European Competition Network (ECN);
Amendment 83 #
2017/2191(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Believes that the Commission should verify that national competition authorities (NCAs) are sufficiently equipped in terms of financial and human resources to guarantee their independence, and provide the needed assistance where otherwise; requests that it should submit an annual report to Parliament regarding this key point;
Amendment 105 #
2017/2191(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Reiterates that all market players should respect the relevant international, EU, and national tax legislation and pay their fair share of tax accordingly; welcomes the Commission’s in-depth investigations into anti-competitive practices such as selective tax advantages and excess profit ruling systems; stresses that the reduction of tax fraud and tax avoidance is fundamental in order to consolidate sound public budgets;
Amendment 129 #
2017/2191(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Recalls that Commissioner Vestager stated during a structured dialogue with the economic and monetary affairs committee (ECON) on Tuesday 21 November that the Google case represented potentially 4,2 terabytes of data to analyse; believes that this case clearly highlights the importance of having sufficient resources and adequate equipment allocated to competition authorities;
Amendment 157 #
2017/2191(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Amendment 159 #
2017/2191(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Welcomes the opening of the dialogue between the Commission and China on state aid control and follows carefully China's adoption of a Fair Competition Review System designed to ensure State measures do not adversely affect market entry and exit and the free movement of goods; asks the Commission to keep the EP updated on the negotiations taking place between the two economic blocks;
Amendment 163 #
2017/2191(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 b (new)
Paragraph 17 b (new)
17b. Asks the Commission to include a chapter on competition in every Free Trade Agreement or Economic Partnership, and invites DG TRADE to liaise with DG COMP in this view, taking into account the specific economic conditions of the least developed economies;
Amendment 166 #
2017/2191(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 c (new)
Paragraph 17 c (new)
17c. Invites the EU chief negotiator for the Brexit, in cooperation with Commissioner Vestager, to start as soon as possible a fair an transparent discussion on the future of the EU-UK relation in terms of competition;
Amendment 172 #
2017/2191(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Calls on the Commission to ensure that Google implements this remedy effectively; believes that the greatest danger now would be if the Commission were to settle for a partially effective remedy, failing to truly restore the level playing field required for competition and innovation to thrive; notes that following the opportunity to test this remedy, competitors are claiming that the solution proposed by Google will prove insufficient to restore a level playing field in the sector;
Amendment 183 #
2017/2191(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Notes that,Requests the Commission to carry an in-depth analysis on how the Google proposal would work, as without full- blown structural separation between Google’s general and specialised search services, an auction-based approach canmight not deliver equal treatment, since in the context of an auction, Google’s proposed functional separation would simply transfer profit from one Google business unit to another;
Amendment 203 #
2017/2191(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Encourages the Commission to ensure that it has a full complement of in- house high-tech engineers and specialists in cutting-edge technologies available to resolve specific digital economy cases as contracting out in this area might lead to implicit conflicts of interests;
Amendment 207 #
2017/2191(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 b (new)
Paragraph 24 b (new)
24b. Welcomes the "unannounced inspections concerning access to bank account information by competing services" announced by the Commission on 6 October 2017; invites the Commission to remain vigilant on this issue, especially when the Regulatory Technical Standards on strong customer authentication and secure communication will enter into force;
Amendment 215 #
2017/2191(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Asks the Commission to applclarify State aid rules strictly and uniformly tofor European and non- European airlines such as Aliwith a view to establia and Air Berlinsh a level playing field between their operations directed towards European and non-European markets; believes that restructuring aid is one of the mostcould in certain scenarios be distortive forms and; believes that the same competition rules should be applied to national and low-cost carriers while taking into account the situation of carriers whose operations have no significant impact on the market;
Amendment 220 #
2017/2191(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)
Paragraph 26 a (new)
26a. Asks the Commission to investigate the dominant status low-cost airlines often hold on different air routes in Europe and the pricing patterns for the said routes; notes that such a position is often obtained through aggressive predatory market behaviour which eliminates competition from the market and ends up burdening consumers with higher tariffs and costs;
Amendment 222 #
2017/2191(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 b (new)
Paragraph 26 b (new)
26b. Requests that the Commission carefully assesses all airline merger deals in accordance with the EU’s merger control procedure, including the impact of these deals on market competition and potential harm to consumers, most notably through higher prices and restrictions to direct access of destinations;
Amendment 225 #
2017/2191(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 c (new)
Paragraph 26 c (new)
26c. Stresses the importance of safeguarding the transparency of flight information, ensuring a level playing field in the market and ultimately protecting European consumers’ ability to make informed choices;
Amendment 226 #
2017/2191(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
Amendment 237 #
2017/2191(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. SWelcomes the Commission’s simplification of rules for public investment in ports and airports, culture and the outermost regions; stresses that, in line with the current Commission Guidelines, all airports financed by the EU budget or the European Investment Bank should be based on a positive cost-benefit analysis to avoid the financing of ghost airports in Europeand medium to long term operational and economic viability to avoid the financing of ghost airports in Europe keeping in mind exceptional cases of insular and sparsely populated regions in the EU; calls on the Commission to come up with a public list of such potential ghost airports;
Amendment 251 #
2017/2191(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Calls on the Commission to analyse the options to open up competition in the transport sector in order to complete the single market, in particular in those Member States where public port and airport networks are managed and monopolised by the central government or where such networks persistently generate public deficit where necessary, keeping as a priority the safeguarded connection of insular and peripheral regions;
Amendment 262 #
2017/2191(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
Paragraph 31
31. Invites the Commission to look at the bilateral aviation agreement between Spain and Russia which obliges all flights going through Siberia to depart from or land at the Madrid hub airport, giving an unfair advantage to the Iberia national carriers where there is evidence that such agreements are distorting the single market;
Amendment 272 #
2017/2191(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
32. Calls on the Commission to analyse how lack of competition in certain parts of the food supply chain could be affecting prices and the viability of many agricultural producers, especially small- scale farmers;
Amendment 288 #
2017/2191(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 b (new)
Paragraph 32 b (new)
32b. Urges the Commission to oppose without delay the acquisition of Monsanto by Bayer; recalls that this acquisition would result in the creation of the world's largest integrated pesticides and seeds company, with leading portfolios in non- selective herbicides, seeds and traits, and digital agriculture; underlines that this very dangerous monopoly would strongly threaten EU agriculture and citizens;
Amendment 193 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10 a. Highlights that according to the 2016 ECB annual report, investment rose at a slightly slower pace than in the previous year;stresses that ECB monetary policy’s efforts have not yet left a tangible impact on the investment side of the EU economy;notes that this lack of impact is especially having an adverse effect in the peripheral regions of the European Union;
Amendment 208 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Underlines that despite the positive effect of the ECB monetary policy on growth, employment and the financing costs of Member States, non-financial companies and households, the euro area continues to suffer from a very low level of productivity growth, which is the result of the lack of investment, especially in its southern and peripheral regions;
Amendment 237 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. CNotes that divergences among euro area economies still persist; considers that 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;
Amendment 303 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
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; moreover, notes that the 2016 ECB annual report underlines that the cost of borrowing for euro area households continues to vary across countries;
Amendment 114 #
2017/2114(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Believes that the EU Institutions should assess whether the EU methodologies for the evaluation of the economic and social performance of EU Member States as well as the targets applied under the Stability and Growth Pact are still up-to-date, given that the overall economic and social conditions both at national and European level have changed drastically since the time when they were first drafted;
Amendment 172 #
2017/2114(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Amendment 187 #
2017/2114(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Shares the Commission’s view on the need for changes in labour market legislation that provide flexibility and security for both employees and employers, thereby increasing employment and ensuring sustainable growth and social right protection;
Amendment 231 #
2017/2114(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Agrees that the economic upswing needs to be supported by investment and notes that there is still an investment gap in the euro area; recognises, however, that in some Member States investments already exceed the pre-crisis level; in this regard stresses that, while countries which have to continue on the path of fiscal consolidation must do that by cutting public expenditure in unproductive areas, countries having the margin for manoeuvre must use it for more productive investment;
Amendment 40 #
2017/2072(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the stock of non- performing loans of significant institutions (SIs) stood at EUR 865 billion at the end of March 2017 and it is steadily declining;
Amendment 60 #
2017/2072(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas the Banking Union remains incompletis a fundamental objective for the euro area’s financial stability, it remains incomplete and further efforts are needed as long as it lacks an effective, common fiscal backstop and its third pillar, a European Deposit Insurance scheme;
Amendment 110 #
2017/2072(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes the ECB’s determination in the context of the precautionary recapitalisation of Monte dei Paschi di Siena that the bank is solvent and meets the capital requirements; notes, in this regard, that the determination of solvency leaves room for an element of subjectivity as this determination greatly depends on how a bank’s assets are valued;
Amendment 134 #
2017/2072(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Reiterates its concerns about the high level of non-performing loans (NPLs) in certain jurisdictions and of Level III assets within the largest EU area banks; agrees with the Commission that ‘Member States and banks themselves have a primary responsibility in tackling non- performing loans’4 ; ;welcomes, nonetheless, the work done by different EU institutions and bodies on this issue; calls on these actors and the Member States to duly implement the Council conclusions of 11 July 2017 on the action plan to tackle non- performing loans in Europe; _________________ 4 Commission communication on completing the Banking Union, 11 October 2017, p. 15 (COM(2017)0592).takes note of the public consultation on the 'Addendum to the ECB Guidance to banks on non- performing loans', calls on the ECB Supervisory Board to carefully assess the comments received and the concerns raised and to submit a new text to public consultation;
Amendment 217 #
2017/2072(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Recalls its resolution of 17 May 2017 on FinTech; welcomes, in this respect, the work of the Commission, the proposed inclusion of technological innovation in the mandates of the ESAs and the ongoing public consultation on the ECB’s draft guidance to assessments of FinTech bank licence applications; calls on the supervisory authorities to closely monitor and assess cyber security risks as well as on the financial institutions across the EU to be very ambitious in protecting consumer data and guaranteeing cyber- security;
Amendment 289 #
2017/2072(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Welcomes the SRB’s prioritisation of enhancing resolvability of credit institutions, as well as the progress made in developing minimum requirement for own funds and eligible liabilities (MREL) targets in the framework of institution- specific resolution strategies; underlines that MREL should be mindful of institutions’ business models, as in many countries there are banks predominantly funded via deposits of retail and SME customers and that are not active on capital markets; notes that for these institutions the issuance of eligible liabilities could be a burdensome exercise and MREL compliance can be mostly reached via a strengthening of equity, which requires time; stresses that MREL targets should be realistic and proportionate to the different banking business models in the EU Member States;
Amendment 326 #
2017/2072(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Notes the ongoing technical work by the Council on a common fiscal backstop for the Single Resolution Fund (SRF) and calls for its swift approval;
Amendment 381 #
2017/2072(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Notes the potential benefits and the likely risks related to the introduction of an EDIS; considers, therefore, that risk reduction measures to be essential building blocks laying the foundations forand risk sharing measures should go in parallel in view of the establishment of an EDIS;
Amendment 6 #
2017/2071(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Acknowledges the EIB’s contribution to restoring investment activity in the EU after the economic and financial crises; stresses that the EIB’s activities during the current period of recovery and credit availability must be carefully directed towards produjects and projects, thereby ensuring additionalityespecially in regions with a low level of investment capacity, thereby ensuring additionality and limiting geographical concentration;
Amendment 16 #
2017/2071(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses the need to minimise the risk of crowding out the private sector by focusing on long-term financing otherwise unavailable to EIB clients on the markets, or by greater risk-taking, namely by supporting the financing of projects that would not get financed otherwise, particularly in support for innovative start-ups and SMEs;
Amendment 25 #
2017/2071(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Believes that instead of playing a partly anti-cyclical role,Recognises the importance for the EIB to continue to play its anti-cyclical role in support of long-term growth; believes that one of the key priorityies for the EIB should be to focus on areas where markets fail; underlines the EIB’s role in developing an "investment culture" across the EU through targeted investments in education and training, in particular in less developed regions;
Amendment 41 #
2017/2071(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Emphasises that the EIB can play a positive role in reducing the negative public investment gap, but that its activities should not come into conflict with fiscal rules, as fiscal stability is a key precondition for stable and sustainable economic growth;
Amendment 46 #
2017/2071(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Underlines that at EU level there are major structural reasons which are increasing the investment gap between Member States; calls on the EIB to boost its technical assistance in order to address low project generation capacity and borrowing capacity in some Member States;
Amendment 57 #
2017/2071(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Recalls the high degree of urgency of clarifying the impact of Brexit on the EIB's current budget as well as the future UK economic participation in order for the bank to continue to be able to perform its role;
Amendment 64 #
2017/2071(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls on the Commission to monitor carefully the cost and efficiency associated with the high number of financially small mandates given to the EIB; takes the view that the administrative cost associated with such a number ofless effective mandates can undermine the EIB’s price competitiveness and thus render it less effective in performing its role;
Amendment 73 #
2017/2071(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Stresses the need for the EIB to prioritise external operations so that its activities especially focus on areas of high importance for the EU; highlights the great potential for EIB operations to improve the economic situation in Ukraine, which is facing great economic stress and instability due to the ongoing armed conflict inspecific EU neighbouring countries in Eastern Europe as well as in the Southern and Eastern UkMediterrainean, with the direct and indirect participation of Russian military and security serviceshich are facing great economic stress and instability;
Amendment 95 #
2017/2071(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Insists on the need to achieve the highest level of transparency and institutional accountability; calls on the EIB to present to the European Parliament the ongoing operations through regular meetings and giving access to information and financial documents;
Amendment 50 #
2017/2052(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Recommends the design and implementation of an honest and down- to-earth communications programme to inform citizens in all member states of the significance, meaning and choices involved in drawing up the MFF programme, to be carried out while the discussions on the MFF are proceeding as well as later, and this in ways that concretely respond to citizens' everyday interests and concerns;
Amendment 89 #
2017/2052(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Notes that the withdrawal of the UK from the EU's budgetary system will imply changes that go beyond the shortfall that will result in net revenues, involving capillary economic and financial impacts, probably negative, on the way by which the EU budget will operate; calls therefore for a study of such possible impacts and how their potential negative consequences can be pre-empted and minimised;
Amendment 103 #
2017/2052(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls, therefore, for continuous support for existing policies, in particular the long-standing EU policies enshrined in the Treaties, namely the cohesion policy and the common agricultural and fisheries policies, and the cohesion policy; rejects any attempt to renationalise these policies, as this would neither reduce the financial burden on taxpayers and consumers, nor achieve better results, but would instead hamper growth and the functioning of the single market while widening the disparities between territories and economic sectors; intends to secure the same level of funding for the EU-27 for these policies in the next programming period while further improving their added value and simplifying the procedures associated with them;
Amendment 121 #
2017/2052(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Calls on the Union to assume its role in two emerging policy areas with internal and external dimensions, which have appeared in the course of the current MFF: on the one hand, by developing a comprehensive asylum, migration and integration policy and addressing the root causes of migration and displacement in third countries and on the other hand, by providing security to European citizens and promoting stability abroad, notably by pooling research efforts and capabilities in the area of defenceinternal security within the Schengen area which as of now remain too splintered;
Amendment 223 #
2017/2052(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39 a (new)
Paragraph 39 a (new)
39a. Agrees that the concept of juste retour regarding Member States' contributions to the EU budget is not justifiable, but that it is likely to become more prevalent following the UK's withdrawal from the EU; therefore recommends that the Court of Auditors prepares a report on the scenarios for national income and outgo, gross and net, under the MFF from the EU budget that would follow under different options that could be envisaged;
Amendment 239 #
2017/2052(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44
Paragraph 44
44. Agrecknowledges that the search for European added value should be one of the main principles guiding the EU institutions when deciding about the type of spending in the next MFF; poinis a fundamental question to be addressed, and agrees that the Union budget should serve, inter alia, as a tool for achieving the Treaty objectives and providing for European public goods; points out, however, the multi-faceted character of the concept of European added value and its multiple interpretations, and warns against any attempt to use its definition to call into question the relevance of EU policies and programmes on purely quantitative or short-term economic considerations; believes that there is a clear added value when an action at European level: – goes further than national, regional or local efforts cout, however, the existence of multiple interpretations of the concept and calls for a clear definition of the criteria thereof that should take territorial specificities into account; ld (spillover effect); – incentivises actions at national, regional or local level to fulfil EU Treaty objectives which would not otherwise be realised; – supports actions that can only be financed by pooling resources at EU level because of their very high financing requirements; or – contributes to the establishment and support of peace and stability in the EU’s neighbourhood and beyond; encourages the Commission to further develop the concept of European added value, while taking into account territorial specificities such as geographical insularity and remoteness;
Amendment 242 #
2017/2052(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44
Paragraph 44
Amendment 260 #
2017/2052(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 47
Paragraph 47
47. Calls for a genuine simplification of the EU budgetary system in the next MFF with the aim to ease absorption by possible recipients; underlines, in particular, the need to reduce overlaps between instruments that serve similar types of actions, for example in the areas of innovation, SMEs or transport, and the necessity of eliminating the competition which exists between different forms and sources of funding, in order to ensure maximum complementarity and to provide for a coherent financial framework;
Amendment 341 #
2017/2052(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 68
Paragraph 68
68. Believes that the next MFF should see a greater concentration of budgetary resources in areas that demonstrate a clear European added value and as much as possible stimulate an even economic growth, competitiveness and employment across all the regions of the EU; stresses, in this context, the importance of research and innovation in creating a sustainable, world-leading, knowledge-based economy, and regrets that, due to the lack of adequate financing, only a small proportion of high- quality projects in this field has received EU funding under the current MFF;
Amendment 375 #
2017/2052(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 72
Paragraph 72
72. Reiterates its strong commitment to EFSI that aims at mobilising EUR 500 billion in new investment in the real economy under the current MFF; believes that EFSI has already delivered a powerful and targeted boost to economic sectors that are conducive to sustainable growth and jobs and that more can be done so that its benefits are felt in all the regions of the EU; welcomes, therefore, the Commission’s intention to put forward a legislative proposal for the continuation and improvement of this investment scheme under the new MFF; stresses that any legislative proposal should be based on the conclusions of a Commission review and independent evaluation;
Amendment 385 #
2017/2052(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 73
Paragraph 73
73. Insists on the importance of the MFF for sectors relying on long-term investment, such as the transport sector; highlights that the transport infrastructures are the backbone of the single market and the basis for sustainable growth and job creation; notes that accomplishing a single European transport area connected to neighbouring countries requires major transport infrastructure especially in peripheral and less developed regions and must be treated as a key priority in terms of thefor EU’s competitiveness and for economic, social and territorial cohesion, including for peripheral and insular areas; considers, therefore, that the next MFF should provide for sufficient funding for projects that contribute in particular to the completion of the TEN-T core network and its corridors, which should be further extended; recognizes the importance of the Cohesion Fund in this regard and insists on its continuation in the new MFF; stresses that an updated and more effective CEF programme should cover all modes of transport and focus on interconnections and the completion of the network in peripheral areas while using common standards;
Amendment 428 #
2017/2052(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 77
Paragraph 77
77. Affirms that the common agricultural policy is fundamental for food security and autonomy, the preservation of rural populations and environmental resources, sustainable development and the provision of high-quality and affordable food products for Europeans; points out that food requirements have increased, as has the need to develop environmentally friendly farming practices and the need to tackle climate change; underlines that the CAP is one of the most integrated policies and is mainly financed at EU level and, therefore, replaces national spending; adds that a higher priority to small-scale farmers should be established;
Amendment 587 #
2017/2052(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 86 a (new)
Paragraph 86 a (new)
86a. Believes that the immigration issue will have a budgetary impact on EU finances that go beyond line items that may specifically refer to immigration, such as for cohesion, industrial, neighbourhood and social policies; considers that a framework is needed within which to assess the emerging horizontal and vertical effects of immigration issues on the EU financial framework, in order to enable decision makers and citizens to evaluate the budgetary impact of immigration in a holistic manner;
Amendment 609 #
2017/2052(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 88
Paragraph 88
88. Stresses that the world is confronted with multiple challenges including conflicts, cyber-attacks, terrorism, disinformation, natural disasters, climate change, human rights issues and violations, and protracted crises; believes that the Union has a particular political and financial responsibility which is founded on rules-based foreign policy, cooperation with partner countries, poverty eradication and crisis response;
Amendment 657 #
2017/2052(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 93
Paragraph 93
93. Believes that the next MFF must support the establishment of a European Defence Union should be financed outside an MFF structure; awaits, following the Commission’s announcements in this area, the relevant legislative proposals, including a dedicated EU defence research programme and an industrial development programme complemented by Member States’ investment in collaborative equipment; recalls that increased defence cooperation, the pooling of research and equipment and the elimination of duplications could lead to considerable efficiency gains, often estimated at around EUR 26 billion per year;
Amendment 661 #
2017/2052(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 94
Paragraph 94
94. In the context of the increased attention given to security and defence in the Union, requests a reassessment of all external security expenditure; looks forward in particular to a reform of the Athena mechanism and of the African Peace Facility after the budgetisation of the EDF; welcomnotes the recent commitments by Member States under permanent structured cooperation and asks the High Representative and the Commission to provide clarification as regards its future financing; calls for a successor programme for the Instrument contributing to Stability and Peace focusing on crisis response and capacity building for security and development, while finding a legally sound solution for military capacity building;
Amendment 6 #
2017/2044(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Calls for the 2018 budget to reflect the priorities outlined in the European Semester, specifically re-launching investment, pursuing structuralocially responsible and growth oriented reforms and conducting responsible fiscal policies;
Amendment 15 #
2017/2044(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Reaffirms its commitment to financing Union policies that enhance jobs and growth in all its regions through investments in research, education, infrastructure, SMEs and employment, in particular among young people; fails to understand how the Union can achieve progress in these fields considering the cuts proposed by the Council under subheading 1a; decides instead to additionally reinforce research and innovation programmes that have a very high implementation rate and which, due to oversubscription, are faced with a particularly low success rate for applications;
Amendment 25 #
2017/2044(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Suggests that, as the workload of the ESAs is shifting from legislative tasks to supervisory convergence and enforcement, the budget and manpower of the ESAs should be allocated accordingly; emphasises that all three agencies will have to assign adequate resources to analyse the implications of Brexit for the future of Union financial markets;
Amendment 27 #
2017/2044(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Is concerned by the fact that youth unemployment, especially in the peripheral regions of the Union, remains at unprecedented levels and is convinced that in order not to jeopardise the future of an entire generation of young Europeans, additional actions need to be undertaken; decides therefore to reinforce the Youth Employment Initiative (YEI) beyond the level proposed by the Commission for 2018; stresses that such reinforcement should be considered as additional to the overall allocation that was politically endorsed for YEI in the context of the MFF mid-term revision, and not as a mere frontloading of that allocation in the 2018 Budget;
Amendment 29 #
2017/2044(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Recalls that the cohesion policy plays a primary role in theachieving social and economic convergence in the Union, and thus its development and growth of the Union; stresses that in 2018, cohesion policy programmes are expected to catch-up and reach cruising speed; and emphasises Parliament’s commitment to ensuring adequate appropriations for those programmes that represent one of the core policies of the Union; is however preoccupied by the unacceptable delays in the implementation of operational programmes at national level; calls on Member States to ensure that the designation of managing, auditing and certifying authorities is concluded and implementation is accelerated;
Amendment 37 #
2017/2044(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Believes that, while the peak of the migratory and refugee crisis seems to have passedhas not been repeated in recent months, the Union must stand ready to respond to any unforeseen event in this area; therefore urges the Commission to continuously monitor the adequacy of allocations under Heading 3 and make full use of all available instruments to respond in a timely manner to any unforeseen event that might require additional funding; decides therefore to reinforce in a limited manner the Asylum Migration and Integration Fund and the Internal Security Fund; notes, once again, that the Heading 3 ceiling is vastly insufficient to provide for appropriate funding for the internal dimension of the migration and refugee crisis as well as other priority programmes, such as culture programmes;
Amendment 42 #
2017/2044(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Underlines that the costs ofor moving the European Banking Authority (EBA) from London should be borne by the UK; points out, however, that the Commission should have prepared the necessary financial allocations in the eventuality that it would have to bear the implied costs;
Amendment 52 #
2017/2044(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Points out that consideraWelcomes the Commission initiative to assess the current institutional framework of the ESAs and possible efficiency gains that could be achieved by merging EBA with at least one of the two other ESAsthrough a change in the current structure.
Amendment 114 #
2017/2044(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39
Paragraph 39
39. Is of the opinion that priority should be given to the Union’s immediate neighbours and to measures aimed at tackling the main issues they are facing, namely the migratory and refugee crisis and corresponding humanitarian challenges in the Southern Neighbourhood, and the Russian aggressionongoing conflicts in the Eastern Neighbourhood; believes that stability and prosperity of the EU Neighbourhood are beneficial to both the concerned regions and to the Union as a whole; reiterates that supporting countries which are implementing association agreements with the Union is pivotal to facilitating political and economic reforms, but stresses that such support should apply as long as those countries meet the eligibility criteria, especially as regards the rule of law and enforcing democratic institutions; therefore decides to increase resources for the European Neighbourhood Instrument (ENI), for the Instrument for Pre-accession Assistance (IPA) and for Macro-Financial Assistance (MFA);
Amendment 121 #
2017/2044(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42
Paragraph 42
42. Is of the opinion that in order to adequately tackle disinformation campaigns, especially those coming from the Russian Federation, and to promote an objective image of the Union outside its borders, additional financial means are needed; calls therefore to step up funding to counter disinformation campaigns and cyberattacks; decides therefore to increase resources for strategic communication actions;
Amendment 28 #
2017/2043(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Reiterates its firm conviction that in order to achieve sustainable growth and job creation with a long-term goal of achieving upward socioeconomic convergence in the EU, investments in research, innovation, infrastructure, education and SMEs are key; welcomes in this respect the proposed reinforcements to Horizon 2020, the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) and Erasmus+ as these programmes will contribute directly to reaching these goals; regrets, however, that the proposed allocation for COSME is lower in comparison with the 2017 budget and points to the need to further reinforce SMEs, which are the main source of job creation in the EU and have a crucial role in reducing the investment gap and contributing to the prosperity of the EU;
Amendment 40 #
2017/2043(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Commends the role of the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) in bridging the investment gap across the EU and, with renewed rules aimed at enhancing geographical coverage, and in this context supports its extension until 2020; underlines its position in the on-going legislative negotiations that no further cuts should be incurred on existing EU programmes in order to finance this extension;
Amendment 53 #
2017/2043(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. WelcomesTakes note of the EU initiatives in the field of defence research, which willith the aim to contribute towards achieving economies of scale in the sector and thus lead to greater coordination among Member States in the field;
Amendment 63 #
2017/2043(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Regrets that the Commission has not followed up on Parliament’s request to put forward an assessment and relevant proposals for an ‘18th Birthday Interrail Pass for Europe’; is convinced that this proposal has the potential to boost European consciousness and identity and that, with an equivalent alternative or supplement to young Europeans that do not have access to a train connection from their home region, such as those residing in the peripheral islands of Europe, can serve as a concrete example of European added value; strongly reiterates its previous call on the Commission to put forward relevant proposals in this regard;
Amendment 97 #
2017/2043(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Reiterates that while growth and jobs should remain the underlying priority of the EU budget,; Believes that obtaining sustainable progress in these fields will be impossible if the citizens feel unsafe or insecureis to go in conjunction with a strengthening in the improvement of safety and security of EU citizens; emphasises, moreover, that the unprecedented mobilisation of special instruments has shown that the EU budget was not initially designed to address the magnitude of the migration and refugee crisis; believes that moving to a post-crisis approach is premature given the volatility of the situation in the EU Neighbourhood and the terrorist threat within the EU; questions therefore the proposed cuts in Heading 3 compared to the 2017 Budget which do not seem to be in line with the EU pledge to deal in an efficient manner with the migration and refugee crisis, enforce security and tackle terrorism and radicalisation;
Amendment 111 #
2017/2043(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Welcomes the increase proposed for the eastern component of the European Neighbourhood Instrument responding to Parliament’s previous calls; is convinced that in order to counter the activities of an increasingly aggressive Russian Federation, the EU’s support, especially for the countries that have signed Association Agreements, is essential;
Amendment 117 #
2017/2043(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13 a. Maintains that the EU needs to focus on an investment strategy towards its southern neighbourhood;
Amendment 144 #
2017/2043(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Takes note ofWelcomes the Commission’s proposal to set up a European Solidarity Corps (ESC); notes, however, with concern that, despite Parliament’s warnings, the legislative proposal adopted on 30 May 2017 envisages that three fourths of the ESC budget would be financed by redeployments from existing programmes, and mainly from Erasmus+ (EUR 197.7 million); is concerned byasks for in-depth clarifications on the risk that this situation would pose to those EU programmes;
Amendment 153 #
2017/2043(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. WelcomesTakes note of the proposed scaling- up of the preparatory action on defence research and the presentation by the Commission of a legislative proposal for a defence industry development programme; recalls its earlier position that new initiatives in this area should be financed by additional funds and not be detrimental to existing programmes;
Amendment 156 #
2017/2043(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)
Paragraph 22 a (new)
22 a. Asks for targeted commitments towards the Union's peripheral regions with the aim of slowing down the growing socioeconomic cleavage between the European centre and its peripheral regions;
Amendment 164 #
2017/2043(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Notes that the Commission has left a EUR 713.5 million margin under the ceilings of Heading 2; points to the fact that increased volatility of agricultural markets, as was the case with the dairy sector crisis in the past, as well as nature caused emergencies such as droughts and floods, might envisage recourse to this margin; calls on the Commission to ensure that the margin left under the ceilings is sufficient to address any crises that may arise;
Amendment 176 #
2017/2043(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
30. Is of the opinion that the importance and urgency of these issues is not in line with the significant decreases in commitment (-18.9 %) and payment appropriations (-21.7 %) proposed for Heading 3 compared with the 2017 budget, notably on the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF), the Internal Security Fund (ISF) and the Justice programme; considers that those cuts are not fully justifiable given the delays in implementation of the agreed measures and the delays in the adoption of the new legal proposals; calls therefore on the Commission to ensure that adequate budgetary resources are provided for and that any additional needs will be swiftly addressed;
Amendment 192 #
2017/2043(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36
Paragraph 36
36. Believes, however, that the level of cuts of the Development Cooperation Instrument (DCI) and the European Neighbourhood Instrument (ENI), especially for the southern component, is not entirely justified given the longer-term needs of the EU action oin migratthe regions, going beyincluding its policy ond the migration compacts under the Partnership Frameworkeconomic and democratic development of the region, as well as the area of migration;
Amendment 224 #
2017/2043(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 46
Paragraph 46
46. Reiterates its conviction that the European agencies active in the Justice and Home Affairs field must be urgently provided with the necessary operational expenditure and staffing levels to allow them to achieve the additional tasks and responsibilities they have been given in recent years; welcomes, in this regard, the substantial staff increases proposed for the European Coast and Border Guard Agency (Frontex) and the European Asylum Support Office (EASO), which it considers a minimum to ensure that these agencies can effectively perform their operations; requests the Commission to reassess whether the proposed operational funding (-23.6 % compared to 2017) and staffing levels (-4) for Eurojust will indeed allow this agency to fulfil in an effective manner its key role in the promotion of judicial cooperation in civil and criminal matters, including in the fields of drug policy and crime prevention;
Amendment 4 #
2017/2022(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)
Recital F a (new)
F a. Whereas the European Parliament report entitled "Women in the European Parliament", issued on 8 March 2017 on the occasion of International Women's Day shows a gender imbalance in managerial posts in the European Parliament, with 83,3 % of Parliament's Deputy Secretary-General and Directors- General positions being held by men and 16,7 % by women, 70,2 % of Parliament's Director positions being held by men and 29,8 % by women, and 65,9 % Parliament's Heads of Unit positions being held by men and 29,8 % by women;
Amendment 5 #
2017/2022(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F b (new)
Recital F b (new)
F b. Whereas the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union places an obligation on the Union to respect linguistic diversity and prohibits discrimination on grounds of language, thus giving the right to any Union citizen to use any of the 24 official Union languages when corresponding with Union institutions, which are obliged to reply in the same language;
Amendment 130 #
2017/2022(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28 a (new)
Paragraph 28 a (new)
28 a. Considers that the cuts to posts within Parliament's administration based on the targeted staff reduction should not come at the expense of smaller Union languages or smaller Member States;
Amendment 156 #
2017/2022(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 a (new)
Paragraph 34 a (new)
34 a. Requests that when awarding new managerial posts in Parliament, a balance which reflects both geographical and gender distribution of such positions should be sought;
Amendment 26 #
2017/2005(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses that domestic and cross- border investments in CBs have worked well in EU markets under the current legislative framework; emphasises that product diversity should be maintained;
Amendment 33 #
2017/2005(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Calls for a clear definition of CBs in a European Directive; insists that the definition for securities henceforth called ‘covered bonds’ must not fall below the standards currently set by Article 12952(4) of the CRR; requests that securities incompatible with this definition but compatible with Article 52(4) of the UCITS DirectiUCITS Directive; CBs which are also compliant with Article 129 of the CRR should benefit from preferential risk weight treatment; for the achievement of the Capital Markets Union's objective, recognizes the potential of UCITS compliant dual recourse securities, with different requirements in terms of eligible cover aressets; calls on the Commission to properly defined them in the same directive under a name clearly distinct from ‘covered bonds’; suggests that this name may be ‘European Secured Notes’; (ESNs);
Amendment 105 #
2017/2005(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 – point c
Paragraph 5 – point c
c) The maturity of the CB cannot be extended, except in the event of insolvency or resolution of the issuer and with approval by the competent supervisory authority;subject to objective financial triggers established by national law, including in the event of insolvency or resolution of the issuer.
Amendment 70 #
2017/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) In order to facilitate the cooperation with other Member States and the screening of foreign direct investment by the Commission, Member States should notify their screening mechanisms and any amendment thereto to the Commission, and should report on the application of their screening mechanisms on a regular basis. For the same reason, Member States that do not have a screening mechanism should also report on the foreign direct investments that took place in their territory, on the basis of the information available to them. This Regulation provides a framework for existing screening mechanisms in the Union, without requiring any Member State to develop such a framework.
Amendment 73 #
2017/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) To that end, it is also important to ensure a minimum level of information and coordination with regard to foreign direct investments falling under the scope of this Regulation in all Member States. This information should be made available by the Member States in which the foreign direct investment is planned or has been completed upon request of the Member States or of the Commission. Relevant information includes aspects such as the ownership structure of the foreign investor and the financing of the planned or completed investment, including, when available, information about subsides granted by third countries. Sensitive information should be excluded from the reporting scope and the Commission should in no way interfere with the right of each Member State to protect sensitive or confidential information.
Amendment 78 #
2017/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20 a (new)
Recital 20 a (new)
(20 a) This Regulation relates to a new action by the Union to scrutinise foreign direct investments. The importance of an open investment environment should nevertheless continue to be stressed and this Regulation aims to achieve the objective of free movement of capital between Member States and third countries to the greatest extent possible.
Amendment 146 #
2017/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2
Article 8 – paragraph 2
2. Where a Member State considers that a foreign direct investment planned or completed in another Member State is likely to affect its security or public order, it may provide comments to the Member State where the foreign direct investment is planned or has been completed. The comments shall be forwarded to the Commission in parallel only if the Commission provides a motivated request to access the comments or if the comments relate to projects of Union interests or EU funded projects.
Amendment 24 #
2017/0138(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) Member States find it increasingly difficult to protect their national tax bases from erosion as tax planning structures have evolved to be particularly sophisticated and often take advantage of the increased mobility of both capital and persons within the internal market. These structures commonly consist of arrangements which are developed across various jurisdictions and move taxable profits towards more beneficial tax regimes or have the effect of reducing the taxpayer´s overall tax bill. As a result, Member States often experience considerable reductions in their tax revenues which hinder them from applying growth-friendly tax policies. It is therefore critical that Member States' tax authorities obtain comprehensive and relevant information about potentially aggressive tax arrangements. This information would enable those authorities to be able to promptly react against harmful tax practices and to close loopholes through enacting legislation or by undertaking adequate risk assessments and carrying out tax audits. Care will need to be taken to devise reporting formats that are succinct and user friendly in order to avoid that the volume of information that could be generated by this Directive will by its very size, inhibit meaningful action on practices that are being reported.
Amendment 71 #
2017/0138(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) In order to supplement or amend certain non-essential elements of this Directive, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union should be delegated to the Commission in connection with updating the hallmarks in order to include in. Every two years, the Commission should publish a draft update of the list of hallmarks potentiallythat define aggressive tax planning arrangements or series of arrangements in response to updated information on those arrangements or series of arrangements which is derived from the mandatory disclosure of such arrangementsto include any new or modified malpractices that will have been identified since the previous update was published and will bring them into force four months after the draft has been published.
Amendment 123 #
2017/0138(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Directive 2011/16/EU
Chapter V – Article 23 a a
Chapter V – Article 23 a a
The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 26a to amend Annex IV, in order to include in the list of hallmarks potentially aggressive tax planning arrangements or series of arrangements in response to updated information on those arrangements or series of arrangements, which is derived from the mandatory disclosure of such arrangements. It shall do so every two years acting on the basis of the information that will be available regarding new or modified malpractices, publishing its new criteria in draft form four months prior to bringing them into force.
Amendment 2 #
2017/0123(COD)
Council position
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) Regulation (EC) No 1071/2009 requires undertakings to conduct effectively and continuously their operations with the appropriate technical equipment and facilities at an operating centre situated in the Member State of establishment, and it allows for additional requirements at national level, the most common of which being a requirement to have parking spaces available in the Member State of establishment. However, those, unevenly applied, requirements have not been sufficient to ensure a genuine link with that Member State in order to efficiently fight letter-box companies and to reduce the risk of systematic cabotage and nomadic drivers organised from an undertaking to which the vehicles do not return. Considering that, in order to ensure the proper functioning of the internal market in the area of transport, specific rules on the right of establishment and the provision of services may be necessary, it is appropriate to further harmonise the establishment requirements and to strengthen the requirements linked to the presence of the vehicles used by the transport operator in the Member State of establishment. Defining a clear minimum interval within which the vehicle has to return also contributes to ensuring that those vehicles can be correctly maintained with the technical equipment situated in the Member State of establishment and facilitates controls. The cycle for such returns should be synchronised with the obligation on the transport undertaking in Regulation (EC) No 561/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council6 to organise its operations in a manner that enables the driver to return home at least every four weeks, so that both obligations can be fulfilled through the return of the driver together with the vehicle at least every second four week cycle. This synchronisation strengthens the right of the driver to return and reduces the risk that the vehicle has to return only to fulfil this new establishment requirement. However, the requirement to return to the Member State of establishment should not require a specific number of operations to be conducted in the Member State of establishment or otherwise limit the operators possibility to provide services throughout the internal market.. ____________________________ 6 the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2006 on the harmonisation of certain social legislation relating to road transport and amending Council Regulations (EEC) No 3821/85 and (EC) No 2135/98 and repealing Council Regulation (EEC) No 3820/85 (OJ L 102, 11.4.2006, p. 1).Regulation (EC) No 561/2006 of
Amendment 6 #
2017/0123(COD)
Council position
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) Cabotage operations should help to increase the load factor of heavy duty vehicles and reduce empty runs, and should be allowed as long as they are not carried out in a way that creates a permanent or continuous activity within the Member State concerned. To ensure that cabotage operations are not carried out in a way that creates a permanent or continuous activity, hauliers should not be allowed to carry out cabotage operations in the same Member State within a certain time after the end of a period of cabotage operations.
Amendment 7 #
2017/0123(COD)
Council position
Recital 22
Recital 22
Amendment 12 #
2017/0123(COD)
Council position
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EC) No 1071/2009
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
Amendment 13 #
2017/0123(COD)
Council position
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EC) No 1071/2009
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point g
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point g
(g) on an ongoing basis, have at its regular disposal a number of vehicles that comply with the conditions laid down in point (e) and employ drivers who are normally based at anbased on the law applicable to operational centre inof that Member State, in both casese undertaking, proportionate to the volume of transport operations carried out by the undertaking.
Amendment 19 #
2017/0123(COD)
Council position
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – point a
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – point a
Regulation (EC) No 1072/2009
Article 8 – paragraph 2 a
Article 8 – paragraph 2 a
Amendment 23 #
2017/0123(COD)
Council position
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – point b
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – point b
Regulation (EC) No 1072/2009
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
National road haulage services carried out in the host Member State by a non-resident haulier shall only be deemed to comply with this Regulation if the haulier can produce clear evidence of the preceding international carriage and of each consecutive cabotage operation carried out. In the event that the vehicle has been in the territory of the host Member State within the period of four days preceding the international carriage, the haulier shall also produce clear evidence of all operations that were carried out during that period.;
Amendment 25 #
2017/0123(COD)
Council position
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point b
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point b
Regulation (EC) No 1072/2009
Article 10 – paragraph 7
Article 10 – paragraph 7
Amendment 3 #
2017/0122(COD)
Council position
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) While in general regular weekly rest periods and longer rest periods canshall not be taken in the vehicle or in a parking area, but only in suitable accommodation, which may be adjacent to a parking area, i, by way of derogation relevant rest periods may be taken in vehicles, provided that the vehicle is parked in certified safe and secure parking area which provides parking places for commercial vehicles and service facilities fulfilling the minimum requirements. It is of utmost importance to enable drivers to locate safe and secure parking areas that provide appropriate levels of security and appropriate facilities. The Commission has already studied how to encourage the development of high- quality parking areas, including the necessary minimum requirements. The Commission should therefore develop standards for safe and secure parking areas. Those standards should contribute to promoting high- quality parking areas. The standards may be revised in order to cater for better access to alternative fuels, in line with policies developing that infrastructure. It is also important that parking areas are being kept free from ice and snow.
Amendment 9 #
2017/0122(COD)
Council position
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point c
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point c
Regulation (EC) No 561/2006
Article 8 – paragraph 8 – subparagraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 8 – subparagraph 1
8. Where a driver chooses to do this, daily rest periods and reduced weekly rest periods away from base may be taken in a vehicle, as long as it has suitable sleeping facilities for each driver and the vehicle is stationary. The regular weekly rest periods and any weekly rest period of more than 45 hours taken in compensation for previous reduced weekly rest periods shall not be taken in a vehicle. They shall be taken in suitable gender-friendly accommodation with adequate sleeping and sanitary facilities. By way of derogation from the second subparagraph, the regular weekly rest periods and any weekly rest of more than 45 hours taken in compensation for previous reduced weekly rest may be taken in a vehicle, provided that the vehicle is parked in certified safe and secure parking area which provides parking places for commercial vehicles and service facilities fulfilling the minimum requirements set out in Article 8a. Until [OJ: three years after entry into force] a vehicle may also be parked in a regular parking area which provides basic service facilities. Relevant period might be prolonged by the Commission, by means of delegated act, for additional two years if according to the out comes of the Commission’s report on the availability of safe and secure parking are as the number of certified safe and secure parking areas across EU would not be sufficient to meet reported needs.
Amendment 10 #
2017/0122(COD)
Council position
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point c
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point c
Regulation (EC) No 561/2006
Article 8 – paragraph 8 – subparagraph 2
Article 8 – paragraph 8 – subparagraph 2
Any costs for accommodation outside the vehicle shall be covered by the employer, as well as any fee deriving from the use of safe and secure parking area.;
Amendment 12 #
2017/0122(COD)
Council position
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point d
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point d
Regulation (EC) No 561/2006
Article 8 – paragraph 8a – subparagraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 8a – subparagraph 1
8a. Transport undertakings shall organise the work of drivers in such a way that the drivers are able to return to the employer's operational centre where the driver is normally based and where the driver's weekly rest period begins, in the Member State of the employer's establishment, or to return to the drivers' place of residence, or to any other location chosen by the driver, within each period of four consecutive weeks, in order to spend at least one regular weekly rest period or a weekly rest period of more than 45 hours taken in compensation for reduced weekly rest period.
Amendment 13 #
2017/0122(COD)
Council position
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 Regulation (EC) No 561/2006
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 Regulation (EC) No 561/2006
4. By 31 December 2024At the latest [OJ: three years after the date of entry into force of this amending Regulation], the Commission shall present a report to the European Parliament and to the Council on the availability of suitable rest facilities for drivers and of secured parking facilities, as well as on the development of safe and secure parking areas certified in accordance with the delegated acts referred to in paragraph 2. That report may list. The report shall in particular cover information on the number and the location of certified safe and secure parking areas, on their capacity and usage, and on the demand for additional places or facilities. Based on this report, the Commission shall propose, if appropriate, measures aiming to increase the number and quality of certified safe and secure parking areas and/or measures to prolong transitional period laid down in the fourth subparagraph of Article 8 for additional two years.
Amendment 3 #
2017/0121(COD)
Council position
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) When a driver is engaged in a combined transport operation, the nature of the service provided during the initial or final road leg is closely linked with the Member State of establishment if the road leg on its own is a bilateral transport operation. By contrast, when the transport operation during the road leg is carried out within the host Member State or as a non-bilateral international transport operation, there is a sufficient link with the territory of a host Member State and therefore the posting rules should apply.
Amendment 6 #
2017/0121(COD)
Council position
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) Where a driver performs other types of operations, notably cabotage operations or non-bilateral international transport operations, there is a sufficient link to the territory of the host Member State. The link exists in case of cabotage operations as defined by Regulations (EC) No 1072/20096 and (EC) No 1073/20097 of the European Parliament and of the Council since the entire transport operation takes place in a host Member State and the service is thus closely linked to the territory of the host Member State. A non- bilateral international transport operation is characterised by the fact that the driver is engaged in international carriage outside of the Member State of establishment of the undertaking making the posting. The services performed are therefore linked with the host Member States concerned rather than with the Member State of establishment. In those cases, sector- specific rules are only required with regard to the administrative requirements and control measures. Nevertheless, until negotiations between the Union and relevant third countries as regards the application of rules equivalent to those laid down in this Directive will be concluded, certain number of cross-trade operations should be exempted from posting rules. _________________ 6Regulation (EC) No 1072/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009 on common rules for access to the international road haulage market (OJ L 300, 14.11.2009, p. 72). 7Regulation (EC) No 1073/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009 on common rules for access to the international market for coach and bus services, and amending Regulation (EC) No 561/2006 (OJ L 300, 14.11.2009, p. 88).
Amendment 8 #
2017/0121(COD)
Council position
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) Union operators face growing competition from operators based in third countries. It is therefore of the utmost importance to ensure that Union operators are not discriminated against. According to Article 1(4) of Directive 96/71/EC, undertakings established in a non-member State must not be given more favourable treatment than undertakings established in a Member State. That principle should also apply with regard to the specific rules on posting provided for in this Directive. It should, in particular, apply when third country operators perform transport operations under bilateral or multilateral agreements granting access to the Union marketTherefore, taking into account the fact that the Union has already exercised its competence and adopted common specific rules on posting of drivers, it should begin negotiations with the relevant third countries with a view to the application of rules equivalent to those laid down in this Directive.
Amendment 10 #
2017/0121(COD)
Council position
Article 1 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 1 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
For the purpose of this Directive, a bilateral transport operation in respect of goods means the movement of goods, based on a transport contractconsignment note, from the Member State of establishment, as defined in Article 2(8) of Regulation (EC) No 1071/2009, to another Member State or to a third country, or from another Member State or a third country to the Member State of establishment. In a bilateral transport operation, a Member State of establishment shall be either the place of origin where the transported goods are loaded or the place of destination where the goods are unloaded. Moreover, a bilateral transport operation may involve picking up of the goods at one or several loading points until their final delivery at one or several delivery points.
Amendment 13 #
2017/0121(COD)
Council position
Article 1 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 1 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 17 #
2017/0121(COD)
Council position
Article 1 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3
Article 1 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3
Amendment 19 #
2017/0121(COD)
Council position
Article 1 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 4
Article 1 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 4
Theis exemptions for additional activities set out in the third and fourth subparagraphs of this paragraph shall apply only until the date fromon which smart tachographs complying with the requirement of recording border crossings and additional activities referred to in the first subparagraph of Article 8(1) of Regulation (EU) No 165/2014 are requnegotiations between the Union and relevant thired to be fitted in the vehicles registered in a Member State for the first time, under the fourth subparagraph of Article 8(1) of that Regulation. From that date the exemptions for additional activities set out in the third and fourth subparagraphs of this paragraph shall apply solely to drivers using vehicles fitted with smart tachographs, as provided for in Articles 8, 9 and 10 of that Regulationcountries as regards the application of rules equivalent to those laid down in this Directive will be concluded.
Amendment 21 #
2017/0121(COD)
Council position
Article 1 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 1 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) picks up passengers in the Member State of establishment and sets them down in another Member State and/or a third country;
Amendment 23 #
2017/0121(COD)
Council position
Article 1 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point b
(b) picks up passengers in a Member State and/or a third country and sets them down in the Member State of establishment; or
Amendment 25 #
2017/0121(COD)
Council position
Article 1 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point c
Article 1 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point c
(c) picks up and sets down passengers in the Member State of establishment for the purpose of carrying out local excursions in another Member State and/or a third country, in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1073/2009.
Amendment 28 #
2017/0121(COD)
Council position
Article 1 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Article 1 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 29 #
2017/0121(COD)
Council position
Article 1 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 3
Article 1 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 3
Amendment 31 #
2017/0121(COD)
Council position
Article 1 – paragraph 8
Article 1 – paragraph 8
8. A posting shall, for the purpose of Article 3(1a) of Directive 96/71/EC, be considered to be ending when the driver leavesfinally delivers goods or sets passengers down in the host Member State in the performance of the international carriage of goods or passengers. That period of posting shall not be cumulated with previous periods of posting in the context of such international operations performed by the same driver or by another driver whom he or she replaces.
Amendment 34 #
2017/0121(COD)
Council position
Article 1 – paragraph 10
Article 1 – paragraph 10
10. Transport undertakings established in a non-Member State shall not be given more favourable treatment than undertakings established in a Member State, including when performing transport operations under bilateral or multilateral agreements granting access to the Union market or parts thereof. Hence once this Directive has entered into force, the Union shall begin negotiations with the relevant third countries with a view to the application of rules equivalent to those laid down in this Directive.
Amendment 17 #
2017/0116(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) Aviation plays a crucial role in Union's economy and the everyday lives of European Union citizens. It is a strong driver for economic growth, jobs, trade and mobility, as well as connectivity and mobility for businesses and citizens alike. Over the past decades, growth in air transport services significantly contributed to improving connectivity within the Union and with third countries and has been a significant enabler of Union economy at large.
Amendment 20 #
2017/0116(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) Union air carriers are at the centre of a global network connecting Europe internally and with the rest of the world. They should be enabled to compete against third countries air carriers in an environment of open and fair competition between all air carriers taking into account regulatory issues such as labour conditions and environmental protection. This would contribute to maintaining conditions conducive to a high level of Union's connectivity.
Amendment 32 #
2017/0116(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. An investigation shall be initiated following a written complaint submitted by a Member State, a Union air carrier or an association of Union air carriers in accordance with paragraph 2, a national consumer organisation, or on the Commission's own initiative, if there is prima facie evidence of either of the following:
Amendment 36 #
2017/0116(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 4
Article 3 – paragraph 4
4. The Commission may decide not to initiate an investigation where the adoption of measures in accordance with Articles 10 or 13 would be against the Union interest or where the Commission considers that the facts put forward in the complaint neither raise a systemic issue, nor have a significant impact on one or more Union air carriers.
Amendment 42 #
2017/0116(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) whether a practice affecting competition, adopted by a third country or a third country entity, has caused injury or threat of injury to the Union air carrier(s) concerned or where irregular behaviour restricting competition had a negative impact on the internal market of the European Union.
Amendment 46 #
2017/0116(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. The proceedings shall be concluded within two yearsan 18 month period following the initiation of an investigation. That period may be prolonged within a set timeline in duly justified cases.
Amendment 48 #
2017/0116(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2
Article 9 – paragraph 2
2. In case of urgency, such as in situations where there is a risk of immediate and irreversible injury to Union air carrier(s), the proceedings may be shortened to one yeara maximum period of six months.
Amendment 50 #
2017/0116(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 9 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. The Commission may, with the right of appeal by injured parties, suspend the proceedings where the third country or the third country entity concerned has taken decisive steps to eliminate, as the case may be:
Amendment 85 #
2017/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 25
Recital 25
(25) Experience shows that business records may be kept in the homes of directors or other people working for an undertaking, especially with the increased use of more flexible working arrangements. In order to ensure that inspections are effective, national administrative competition authorities should have the power to enter any premises, including private homes, where there is a reasonable suspicion that business records are being kept which may be relevant to prove a serious violation of Article 101 or Article 102 TFEU. The exercise of this power should be subject to the prior authorisation of a judicial authority. This does not prevent Member States from entrusting the tasks of a national judicial authority to a national administrative competition authority acting as a judicial authority, in cases of extreme urgency.
Amendment 106 #
2017/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 36
Recital 36
(36) The differences between leniency programmes at Member State level alsocan in some cases jeopardise the level playing field for undertakings operating in the internal market. It is therefore appropriate to increase legal certainty by reducing these differences.
Amendment 148 #
2017/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that national competition authorities have the human, financial and technical resources 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. The Commission should provide the needed technical assistance upon the request of the respective NCA.
Amendment 163 #
2017/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that if a reasonable suspicion exists that books or other records related to the business and to the subject matter of the inspection which may be relevant to prove a serious violation of Article 101 or Article 102 TFEU are being kept in any premises other than those referred to in Article 6, land or means or transport, including the homes of directors, managers, and other members of staff of undertakings and associations of undertakings, national administrative competition authorities may conduct unannounced inspections in such premises, land and means of transport.
Amendment 173 #
2017/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 1
Member States shall ensure that national administrative competition authorities may by decision requiredemand undertakings and associations of undertakings to provide all necessary information for the application of Articles 101 and 102 TFEU within a specified time limit. This obligation shall cover information which is accessible to the undertaking and association of undertakings.
Amendment 178 #
2017/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 1
Article 10 – paragraph 1
Member States shall ensure that national administrative competition authorities acting on their own initiative may by decision order the imposition of interim measures on undertakings at least in cases where there is urgency due to the risk of serious and irreparable harm to competition and on the basis of a prima facie finding of an infringement of Article 101 or Article 102 TFEU. Such a decision shall apply for a specific period of time and may be renewed in so far that is necessary and appropriate. The European Competition Network is to be duly informed of such measures and their progress.
Amendment 204 #
2017/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 1
Article 14 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that the maximum amount of the fine a national competition authority may impose on each undertaking or association of undertakings participating in an infringement of Articles 101 or 102 TFEU should not be set at a level below 10% of its total worldwide turnover i10% of its relevant turnover in the Member State where the infringement took place based on the business year preceding the decision.
Amendment 220 #
2017/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 16 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. Member States shall aim at ensureing that immunity can be granted only if the undertaking
Amendment 226 #
2017/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 2
Article 17 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall ensure that a reduction of fines is granted only ifwhen the conditions laid down in Article 18 are fulfilled and the applicant discloses its participation in a secret cartel and provides the national competition authority with evidence of the alleged secret cartel which represents significant added value for the purpose of proving an infringement of Article 101 TFEU or a corresponding provision under national law, relative to the evidence already in the national competition authority’s possession at the time of the application.
Amendment 227 #
2017/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) it ended its involvement in the alleged secret cartel immediately following its application, or made clear its plans to end its involvement, except for what would, in the competent national competition authority’s view, be reasonably necessary to preserve the integrity of its investigation;
Amendment 230 #
2017/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 19 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 19 – paragraph 1 a (new)
A collaboration system between the NCAs, the ECN, and the Commission’s translation department should be established where assistance in the translation of documents and correspondence in such situations is needed
Amendment 232 #
2017/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 20 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 20 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. A collaboration system between the NCAs, the ECN, and the Commission’s translation department should be established where assistance in the translation of documents and correspondence in such situations is needed
Amendment 14 #
2016/2323(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the internal political, economic and social context as well as external challenges and political uncertainties are likely to uphold the pressure on the 2018 EU budget;
Amendment 15 #
2016/2323(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
B a. Whereas the regional socioeconomic cleavage in the EU continues to increase especially vis-à-vis the Southern periphery of the Union, with an economic and investment crisis which has been dramatically reducing the ability of manoeuvre of the different and regional budgets of the poorer Member States;
Amendment 20 #
2016/2323(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 1
Subheading 1
A budget for growth, jobssustainable growth, jobs, social inclusion and security
Amendment 27 #
2016/2323(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the important role played by the EU budget in delivering concrete answers to the challenges the EU is facing; stresses that jobs, economic growth, migration, security and tackling populismsocial inclusion, decent, quality and stable jobs, eradication of poverty, greening, economic growth and socio-economic convergence, migration, development, security are the main concerns at EU level and that the EU budget remains part of the solution to these issues; stresses that solidarity must stay an underlying principle of the EU budget; underlines that a strong EU budget will benefit Member States and EU citizens alike; expects that the Commission will put forward a draft 2018 budget that enables the EU to continue to generate prosperity and ensure the safety of its citizens;
Amendment 31 #
2016/2323(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the important role played by the EU budget in delivering concrete answers to the challenges the EU is facing; stresses that jobs, economic growth aimed at an upward socioeconomic convergence between the different regions of the Union, migration, security and tackling populism are the main concerns at EU level and that thea well- focused EU budget remains part of the solution to these issues; underlines that a strong and targeted EU budget will benefit Member States and EU citizens alike; expects that the Commission will put forward a draft 2018 budget that enables the EU to continue to generate prosperity and ensure the safety of its citizens;
Amendment 51 #
2016/2323(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Believes that the EU budget must be equipped with thflexible tools tohat enable it to respond to multiple crises simultaneously; is of the opinion that, while growth and jobs continue to remain the core priorities of the EU budget, obtaining; adds that sustainable progress in these fields will not be possible should EU citizens feel unsafe or inhas to be accomplished in parallel to the addressing of EU citizens' concerns on safety and secureity;
Amendment 64 #
2016/2323(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Underlines that enhancing the competitiveness of the EU economy is, a sound infrastructure, well-funded research, further support to developing skills of employees and the continued commitment of the EU to strengthen investment are keys to ensuring economic growth and job creation; believes that the creation of socially sustainable, well-paid jobs must be one of the main priorities of the EU budget; argues that jobs are created mainly by the private sector, and that adequate budgetary support therefore needs to be devoted to supporting both private sector investmentsand public investments, namely in the field of public service; consequently, underlines the importance of Heading 1a, which delivers real added value for European citizens and business, and calls for an increase of its share in the global budgetthe allocations for this heading in the budget 2018 in order to provide them the infrastructures they need;
Amendment 65 #
2016/2323(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Underlines that enhancing the competitiveness of the EU economy in a socially sustainable manner is key to ensuring economic growth and job creation; believes that the creation of socially sustainable, well-paid jobs must be one of the main priorities of the EU budget; argues that jobs are created mainly by the private sector, and that adequate budgetary support therefore needs to be devoted to supporting private sector investments, with special attention to SMEs; consequently, underlines the importance of Heading 1a, which delivers real added value for European citizens and business, and calls for an increase of its share in the global budget;
Amendment 80 #
2016/2323(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Stresses that investments in research and innovation represent a pre- condition for achieving genuine EU competitiveness in the EUat a global level; regrets the fact that, as a result of an alarmingly low success rate of applications, fewer high- quality projects in the field of research and innovation are receiving EU funding; calls in this respect for an adequate level of appropriations to be ensured for Horizon 2020;
Amendment 106 #
2016/2323(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Underlines the important role and potential of the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) in reducing the investment gap in Europe, and recognises the positivnotes the results achieved so far; welcomes also the Commission proposal for extending the EFSI until 2020, which will serve toshould aim at further improveing its functioning, especially as regards the additionality principle and the geographical balance;
Amendment 129 #
2016/2323(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Welcomes the proposal to launch an ‘18 birthday Interrail pass for Europe’; th underlines that this project has the potential to become a key component in increasing European consciousness and identity, especially in the face of threats such as populism and the spread of misinformation; points to the need of providing an equivalent alternative or supplement to young Europeans that do not have access to a train connection from their home region, such as those residing in the peripheral islands of Europe; stresses, however, that such a project should not be financed at the expense of other successful EU programmes and should be as socially inclusive as possible; intends to secure adequate financing for the programme in the 2018 budget;
Amendment 140 #
2016/2323(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Strongly supports regional policy as one of the main investment instruments of the EU budget that enables economic, social and territorial cohesion; underlines that this policy generates growth and jobs in all Member States; recalls the need for further funding designed for the Union's peripheral regions aimed at slowing down the growing socioeconomic cleavage between the European centre and it's peripheral regions; is concerned, however, about the unacceptable delays in implementation of operational programmes at EU level; calls on the Commission and the Member States to cooperate in order to ensure that the designation of managing and certifying authorities is concluded and implementation accelerates;
Amendment 149 #
2016/2323(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11 a. Emphasises that one-size-fits-all calculations based on GDP are not always necessarily the best indicators when it comes to calculating European Union budget commitments through its funding tools especially when dedicating funding for isolated and/or peripheral regions;
Amendment 151 #
2016/2323(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Recognises the importance of the European agricultural sector in maintaining food security in the European Union; expresses its full support to the farmers affected by the Russian embargo or the dairy sector crisis; calls on the Commission therefore to continue to support farmers across Europe in coping with unexpected market volatility; requests that more attention should be given to small-scale farming and small-scale fishing, which are often not in a position to properly benefit from the current system of EU funding;
Amendment 173 #
2016/2323(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Welcomes the role played by instruments such as the Internal Security Fund (ISF) and the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF) in addressing the effects of the migratory and refugee crisihallenges, and calls for adequate budgeting in the coming years for these funds; reiterates its commitment to the principle of burden-sharing among member states in financing the efforts needed to adequately provide for refugees; welcomes also the role of EU agencies in the area of justice and home affairs, such as Europol, EASO, and the European Border and Coast Guard, and calls, in this context, for their mandate to be executed through adequate budgeting and staffing; is convinced that the EU needs to invest more in strengthening its bordersa better border management,, enhancing cooperation between law enforcement agencies, fighting terrorism and radicalisation and ensuringimproving integration measures and practices for those in need of international protection and, where necessary, carrying out return operations for those not entitled to protection while fully respecting the principle of non- refoulement sound return operations;
Amendment 181 #
2016/2323(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Welcomes the role played by instruments such as the Internal Security Fund (ISF) and the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF) in addressing the effects of the migratory and refugee crisis, and calls for adequate budgeting in the coming years for these funds; welcomes also the role of EU agencies in the area of justice and home affairs, such as Europol, the European Asylum Support Office (EASO) and the European Border and Coast Guard, and calls, in this context, for their mandate to be executed through adequate budgeting and staffing; is convinced that the EU needs to invest more in strengthening its borders, enhancing cooperation between law enforcement agencies, fighting terrorism and radicalisation and ensuring sound return operations;
Amendment 193 #
2016/2323(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Strongly supports initiatives in the field of defence research with the aim of encouraging better cooperation between Member States; recalls that, while respecting provisions enshrined in the Treaties as well as the different national constitutions of the Member States, strengthened cooperation in the field of defence is needed in order to meet the security challenges that the EU is facing, which are generated by prolonged instability in the EU neighbourhood and uncertainty regarding the commitment of certain EU partners towards NATO objectives;
Amendment 224 #
2016/2323(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Underlines that one of the conditions for preserving stability and prosperity in the EU is a stable EU Neighbourhood; calls on the Commission therefore to ensure that priority is given to investments in the EU Neighbourhood in order to support efforts to tackle the main issues that this area is facing: thea migration and refugee crisis in the Southern Neighbourhood and Russian aggression in the Eastconflict in both the Eastern and the Southern Neighbourhoods of the EU; reiterates that supporting countries which are implementing association agreements with the EU while engaging in dialogue with all interested parties through multilateral fora is key to facilitating political and economic reforms;
Amendment 225 #
2016/2323(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Underlines that one of the conditions for preserving stability and prosperity in the EU is a stable EU Neighbourhood; calls on the Commission therefore to ensure that priority is given to investments in the EU Neighbourhood in order to support efforts to tackle the main issues that this area is facing: the migration and refugee crisis in the Southern Neighbourhood and Russian aggression in the Eastern Neighbourhood; reiterates that supporting countries which are implementing association agreements with the EU is key to facilitating political and economic reformthe humanitarian, migration and refugee situation in the Southern Neighbourhood and the troubles in both the Southern and Eastern Neighbourhood Eastern Neighbourhood; reiterates that supporting countries which are implementing association agreements with the EU while engaging in dialogue with all interested parties is key to improve rule of law and enforcing democratic institutions;
Amendment 255 #
2016/2323(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)
Paragraph 23 a (new)
23 a. Calls on the Commission to place importance on both traditional and evolving priorities;
Amendment 270 #
2016/2323(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Stresses the importance of Parliament being fully involved in all budgetary-related matters, as the sole institution democraticalirectly elected by EU citizens;
Amendment 8 #
2016/2307(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Stresses that the way EU funding instruments such as the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) mustare structured must be adjusted in line with the aim of improveing the socio-economic convergence of EU Member States and regions by increasing support for SMEs; notes that an increase in such investment is especially needed in the EU's lagging regions, some of which have been characterised by a persistent lack of growth over the last decade; calls for the European Investment Fund (EIF) to present and implement new products provided for under the SME Window (SMEW) in order to accelerate the implementation of the EIF mandate in InnovFin, COSME and RCR, in accordance with the EFSI Regulation, in particular the SMES Equity Product and the uncapped guarantees for riskier loans to innovative SMEs and small mid-caps, and for the EU Programme for Employment and Social Innovation to foster access to micro-finance for vulnerable groups, as well as micro- and social enterprises.
Amendment 3 #
2016/2306(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Considers that thea well-targeted EU budget could help relieve the strain on national budgets and bolster fiscal consolidation efforts and contribute to the EU’s quest for further investment, while not calling into question the principle of shared management;
Amendment 6 #
2016/2306(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Agrees that stability mechanisms are essential, but recalls that they must guarantee a framework for living together, in particular by preserving public services accessible to all generations and territories; considers that the expenditure incurred by the policies related to food, European defence, international cooperation, as well as social and territorial cohesion should be removed from the convergence criteria established by the Stability and Growth Pact; notes that the methodology by which public investment is treated on the same basis as recurrent expenditure, has served to further depress public investment in recent years and should therefore be reviewed;
Amendment 11 #
2016/2306(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Recalls that improving the systems for collecting VAT and custom duties should be the highest priority of all Member States; welcomes the Commission’s proposal for establishing an EU black list of tax havens, which should be enforced by criminal sanctions with the aim of dealing with multinationals that evade taxes; recalls the need to resort toagree on a form of new own resources for the EU budget, such as taxation on speculative financial movements and on environmental and social drifts;
Amendment 15 #
2016/2306(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Considers that growth is still insufficient to create the jobs the EU urgently needs, especially for its young people, and that it is necessary to encourage more public and private investment in infrastructure, education and training, and SMEs;
Amendment 24 #
2016/2306(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 h (new)
Paragraph 4 h (new)
4h. Welcomes the proposal for an extension and reinforcement of the European Fund for Strategic Investment (EFSI); expects further improvements in the areas of additionality, geographical and sectorial coverage, as well as transparency; underlines the potential of synergies between EFSI and European Structural and Investment funds, in particular with regard to their contribution to territorial cohesion; calls on European and national institutions to better involve regional and local authorities in order to address low project generation capacity and borrowing capacity in some Member States;
Amendment 49 #
2016/2306(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas this recovery in the labour markets, and growth, is uneven among the Member States, benefitting those that have implemented structural reforms;
Amendment 64 #
2016/2306(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas growth has to an important degree relied upon unconventional and, in the long term, unsustainabl accommodative monetary policies; whereas this supports the call for a three- pronged policy approach of growth- friendly investment, a full and consistent implementation of the Stability and Growth pact across Member States, and a particular focus on structural reforms;
Amendment 86 #
2016/2306(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas the EU requires important investment effortsinvestment levels remain below pre-crisis levels, thus requiring important investment efforts at European and national level;
Amendment 89 #
2016/2306(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)
Recital G a (new)
Ga. whereas there are still significant imbalances within the euro area and the EU as a whole, with the EU objective to close the economic and social gap between Northern and Southern countries far to be reached;
Amendment 162 #
2016/2306(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Stresses that public investment has an important role to play in addressing key infrastructure and skills barriers; emphasises that in the current economic juncture, there is a strong case for increasing public investments in areas that increase the resilience of the European economy; in this regard stresses that, while countries which have to continue on the path of fiscal consolidation must do that by cutting public expenditure in unproductive areas, countries having the margin for manoeuvre must use it for more productive investment;
Amendment 165 #
2016/2306(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Underlines that innovation and R&D are key drivers for growth, productivity and competitiveness; calls on the EU and Member States to boost investment in human capital, notably education and training in order to adapt them to the new skills and knowledge demand of the EU labour market;
Amendment 169 #
2016/2306(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Notes that the financial system and its institutions are crucial for investment and growth in the European economy; stresses that the current financial system is characterised by increased safety and stability; believes, however, that care should be taken to ensure that prudential reforms being undertaken do not serve to further restrict investment opportunities especially at SME level;
Amendment 208 #
2016/2306(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Stresses that a step-by-stepthe completion of the Banking Union shall aim at increasing resilience in the banking sector and, contributing to financial stability as well as improving the lending to the real economy;
Amendment 226 #
2016/2306(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Emphasises that reliable investment requires a regulatory environment that allows for a return on investment; considers that predictable rules, a level playing field ands well as reduced compliance costs and administrative burden are crucial factors for attracting investment;
Amendment 245 #
2016/2306(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Amendment 271 #
2016/2306(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11 a. Considering that structural reforms may have a negative impact on national budgets, notes that the mismatch between the flexibility granted by the Stability and Growth Pact and the temporal horizon needed to reap the benefits of structural reforms is counterproductive;
Amendment 277 #
2016/2306(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Considers that well-functioning, flexible labour markets have in some instances proven to be quicker to recover from the economic downturn but deplores that this was done at the expense of social rights whose protection had been synonymous with the European Union's ethos; believes that flexibility in labour markets should not mean a race to the bottom in the protection of workers' rights but should fully respect such rights;
Amendment 316 #
2016/2306(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Welcomes the fact that, on average, youth unemployment is declining; notes, however, that there remain stark differences across the Member States that call for continued reforms to facilitate the entry of young people into the labour market; notes too and regrets that the creation of much youth employment remains of a precarious nature, disallowing young employees from the possibility of planning for their future;
Amendment 365 #
2016/2306(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Underlines the fact that all Member States are obliged to comply with the Stabidivergences in economic performance among the members of the Euro area are growing and that this is undermining the support for the single currency; observes the current excessive reliance on the monetary politcy and Growth Pactof the European Central Bank (ECB) to ensure macroeconomic stability; points, in this regard, also to the importanche role of the Treaty on Stability, Coordination and Governance (TSCG), and urges the Commission to submit a report on the implementation of the TSCG in the Member States;
Amendment 378 #
2016/2306(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Emphasises the Commission’s role as guardian of the treaties; calls on the EU Institutions to assess whether the EU methodologies for the evaluation of the economic and social performance of EU Member States as well as the targets applied under the Stability and Growth Pact are still up-to-date, given that the overall economic and social conditions both at national and European level have changed drastically since the time when they were first drafted;
Amendment 392 #
2016/2306(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
Amendment 409 #
2016/2306(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Notes with concern that, following the assessment of the 2017 Draft Budgetary Plans, eight Member States are considered to be at risk of non-compliance, with some significantly deviating from the required adjustment path and unlikely to be able to contain the risks unless they deliver on the necessary fiscal measures;
Amendment 434 #
2016/2306(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Takes note ofWelcomes the Commission’'s communication on a fiscal stance; questions the usefulness of an aggregate target, given the lack of significant spill- over effects of domestic demand between Member States; recalls that the Member States must comply with the Stabilitpoints, in this regard, to the importance of complementing the EU's fiscal framework with binding rules and instruments to directly mand Growth Pact, regardless of aggregate recommendationsage the aggregate fiscal stance of the Euro area;
Amendment 479 #
2016/2306(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Highlights the importance of national and regional parliaments debating country reports and country-specific recommendations;
Amendment 490 #
2016/2306(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Believes that better implementation of country-specific recommendations requires clearly articulated priorities at European level and genuine public debate at national and regional level, leading to greater ownership;
Amendment 8 #
2016/2302(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Emphasises that the ultimate purpose of financial instruments (FIs) is to act in situations of market failure or suboptimal investment as a catalyst making it possible to mobilise funding for projects which cannot secure adequate support from the market; insists that the funding channelled through the EU-supported FIs should as a priority play a social role and not be limited to satisfying private interests only;
Amendment 36 #
2016/2302(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Points to the challenges that FIs represent for democratic control, timely and transparent reporting and accountability, as well as in the implementation of rules governing FIs at a local level; believes that the revision of the Financial Regulation and the ‘omnibus regulation’ could provide an opportunity to streamline the reporting on FIs and thus provide a better basis to assess additionality and complementarity between different forms of EU support, particularly between cohesion funds and the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI).
Amendment 42 #
2016/2302(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Recalls that the upward social and economic convergence of the different regions in the EU should remain a main priority of the EU's Cohesion policy; points out that an assessment of the funding mix between FIs and other instruments should also be based on whether and how the mix contributes positively or negatively to the goal of reducing the cleavage between centre and periphery; in this spirit, emphasises on the need for further funding designed for the Union's peripheral regions aimed at slowing down the growing socioeconomic cleavage between the European centre and its peripheral regions.
Amendment 8 #
2016/2269(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
A a. Whereas many policy areas that are decisive for reducing inequalities in the EU remain primarily in the hands of the Member States, such as employment, education, taxation and the design of welfare systems, product and services markets, public administration and the judicial system;underlines that the European Semester should remain a core vehicle for further steps towards stronger convergence and more effective coordination of such policies across EU Member States, but suggests that new initiatives will be necessary in order to achieve this aim;
Amendment 56 #
2016/2269(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Recognises the potential of the European Pillar of Social Rights for the development of a stronger social dimension of the European Monetary Union if steps are taken to ensure its effective implementation across the EU;
Amendment 57 #
2016/2269(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Believes that a European Union budget that is dedicated to the implementation of robust and effective measures to reduce the divergences in economic performance and outcomes between different territories in the EU could play a key role in lowering inequalities within the EU;
Amendment 35 #
2016/2247(INI)
A. whereas the establishment of the Banking Union has been a fundamental step taken towards the completion of a genuine Economic and Monetary Union; whereas further efforts are needed as the Banking Union remains incomplete as long as it lacks a fiscal backstop and the Third Pillar of a European Deposit Insurance scheme;
Amendment 44 #
2016/2247(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas a completed Banking Union will be an important contribution to breaking the sovereign-risk nexus;
Amendment 83 #
2016/2247(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas recent data show that the estimated NPLs in the euro area is EUR 1132 € billion1a; _________________ 1a2017 independent Annual Growth Survey 5th Report, 23 November 2016.
Amendment 90 #
2016/2247(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes the high level of non- performing loans (NPLs) in some jurisdictions; considers that this issue is crucial and has yet to be sol; notes that notwithstanding the moderate economic recovery in some jurisdictions the latest data on NPLs have peaked or show a declining trend; considers that this issue is crucial but until now it has been only addressed at national levedl; welcomes the work of the SSM and its draft guidance on this issue; looks forward to the results of the work on a minimum EU insolvency framework; calls on Member States to improve their insolvency legislation and to stimulate growth in order to tackle NPLs; calls for the development of a NPL primary and secondary market, possibly at the European level, in the form of a securitisation market; suggests the establishment of dedicated asset management companies (or "bad banks") and enhanced supervision;
Amendment 129 #
2016/2247(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Considers that there are risks associated wiStresses the importance of the objective of the Banking Union to break the sovereign debt; notes, however,-risk nexus; notes that modifying its prudential treatment could have a significantly negative effect on the financial sector, which calls for caution in reform efforts; awaits with interest the results of the international work on this issue; considers that, in the end, a betterEU regulatory framework, be it European or international, will be neede should be consistent with the international standard;
Amendment 158 #
2016/2247(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Points out that guidance provided by international fora should be used in order to avoid the risk of regulatory fragmentation; , but recalls the Parliament's resolution of 23 November 2016 on the finalisation of Basel III which recalled that the current revision should not bring about a significant increase in overall capital requirements, and underlined the principle of the BCBS to promote the level playing field at the global level by mitigating - rather than exacerbating - the differences between jurisdictions and banking models, and by not unduly penalising the EU banking model;
Amendment 189 #
2016/2247(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Recalls the need to clarify the objectives of Pillar 2 and its place within the stacking order of capital requirements; is of the view that the use of capital guidance is a relevant way forward in order to balance financial stability concerns with flexibility needs; encourages the ECB to clarify the criteria that underline the Pillar 2 guidance; recalls that this guidance does not constrain the Maximum Distributable Amount (MDA), therefore it should not be disclosed;
Amendment 217 #
2016/2247(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Points out thatWelcomes the progress made to prepare for allowing some delegation in the area of fit and proper decisions; nevertheless points out that a change in the regulations is needed to allow more and easier delegation of decision-making on some routine issues from the Supervisory Board to relevant officials c; would welcome such a change which would contribute to making ECB banking supervision more efficient;
Amendment 231 #
2016/2247(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
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; welcomes the Commission's proposal of November 2016, which introduces more proportionality and reduces some of the regulatory costs for smaller institutions;
Amendment 239 #
2016/2247(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Encourages the streamlining of requirements to avoid double reporting and unnecessary additional costs of regulation; calls on the Commission to address the issue in due course in line with their conclusions from the call for evidence;
Amendment 243 #
2016/2247(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Underlines that the exercise of supervision should take into consideration the different banking systems and operational models across the EU;
Amendment 248 #
2016/2247(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 b (new)
Paragraph 9 b (new)
9b. Reiterates its stressing of the importance of strong and well- functioning IT systems corresponding to the needs of the supervisory functions of the SSM and security concerns, regrets recent reports about persisting weaknesses in the IT system;
Amendment 253 #
2016/2247(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 c (new)
Paragraph 9 c (new)
9c. Welcomes the excellent work of the Joint Supervisory Teams (JSTs) which are a good example of European cooperation and knowledge building; points out that the proposed future use of a rotating system in the organisation of JSTs should guarantee objective supervision while taking into consideration the lengthy process of knowledge building in this very complex field of expertise;
Amendment 256 #
2016/2247(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 d (new)
Paragraph 9 d (new)
9d. Recalls the need to dedicate more ECB personnel to the SSM to avoid over- reliance on staff from NCAs which potentially jeopardises the ECB supervisory tasks; welcomes the ECB's cooperation with the European Parliament on staff working conditions; underlines the importance of a good working environment that fosters professional cohesion in the ECB;
Amendment 258 #
2016/2247(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 e (new)
Paragraph 9 e (new)
9e. Welcomes that the Banking Union has widely eliminated the home-host issue in supervision by the establishment of a single supervisor and the greatly improved exchange of relevant information between supervisory authorities, enabling a more holistic supervision of cross-border banking groups; stresses that, due to the current incomplete state of the Banking Union, the CRR review on liquidity and capital waivers needs to appropriately take into account concerns of consumer protection in host countries;
Amendment 265 #
2016/2247(INI)
9h. Welcomes the ECB initiative to oblige supervised banks to report significant cyber-attacks under a real- time alert service and the SSM on-site inspections to supervise cyber-security; calls for the establishment of a legal framework which facilitates the exchange of sensitive information relevant to prevent cyber-attacks between banks;
Amendment 267 #
2016/2247(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 i (new)
Paragraph 9 i (new)
9i. Stresses the crucial role of cyber- security for banking services and the need to incentivise financial institutions to be very ambitious in protecting consumer data and guaranteeing cyber-security;
Amendment 268 #
2016/2247(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 j (new)
Paragraph 9 j (new)
9j. Points out that in the current environment non-banks are increasingly expanding their assets and, taking into account that they tend to be very sensitive to crises, encourages expanding regulation to all banking activities;
Amendment 289 #
2016/2247(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Underlines the importance to clarify practical issues which are directly affecting resolution, such as the reliance on service providers which provide critical services for example in the case of out- sourced IT services;
Amendment 293 #
2016/2247(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 b (new)
Paragraph 10 b (new)
Amendment 300 #
2016/2247(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
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; 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; emphasizes that market disclosure should be made in an appropriate manner in order to avoid investor misinterpretation of the MREL requirements;
Amendment 307 #
2016/2247(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Calls for a careful calibration of MREL requirements considering that a disproportionate amount would entail unnecessarily high funding costs and could reduce the capacity of banks to finance the economy;
Amendment 351 #
2016/2247(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Regrets that the Commission did not allow for more time to assess the implementation of the DGSD before proposSupports the Commission's proposal of a three stages approach towards a fully mutualised European fund, which is the most effective option to protect all depositors ing 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 optBanking Union; stands ready to address some of the options and discretions in the DGSD with the objective of reducing them as an important step towards a genuine level playing field; appreciates the Commission's and discretions it includesdditional effect analysis on EDIS;
Amendment 368 #
2016/2247(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Is aware of the potential benefnecessitsy of an EDIS; is nevertheless of the opinion that risk reduction measures are an indispensable counterparty to its establishment in order toto prevent moral hazard; points out the progress made in risk reduction since the establishment of the Banking Union in particular with the SSM and the SRM and the wide range of prevudent moral hazard, and that such measures should preferably precede risk sharingial measures which have been taken with respect to banks; is of the opinion that risk sharing measures should now proceed speedily;
Amendment 427 #
2016/2247(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Welcomes the establishment of loan facility agreements between the SRF and the Banking Union Member States; is of the opinion, nevertheless, that this solution is not sufficient to do away with the bank-sovereign vicious circle and that the work on a common fiscal backstop for the SRF, which should be fiscally neutral over the medium term, should continue step by step; calls for a more robust mutualised credit line via the European Stability Mechanism (ESM); reaffirms the need to have the common backstop fiscally neutral over the medium term and fully operational at the latest by the end of 2024 as agreed within the agreement on the SRF and confirmed by the European Council in June 2016; Calls on the Council and the Commission to speed up the work on this issue;
Amendment 434 #
2016/2247(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)
Paragraph 24 a (new)
24a. Is of the opinion that in order to restore trust, a fiscal backstop needs to work for the Banking Union as a whole;
Amendment 436 #
2016/2247(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 b (new)
Paragraph 24 b (new)
24b. Underlines that the restrictive eligibility criteria of the ESM's direct bank recapitalisation instrument limit its effectiveness; highlights that a more easily accessible mechanism for direct bank recapitalisation would boost depositor confidence, contribute to breaking the sovereign-bank link and reinforce financial stability;
Amendment 31 #
2016/2224(INI)
1. Calls on the Commission to present a comprehensive horizontal legislation to protect whistle- blowers as soon as possible, based on internal market provisions of the EU treaties together with the flexibility clause;
Amendment 56 #
2016/2224(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Argues that whistle-blowers should be free to report both internally, within the workplace, and externally, and should be protectsince organizational and other inadequacies are often such that the available internal procedures are ineffectual or counterproductive, implying that recourse has to be sought directly outside the organisation; in both cases full protection should be extended, regardless of their choice of reporting channels, nor should the latter be hierarchised;
Amendment 88 #
2016/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Welcomes the Commission’s focus in its 2016 country-specific recommendations (CSRs) on the three main priorities to further strengthen economic growth: supporting investment, pursuing structural reforms and preserving responsible public finances contributing to economic growth and social equality;
Amendment 109 #
2016/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Fully supports the efforts made to ensure greater national ownership in the formulation and implementation of CSRs as an ongoing reform process; stresses that more than half of CSRs are to be implemented by or relevant to local and regional authorities, and that therefore reform formulation and implementation must be ensured in partnership with the sub-national government levels;
Amendment 121 #
2016/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Stresses that Europe’s long economic crisis has shown that there is a strong need to focus on public and private investment, in order to enhance the EU’s competitiveness; notes that while the overall assessment of the European Fund for Strategic Investment after one year of functioning is moderately positive, its geographical balance and the truly additional character of its investments should be improved, as should the efforts to develop Investment Platforms including at regional level;
Amendment 145 #
2016/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Underlines that the still-too-high unemployment rates show that the capacity to create jobs in most Member States is still limited; emphasises that further action is needed, in consultation with social partners and in accordance with national practices, to make labour markets more inclusive overall; stresses that the crisis has widened the economic gaps between EU regions, also within Member States, which is a main cause of increasing inequalities in the EU;
Amendment 215 #
2016/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Underlines the fact that investment has so far lagged and failed to lead to sustainable and inclusive growth in the EU and that under the current circumstances, monetary policy alone is unlikely to bring about recovery, even though the rules made necessary by banking union have imposed more stringent financial criteria on banks; considers that a coordinated fiscal expansion is also needed in the EU, therefore, in line with the rules of the Stability and Growth Pact and its flexibility clauses, in order to place emphasis on public and private investment; reiterates that specifically investment-friendly rules, or those where public investment or other priority outlays are excluded from the perimeter of the rule, are the most effective way to increase counter cyclicality in fiscal policy;
Amendment 217 #
2016/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11a (new)
Paragraph 11a (new)
11a. Points out that almost two thirds of the territory-related CSRs this year concerned administrative capacity issues and were addressed to vast majority of Member States; stresses therefore, that the Structural Reform Support Programme (SRSP) should be open to local and regional authorities, involving them directly when putting together the structural reform project in question;
Amendment 220 #
2016/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11b (new)
Paragraph 11b (new)
11b. Notes that investments at sub- national governments level have decreased strongly in recent years, now counting for around sixty per cent of public investment in the EU; underlines that investment policy instruments such as the EFSI and ESIF require a territorial dimension and complementarity between each other;
Amendment 234 #
2016/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Emphasises the need to improve the EU’s overall capacity to create and sustain jobs and thus to tackle high levels of unemployment, while considering that migration could play an important role in compensating for the negative effects of the ageing population; emphasises, however, that this alone cannot be the main response to address structural demographic, labour market or fiscal challenges but that it should be complemented with efficient public expenditure, especially in high-quality social and environmentally sustainable investments and on the ability of the Member States to better use migrants' skills and to adapt labour migration management systems to employers' needs;
Amendment 312 #
2016/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Points out that efforts should be made to remove remaining barriers to investment in the Member States and allow for a more suitable policy mix, including a genuine focus on research and development spending; believes that public and private spending and support for research and higher education institutions are crucial factors and that the weakness or absence of this infrastructure places certain countries at a massive disadvantage; stresses that there is no one-size-fits-all ideal EU innovation policy prescription but in order to close the innovation- capacity divide in the EU, sufficiently differentiated innovation policies in Member States, which are tailored to address each country's specific innovation capacity position are needed by building on the models of success stories that have already been attained;
Amendment 316 #
2016/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17a (new)
Paragraph 17a (new)
17a. Underlines that, given the current distribution of powers and competences in most Member States, delivery on the Country-specific Recommendations will improve with the active participation of the local and regional authorities; to this aim, supports the proposal of a code of conduct for the involvement of the local and regional authorities in the European Semester;
Amendment 15 #
2016/2100(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 10 a (new)
Citation 10 a (new)
– having regard to the European Parliament Resolution of 4 February 2016 on the special situation of islands (2015/3014(RSP)),
Amendment 28 #
2016/2100(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the socially responsible implementation of competition rules prevents the over-concentration of economic and financial power in the hands of a few;
Amendment 35 #
2016/2100(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas fair competition policy should aim at keepsing markets efficient and open, thus leading to with lower prices, better-quality products and services and greater choice for consumers, also promoting innovation and growth;
Amendment 56 #
2016/2100(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the annual report by the Commission on competition policy, which can help to restore a sufficient level of investment and innovation by creating a fair competition environment; also reiterates that Europe’s future should be based on innovation; which creates a high standard of living for all EU citizens, irrespective of economic or geographical background;
Amendment 87 #
2016/2100(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Notes that healthy tax competition accompanied with appropriate transfer mechanisms set up to compensate for the structural economic divergences between different regions and states of the Union remains a constitutive element of the internal market of the Union;
Amendment 119 #
2016/2100(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Reminds the Commission that for the EU's single market to function smoothly, it is imperative to allow national and regional authorities to intervene in situations which emanate from geographical handicaps that impede on the market's ability to flourish in both its economic and social dimension;
Amendment 124 #
2016/2100(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Repeats its calls that one size fits all calculations do not define competition policies, since these undermine social cohesion across the Union, promote policy options that potentially are economically flawed, and in the medium term, inhibit the union's competitiveness vis-à-vis other continental trading and investment blocs;
Amendment 136 #
2016/2100(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Reiterates that in the context of a digital single market, the Commission must be equipped with the right tools to strengthen its surveillance and avoid abuses stemming from dominant positions at the detriment of end consumers in the digital economy;
Amendment 222 #
2016/2100(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Considers that, in order to grant fair competition among companies, in line with the Commission Regulation (EU) No 651/2014, companies located in regions experiencing temporary or permanent disadvantages should be supported and increased flexibility should be granted to Regions experiencing severe economic problems, such as the Regions included in the Convergence and in the Competitiveness Objective, and to insular regions;
Amendment 227 #
2016/2100(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 b (new)
Paragraph 12 b (new)
12b. Requests the Commission to take a constructive position on the issue of state aid keeping in mind that different Member States must respond to different policy imperatives on the basis of their situation, size, physical and other endowments, as well as their state of economic and social development;
Amendment 231 #
2016/2100(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 c (new)
Paragraph 12 c (new)
12c. Considers that isolated and/or peripheral regions and islands should be allowed wider margins for the implementation of state aid provisions than is currently being done, not least under conditions of double isolation or insularity, especially when such provisions would have limited to minimal effect on the wider European market, and when they are intended to help stimulate economic activity and social cohesion in ways that would not otherwise be feasible in the short to medium term;
Amendment 233 #
2016/2100(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 d (new)
Paragraph 12 d (new)
12d. Stresses that state aid is sometimes necessary in order to assure the delivery of services of general economic interest (SGEI) including energy, transport and telecommunication; Emphasises that state intervention is often the best possible policy tool to assure services crucial for the support of economic and social conditions in isolated, remote or peripheral regions and islands in the Union;
Amendment 234 #
2016/2100(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 e (new)
Paragraph 12 e (new)
12e. Welcomes the inclusion of social aid for transport residents of remote regions in the GBER where the problem of connectivity is being recognised; Stresses that the connectivity of peripheral island regions is also essential for sustaining and developing acceptable levels of economic and social initiative by maintaining vital business connections;
Amendment 245 #
2016/2100(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Stresses that – as the Commission has stated for the sixth time in its annual competition report – the temporary state aid granted in the financial sector was necessary for the stabilisation of the global financial system, but must quickly be reduced, or totbe gradually removduced and scrutinised,phased out once the Banking Union is completed;
Amendment 331 #
2016/2100(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20a. Points out the need to differentiate conceptually and policy-wise between competition rules and social policy of the respective Member state; recognises it is every government's obligation to intervene in order to avoid energy poverty on its citizens;
Amendment 435 #
2016/2100(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 a (new)
Paragraph 27 a (new)
27a. Calls in particular for a strict separation between the departments that draw up guidelines and those that have the responsibility to apply those guidelines in specific cases avoiding a situation in which the Competition DG acts as the prosecutor, jury, judge and executioner;
Amendment 2 #
2016/2099(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 2 a (new)
Citation 2 a (new)
- having regard to the September 2016 Evaluation of the Functioning of the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) of the European Investment Bank,
Amendment 22 #
2016/2099(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the bank must retain a strong credit standing and must remain selective in its operations, taking into account not only the high volumes and returns of the investment but also the social and economic development targets of different sectors;
Amendment 29 #
2016/2099(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas the EIB should continue to strengthen its efforts to expand its loan activities in regions with a low level of investment capacity;
Amendment 34 #
2016/2099(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas the EIB, as the institution responsible for the implementation of the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI)FSI, should also maintain solid financial results and a high quality of asset portfolio as a main priority;
Amendment 44 #
2016/2099(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas the EIB should, through all its available instruments, help address regional inequalities on the basis of financing sound investment projects; whereas, in particular, the EIB should devise additional ways of sustaining the economic development of the peripheral regions of the EU, including those countries that have had to apply a stabilisation programme;
Amendment 64 #
2016/2099(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Underlines that at EU level there are major structural reasons which are increasing the investment gap between Member States; calls on the EIB to boost its technical assistance in order to address low project generation capacity and borrowing capacity in some Member States;
Amendment 77 #
2016/2099(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Underlines the fact that the strengthening of EU competitiveness depends among other things on an increase in public and private investment, especially in innovation, research and development and digitalisation;
Amendment 87 #
2016/2099(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Notes that in 2015, 58% of all EIB-signed projects were allocated to the five biggest economies while the share of the other 23 Member States stood at 32%;
Amendment 186 #
2016/2099(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16a. Observes that EFSI portfolio after one year of operations is highly concentrated, notably under the Infrastructure and Innovation Window 63% of total amount signed is in the United Kingdom, Italy and Spain and under the SME Window, 54% of the amount signed is in Italy, France and Germany; underlines that smaller Member States and peripheral regions have less capacity and financial capability to originate and structure bankable projects; urges the EIB to ensure an adequate geographical distribution of the operations;
Amendment 208 #
2016/2099(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 4
Subheading 4
Innovation andcreasing EU competitiveness through innovation and education
Amendment 215 #
2016/2099(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19a. Believes that the EIB plays a key role in developing an "investment culture" across the EU through targeted investments in education and training, in particular in less developed regions;
Amendment 227 #
2016/2099(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Takes the view that the EIB should devise ways of relaxing the conditionality for benefitting firms in regions with youth unemployment above 250 %, without calling into question the viability of the projects; adds that where such flexibility is provided, a conditionality of youth employment must be included;
Amendment 286 #
2016/2099(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Asks the EIB to continue its action to tackle the migrant and refugee crisis by financing emergency projects in countries of destination and where possible, making long-term investments in the refugees’ countries of origin;
Amendment 313 #
2016/2099(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Paragraph 30 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Strengthening transparency and accountability
Amendment 314 #
2016/2099(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 a (new)
Paragraph 30 a (new)
30a. Calls on the EIB to implement stringent criteria on conflict of interest, fraud and corruption in order to safeguard public interest;
Amendment 315 #
2016/2099(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 b (new)
Paragraph 30 b (new)
30b. Insists on the need to achieve the highest level of transparency and institutional accountability; calls on the EIB to present to the European Parliament the ongoing operations through regular meetings and giving access to information and financial documents;
Amendment 316 #
2016/2099(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 c (new)
Paragraph 30 c (new)
30c. Calls on the EIB to improve the participation of national governments, regional and local authorities; encourages the EIB to facilitate the exchange of best practices and to strengthen the involvement of the EIB's national offices;
Amendment 1 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 3
Citation 3
– having regard to Regulation (EU) 20175/1017 of the European Parliament and of the Council1 (the EFSI regulation), _________________ 1 OJ L 169, 1.7.2015, p. 1.
Amendment 18 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Takes note of the large investment gap in Europe, which the Commission estimates at a minimum of EUR 200-300 billion a year; , highlights in particular, against this backdrop, the market needs in Europe for high-risk financing, for instance in the fields of R&D, energy and ICT; is concerned by the fact that the most recent data on national accounts do not indicate any surge in investment since the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) was launched, leading to risks of continued subdued growth and continuing high unemployment rates; therefore, questions the implementation method being used for EFSI; stresses that closing this investment gap is key to reviving growth, fighting unemployment and attaining long-term EU policy objectives;
Amendment 128 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. ConsiderRegrets that the criteria according to which projects are assessed are unclear and lack transparency; requests furtherll and detailed information from the EFSI governing bodies on the evaluations carried out on all projects approved under EFSI accordingly, in particular as regards their additionality and contribution to growth and job creation as defined in the Regulation;
Amendment 153 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Acknowledges that it may take some years to prepare new innovative projects, that the EIB is under pressure to achieve the EUR 315 billion goal and therefore had no option but to launch EFSI activities immediately,; is concerned, however, that the EIB, when implementing EFSI, has thus far drawn on its existing project pipeline with lower risk projects to a large extent, thereby reducing its own conventional financing; fears that EFSI does not provide complementary financing for high-risk innovative projects; underlines that even though a project qualifies as a special activity, this does not necessarily imply that it is risky, however the classification as a special activity might also stem from the fact that its financing has been structured in an artificially risky fashion, implying that very low-risk projects can also easily end up as high-risk projects;
Amendment 202 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Welcomes that all sectors defined in the EFSI Regulation have been covered by EFSI financing; points out, however, that certain sectors are under-represented despite their high demand for investment; notes that this might be due to the fact that certain sectors already offered better investment opportunities in terms of shovel-ready, bankable projects when EFSI started up, as well as lack of experience and technical know-how in absorbing funding through instruments such as EFSI; invites the EIB against this backdrop to discuss how to improve sectorial diversification, linking it to the goals set out in the Regulation as well as the issue of whether EFSI support should be extended to other sectors;
Amendment 256 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Urges the EFSI governing bodies to pay greater attention to investment platforms with a view to maximising the benefits that the latter can bring in overcoming investment barriers, especially in EU-13; invites the EIB to provide stakeholders with more information on the platforms; recognizes the role of Local and Regional Authorities in identifying strategic projects and encourages their participation;
Amendment 262 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Proposes a discussion of additional means of promoting IPs, such as by prioritising the approval of projects presented via a platform, the pooling of smaller projects and group contracts and establishing mechanisms to finance groupings of contracts; believes that transnational platforms should be promoted in particular, as many energy and digital projects have a transnational dimension;
Amendment 273 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Welcomes that by the end of 2016, all 28 countries received EFSI funding; underlines, however, that as of 30 June 2016, EU-15 had received 91% whereas EU-13 had only received 9% of EFSI support; regrets that EFSI support has mainly benefitted a limited number of countries; considers the risk of territorial concentration and, therefore, underlines the need for greater attention to less developed and isolated regions also through strengthened technical assistance;
Amendment 286 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Acknowledges that GDP and the number of projects approved are linked; recognises that larger Member States are able to take advantage of more developed capital markets, have stronger administrative and technical capacity and are therefore more likely to benefit from a market-driven instrument such as EFSI; underlines that lower EFSI support in EU- 13 may be attributable to other factors, such as the small size of projects, andexisting barriers to investment including excessive bureaucracy, the small size of projects, the peripheral geographical position of a given region as well as competition from the European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF); observes with concern, however, the disproportionate benefit to certain countries and underlines the need to diversify geographical distribution further, especially in crucial sectors such as modernising and improving the productivity and sustainability of economies;
Amendment 52 #
2016/2063(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital J a (new)
Recital J a (new)
Ja. whereas the ECB's monetary policy efforts are still failing to leave a tangible impact on the investment side of the EU economy; Notes that this lack of impact is especially having an adverse effect in the peripheral regions on the Union;
Amendment 61 #
2016/2063(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses that the euro area continues to suffer from a high level of unemployment and excessive low inflation and that, in addition, the euro area is facing a very low level of productivity growth, which is the result of the lack of investment since the beginning of the crisis; notes that the high level of public debt and the huge number of non- performing loans in the banking sector in some Member States are still fragmenting the euro area financial market, thus reducing room for manoeuvre to support the most fragile economie, especially in its southern peripheral regions, since the beginning of the crisis;
Amendment 86 #
2016/2063(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Acknowledges that, confronted with this very complex environment and the risks of a prolonged period of low inflation, the ECB was within the terms of its mandate in adopting extraordinary measures to lift inflation back up to the medium-term objective of 2 %; notes that, since the launching of the APP in March 2015, and owing to targeted long-term refinancing operation (TLTRO) programmes targeted at the real economy, financial conditions have improved, which has promoted a recovery in lending to firms and households in some parts of the euro area;
Amendment 114 #
2016/2063(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Agrees with ECB President Mario Draghi that the single monetary policy alone cannot stimulate aggregate demand unless it is complemented by; Adds that sound fiscal policies and ambitious structural reform programmes at Member State level can sometimes be needed; recalls that the main benefit of monetary policy is to safeguard price stability in order to guarantee a stable environment forinducing investment; considers that monetary policy is not the appropriate tool toalone cannot solve the structural problems of the European economy;
Amendment 128 #
2016/2063(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Underlines that structural reforms in the economy and the labour market should also fully take into account the demographic trends in Europe, in order to create incentives for a more balanced demographic structure that would make it easier to maintain an inflation target of around 2 %;
Amendment 139 #
2016/2063(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Notes, however, that even though the impact of unconventional measures has been significant, inflation is not expected to converge to the 2 % medium-term objective at the 2017 horizon; notes that the current recovery in bank and market lending has not wholly produced the expected effect on the existing investment gap in the euro area so far, even as the rules made necessary by Banking Union have enforced stricter financial criteria on banks; Asks therefore for improved fiscal policies, that are both sustainable and growth-inducing, while promoting structural reforms that directly facilitate investment and growth;
Amendment 154 #
2016/2063(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Underlines that a prolonged period of ultra-low (negative) interest rate policy creates potential risks for financial stability and ultimately the whole economy; warns that a decline in the profitability of banks will dampen their willingness to develop lending activity; points particularly to the effect of such an interest rate policy on local and regional banks and savings banks with little funding from financial markets, and to risks in the insurance sector;
Amendment 164 #
2016/2063(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Understands the reason why negative rates have been implemented, but; remains concerned about the potential consequences of negative interest rate policy for individual savers and the financial equilibrium of pension schemes; believes that owing to demographic trends and cultural preferences for saving, these negative effects on income may lead to an increase in the household saving rate, which could be detrimental to domestic demand in the euro area;
Amendment 176 #
2016/2063(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Calls on the ECB to carefully assess the risks of a future resurgence of housing bubbles owing to its ultra-low (negative) interest rate policy, particularly in big cities, and to design specific macroprudential recommendations in this regard;
Amendment 199 #
2016/2063(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
Amendment 209 #
2016/2063(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Is concerned about the current 'liquidity trap' the European economy seems to have fallen into, with interest rates at the Zero Lower Bound (ZLB), weak demand forecasts, limited investment and spending by households and businesses, in particular in surplus countries;
Amendment 232 #
2016/2063(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16a. Notes that the current system by which the ECB is relying on the employment of temporary agents, placed within a system of repetitive temporary contracts, is reportedly creating instability in the working environment and undermining professional cohesion at the ECB;
Amendment 21 #
2016/2056(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the further development of the retail financial services market at EU level, with the appropriate legislative framework imposing the needed consumer protection, would not only facilitate important and fruitful cross- border activity, but would also open up greater scope for healthy competition at national level;
Amendment 63 #
2016/2056(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Underlines the importance of promoting positive developments in this market by creating and maintaining a level playing field for all stakeholders where the rules are as technology- and business- model-neutral as is feasible; points out that such an approach is necessary, not least in order to give new and innovative SMEs a fair chance;
Amendment 73 #
2016/2056(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Emphasises, in particular because of low levels of consumer trust and satisfaction, that the Green Paper initiative can succeed only if it has a strong focus on creating an EU market in which well- protected consumers have equal opportunities and access to transparent, straightforward and good- value-for-money products;
Amendment 125 #
2016/2056(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Stresses, not least given that otherwise positive digitisation processes could trigger exclusionary tendencies, that the financial inclusion perspective should always be kept in mind, and that measures should be taken to ensure that all consumers have equal access to at least the most essential financial services;
Amendment 172 #
2016/2056(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Emphasises the need to focus on the removal of undue statutory barriers towards the cross-border provision of financial services;
Amendment 197 #
2016/2056(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Calls foron the Commission to intensify its work against discrimination on grounds of residence in the European market on retail financial services and, if necessary, to complement the planned general proposals to end unjustified geo- blocking with further legislative initiatives targeted specifically at the financial sector;
Amendment 210 #
2016/2056(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Calls on the Commission, inter alia with reference to the PAD, to map the rules, practices and non-practices that apply to domestic and cross-border switching in all parts of the European retail financial services market, and to present a coherent and comprehensive strategy forwhich while taking into account the different financial market models, makinges switching service providers and products easier for the consumer;
Amendment 256 #
2016/2056(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Asks the Commission to study further the benefits and costs of removing all barriers towards the cross-border provision of financial services, thus guaranteeing domestic and cross-border portability in various parts of the retail financial services market (for example as regards insurance products and bank account numbers);
Amendment 86 #
2016/2047(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21 a. Recalls the need for further funding designed for the Union's peripheral regions aimed at slowing down the growing socioeconomic cleavage between the European centre and it's peripheral regions;
Amendment 87 #
2016/2047(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 b (new)
Paragraph 21 b (new)
21 b. Notes that the EIB's Evaluation of the functioning of the EFSI from September 2016 shows that as for the period ending 30 June 2016, only two peripheral Member States, Cyprus and Malta, had no signed operations under either window of that Fund;
Amendment 93 #
2016/2047(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)
Paragraph 23 a (new)
23 a. Requests that more attention should be given to small-scale farming and small-scale fishing, which are very often not in a position to properly benefit from the current system of Union funding;
Amendment 100 #
2016/2047(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Reiterates, that budgetary flexibility has its limits and can only be a short-term solution; is strongly convinced that a forward-looking and brave answer in the face of a crisis that involvesthis long-term migrant and refugee crisis is needed; highlights that in the past years, when the impact of the same crisis was being predominantly felt only in Southern Europe, necessary priority has not been given; requests that at a time when the crisis has spilled over to the entire continent and shows no signs of abating, is an upwards adjustment of the ceiling of Heading 3 is necessary; insists that such an adjustment is indispensable and urgent and is disappointed that the Commission forewent the opportunity to propose it at the occasion of the MFF mid- term revision;
Amendment 107 #
2016/2047(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Welcomes the Commission’s proposal, as part of the MFF mid-term revision, to establish a new European Union Crisis Reserve, to be financed from de-committed appropriations, as an additional instrument to react rapidly to crises, such as the current migrant and refugee crisis, as well asmigrant and refugee crisis, a crisis through which the Union's Mediterranean countries have long been in need of the adaptation of the tools applied to the Union's migration policy framework, amongst which the need for a boost in financial assistance; considers that the newly established Crisis Reserve should as well accommodate a wider set of events with serious humanitarian or security implications;
Amendment 10 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas SMEs and mid-caps play an important role for the European economy in terms of employment and growth;
Amendment 12 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas micro, SMEs and mid-caps play an important role for the European economy in terms of employment and growth;
Amendment 14 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas micro and SME financing suffered more from the crisis than the financing of large enterprises;
Amendment 18 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas European SMEs are very diverse and include a vast number of micro-enterprises, which often operate in traditional sectors and a growing number of new start-ups and fast-growing innovative enterprises; whereas these business models face different problems and, therefore, have different financing needs;
Amendment 24 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas 77% of outstanding SME funding in Europe is provided for by banks; __________________ 2bECB survey on the Access to Finance of Enterprises in the euro area – April to September 2015
Amendment 37 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Acknowledges the diversity of micro, SMEs and mid-caps in the Member States, which is reflected in their business models, size, geographical position, socioeconomic environment, stages of development, financial structure and legal form;
Amendment 44 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes differences in financing needs and conditions for SMEs between Member States, notably the quantity and cost of available funding, which are influenced by SME-specific and country-specific factors and exacerbated by the geographical divides within the EU which often overlap with a deep socioeconomic cleavage at a continental level;
Amendment 48 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Believes that in a comprehensive and well-designed Capital Markets Union all market participants with the same relevant characteristics should face a single set of rules, have equal access to a set of financial instruments or services and be treated equally when they are active in the market;
Amendment 49 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Notes that the low proportion of women running SMEs is partly due to a more difficult access to finance; regrets that the European Progress Microfinance Facility whose objective is to promote equal opportunities for women and men, had a 60:40 male-to-female ratio for microloans in 2013; calls therefore on the Commission to make sure that its programmes aiming at facilitating access to finance for SMEs do not disfavour women entrepreneurs;
Amendment 50 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Calls on the Commission to assess discrimination faced by SMEs run by other vulnerable groups of society;
Amendment 53 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Underlines the need for diverse public and private funding options for SMEs throughout their lifecycle; stresses that access to finance is also of importance for the transfer of businesses; calls on the Commission and the Member States to support SMEs in this process;
Amendment 63 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Encourages SMEs to consider the whole EU as their home market and to use the potential of the single market for their financing needs; welcomes the Commission’'s initiatives supporting SMEs and start-ups in an upgraded Single Market; underlines, in this context,emphasises that the Start-up initiative of the European Commission should favour not only the establishment of start-ups but also their development and growth; underlines the importance of the implementation of the Small Business Act; calls on the Commission for a follow- up to the Small Business Act which would further assist businesses to overcome both physical and regulatory barriers; recognises, in this context, that innovation is a key driver for sustainable growth and employment in the EU and that specific attention should be given to Innovative SMEs;
Amendment 68 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Underlines that overcoming information problems about SMEs will help to improve access to capital markets for those growing medium-sized firms that are most likely to benefit from easier access to finance; Supports the idea of creating a minimum, simple and shared set of data to build a credit scoring system available to SMEs interested in accessing capital markets, to be implemented through the creation of a common European platform, where SMEs looking for finance could voluntarily insert their data and keep them up to date; believes that such an instrument would allow companies to reach international pools of liquidity;
Amendment 72 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Notes that start-ups in particularand micro- enterprises, especially those in economically depressed regions, find it difficult to obtain appropriate funding and to identify and meet regulatory financial requirements; encourages therefore Member States in their efforts to create one-stop shops as hubs for all regulatory requirements for entrepreneurs; welcomes the Commission’s plan to launch a European Pact for starts-ups to address these issues;
Amendment 77 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Asks for more flexibility aiming towards a tailor-made regulatory framework as against a one-size-fits-all approach in the sector; Acknowledges that the different country specific factors at economic, legal and cultural levels create an asymmetrical scenario as regards the financing needs for SMEs in the EU;
Amendment 78 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Notes that rules on bankruptcy, insolvency and second chance opportunities remain very fragmented across the EU, and that this also restricts cross border investments; Believes that simplified and harmonised rules in the area would support start-ups, micro, SMEs and improve the EU's business environment;
Amendment 82 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Welcomes the Commission’'s initiative to identify undue barriers and obstacles to the financial sector providing funding to the real economy, in particular micro, SMEs; underlines the importance of simplifying or modifying rules which gave rise to unintended consequences;
Amendment 96 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Acknowledges that bank lending is traditionally the most important external financing source for SMEs; underlines the important role of banks with specific regional and local knowledge and their long-term relationship with SMEs; highlights that bank-based and capital- based financing models should be complementary;
Amendment 97 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Points out that where bank lending does not fulfil the financial and business needs for SMEs, a vacuum in capital is created, which might generate the conditions for illegal and criminal financing;
Amendment 98 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Highlights that the financial crisis has led to the fragmentation of the EU savings and credit markets; emphasises that despite unconventional measures by the ECB and the creation, yet to be completed, of the Banking Union, credit conditions continue to vary across the euro area, reflecting differences in risk perception and economic conditions;
Amendment 103 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 b (new)
Paragraph 8 b (new)
8b. Believes that the fragmentation of the EU savings and credit markets can only be addressed through completion of the baking union; highlights the need to implement the European Deposit Insurance Scheme (EDIS), the third pillar of the Banking Union; invites the Commission to consider the introduction of a financial backstop to further enhance the stability and reduce systemic risk;
Amendment 111 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Encourages the Commission to assess and introduce "funding for lending" programmes that would make ECB money available to banks with the sole purpose of lending to SMEs;
Amendment 116 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Underlines that while digitalisation is advancing and therefore new sources of financing are emerging, the local presence of traditional credit institutions especially in islands and archipelagos as well as rural, remote and peripheral areas remains essential for SMEs' access to finance;
Amendment 117 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Notes that a diversification of credit sources would lead to greater stability of the financial sector;
Amendment 123 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Emphasises the need to avoid double reporting requirements and multiple reporting channels, and more generally an unnecessary administrative burden on credit institutions, in particular smaller banks; Is concerned about multiple regulatory requirements for banks and possible negative effects on lending to SMEs; calls on the Commission to assess these effects on SME lending, with the support of the EBA and SSM;
Amendment 130 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Emphasises the importance of the SME Supporting Factor for maintaining and increasing bank lending to SMEs; calls on the Commission to examine the appropriate calibration of the factor, including size, threshold and, possible interactions with other regulatory requirements, as well as external elements such as geographical position and socioeconomic environment; is concerned about the possible negative impact of its removal; calls on the Commission to explore the possibility of making this factor permanent;
Amendment 132 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Emphasises the importance of the SME Supporting Factor for maintaining and increasing bank lending to SMEs; calls on the Commission to examine the appropriate calibration of the factor, including size, threshold and possible interactions with other regulatory requirements; is concerned about the possible negative impact of its removal; calls on the Commission to explore the possibility of making this factor permanent; suggests that initiatives for improved SME funding should be expanded to start-ups, micro- enterprises and mid-cap companies;
Amendment 134 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Reminds banks that lending and risk- taking is part of their core business; sStresses that risk assessment and the evaluation of qualitative information is one of their banks' major strengths, in particular for complex SME lending; underlines the confidential nature of credit information that banks receive when assessing the creditworthiness of SMEs;
Amendment 146 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16a. Calls on the Commission to develop public sector backed investments and government scheme loans to SMEs;
Amendment 147 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Recalls that credit institutions must, upon request, provide SMEs with an explanation of their rating decisions; calls onencourages the Commission to assess the implementation of this provisionstrengthen the provisions outlined in Article 431 (4) of the CRR and to make giving feedback to SMEs applying for loans mandatory;
Amendment 150 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Calls on EBA and the Commission to provide more guidance on the implementation of the current forbearance regulation; recalls that non-performing loans on banks' balance sheet are hampering the delivery of new loans, hence, stronger measures are needed to overcome the problem; asks the Commission to conduct an impact assessment of the current forbearance regime for non-performing loans; stresses that the introduction of a de minimis limit for minor violations would help to prevent an unnecessary und unjustified drop in the creditworthiness of the SME;
Amendment 153 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18a. Notes that limits to the purchase of government bonds by banks or the increase of weighting of these bonds would increase the credit costs and increase the competitive gap in EU;
Amendment 158 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 b (new)
Paragraph 18 b (new)
18b. Welcomes the measures adopted by the ECB on 10 March 2016 and, in particular, the new series of four targeted longer-term refinancing operations (TLTRO II), which will reinforce the ECB's accommodative monetary policy stance and incentivise bank lending to the real economy; underlines that monetary policies alone would not be sufficient to boost growth and investments and that they have to be accompanied by appropriate fiscal policies;
Amendment 165 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Calls on the Member States to foster a risk-taking and capital market culture; reiterates that financial education for SMEs is key to increasing the use and acceptance of capital market solutions, allowing for a better assessment of costs, benefits and the associated risks; calls on the Member States to enhance the financial literacy of SMEs and their access to information via the creation of regional one-stop-shops;
Amendment 186 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21a. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to ensure enhanced coordination and consistency among all EU investment policies targeted at SMEs including the EFSI, EU regional funds, European Investment Fund (EIB), specific financial instruments foreseen by funding programmes such as COSME, Horizon 2020, EASI, Connecting Europe Facility;
Amendment 189 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 b (new)
Paragraph 21 b (new)
21b. Emphasises the potential of EU cohesion policy and the EU regional fund as a source for SME funding aimed at enhancing the competitiveness of SMEs, which is one of the goals of the EU cohesion policy; Underlines that more than 63 billion euro of ESI funds have been allocated in the 2014-2020 programming (plus almost 31 billion by national co-financing for a total of 94 billion euro);
Amendment 190 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 c (new)
Paragraph 21 c (new)
21c. Considers the EFSI as an important source of funding for SMEs and calls on the Commission and the Member States to promote the use of the European Investment Project Portal which aims at putting in contact project promoters and investors; calls on the Commission to evaluate the possible extension of the EFSI beyond its expiry date;
Amendment 191 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 d (new)
Paragraph 21 d (new)
21d. Calls on the Commission and Member States to promote a holistic approach to the dissemination of information on all EU funding opportunities (including Banking Union, Capital Markets Union and EU regional funds) at European, national, regional and local level;
Amendment 195 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Emphasises the importance of the transparency, standardisation and public availability of SME financing information for banks, investors, supervisors and other stakeholders in order to understand the risk profile and take informed decisions; welcomes the Commission’'s SME information strategy;
Amendment 203 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Highlights the need to foster innovation through lending platforms; encourages banks to regard the use of such innovative technologies as an opportunity; stresses that alternative funding sources like crowdfunding or peer-to-peer lending offer solutions for start-ups and innovative SMEs in particular; welcomes the Commission’s assessment of the existing framework for crowdfunding; calls on the Commission to explore the need for, and potential of, a harmonised EU framework for alternative funding sources;
Amendment 212 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)
Paragraph 24 a (new)
24a. Points out that direct state aid, which does not distort the benefits of competition at EU level, is sometimes necessary in order to assure the needed funds for start- ups, microenterprises and SMEs, especially where the socioeconomic conditions do not allow for another source of access to finance;
Amendment 215 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)
Paragraph 24 a (new)
24a. Calls on the Commission to encourage safe lending to companies by private individuals through peer-to-peer lending or retail bonds;
Amendment 216 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 b (new)
Paragraph 24 b (new)
24b. Calls on the Commission to encourage new platforms for private equity financing such as mezzanine finance, public sector backed equity funds, business angels and fundraising; welcomes the Commission's assessment of the existing framework for crowdfunding and calls for a regulatory initiative to harmonise the European framework for crowdfunding and facilitate cross-border investment;
Amendment 217 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 c (new)
Paragraph 24 c (new)
24c. Emphasises the role that Member States could play to achieve innovation- led, sustainable and inclusive growth through mission-oriented agencies at European level;
Amendment 224 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Welcomes the Commission’'s proposals for a framework for simple, transparent and standardised (STS) securitisation and the calibration of the prudential requirements for banks; notes the possible effects of SME securitisation for bank lending to SMEs; stresses the fact that small banks would not be able to issue securitization/covered bonds with the sufficient size to be interesting enough to investors to buy; calls for the introduction of a "Small Bank Solution" regime within the framework for simple, transparent and standardized (STS) securitization whereby a pool of banks may release joint re-securitizations pools, made of simple transparent standardized small securitization, thus sufficiently large in size for interested investors to buy, thereby avoiding an unlevelled playing field among smaller and bigger banks;
Amendment 237 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 a (new)
Paragraph 27 a (new)
27a. Welcomes the Commission's decision to launch a public consultation on a "start-up initiative" which is aimed at collecting stakeholders' views on how to create favourable conditions for entrepreneurs to start up and scale up their business in the EU;
Amendment 4 #
2016/2019(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)
Recital G a (new)
Ga. whereas the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union places an obligation on the Union to respect linguistic diversity and prohibits discrimination on grounds of language, thereby giving the right to any Union citizen to use any of the 24 official Union languages when corresponding with Union institutions, which must reply in the same language used by the citizen;
Amendment 27 #
2016/2019(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Points out that while the overall spending level is appropriate for the exercise of European democracy, efforts to look for savings and to strive for further enhancing the efficiency of the use of public money, without ignoring the needs of small languages, are strongly encouraged;
Amendment 117 #
2016/2019(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 a (new)
Paragraph 34 a (new)
34a. Reiterates that the utmost should be done in order to assure that the dissemination of the Parliament's information and messages, including the Parliament services welcoming visitors' groups, is available in all of the 24 official languages of the Union;
Amendment 16 #
2016/2004(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Amendment 24 #
2016/2004(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes that the Union budget has proven to be a crucial resource in tackling recent crises and responding to needs that had not been necessarily anticipated during the negotiation of the MFF 2014-2020, such as the migration and refugee crisis or geopolitical tensions in the European neighbourhood producing a number of serious emergencies, while in the Union a continuous lowering of investment levels has led to an investment gap;
Amendment 30 #
2016/2004(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Underlines that the limited capacity of the Union budget to tackle these crises arises principally from the use of all means available agreed upon in the MFF negotiations, and particularly the use of special instruments such as the flexibility instrument; recalls Parliament’'s decisive role in shaping those instruments during the MFF negotiations; highlights, however, that if the crises continue to worsen even the full activation of the existing flexibility provisions will be insufficient to address the problem; in this context, invites the Council to reconsider its position on the question of budgeting the MFF special instruments so as to alleviate the constraints weighing on the Union budget; reiterates in that connection its long- standing position that the payment appropriations for the special instruments (the flexibility instrument, the EU Solidarity Fund, the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund and the Emergency Aid Reserve) should be calculated over and above the MFF ceilings, as is the case for commitments; expects these issues to be resolved;
Amendment 41 #
2016/2004(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Notes the Commission’'s European Economic Forecast (Autumn 2015), which indicates a modest recovery; stresses, however, that this recovery remains worryingly weak and too slow for a prompt return to full employment to be achieved, with long-term and very long-term unemployment on the rise and with an ever increasing deficit in the EU's goal of socioeconomic convergence; notes, furthermore, the appearance of new challenges, such as the slowdown in emerging market economies and global trade, with particular pressure arising from volatility on Chinese markets, the need to tackle the refugee crisis, and persisting geopolitical tensions;
Amendment 65 #
2016/2004(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Regrets that the Union budget has in recent years been a collateral victim of Member States’ fiscal consolidation efforts aimed at complying with their obligations under the Stability and Growth Pact, which have led them to consider their contribution to the Union budget as a burden and to treat it as an adjustment variable; Emphasises that one size fits all calculations based on GDP are not always necessarily the best indicators when it comes to calculating European Union budget commitments through its funding tools especially when dedicating funding for isolated and/or peripheral regions;
Amendment 80 #
2016/2004(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Highlights the fact that the Union has had to face numerous crises in recent years; recalls that a solution has still not been foundagreed upon for the Europe-wide migrant and refugee crisis, which escalated in 2015 with a sudden and massive increase in the numbers of refugees and migrants travelling to the Union to seek asylum, which has further impacted on the internal crisis; underlines that the Union budget should be used as part of a European solution to overcome these emergencies;
Amendment 89 #
2016/2004(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Recalls that the Union budget provides the backbone of the investment plan by making available the EUR 8 billion required in commitment and payment appropriations for the provisioning of the guarantee fund of the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI), out of which a total of EUR 3.38 billion has already been mobilised in the 2015 and 2016 budgets; reiterates its commitment to reinforce Horizon 2020, and the Connecting Europe Facility and the funding for SMEs through the annual budgetary procedure, in order to compensate the cuts agreed during the EFSI negotiations as much as possible;
Amendment 51 #
2016/0364(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 6 a (new)
Recital 6 a (new)
(6a) The principle of equal pay for male and female workers for equal work or work of equal value is laid down in art 157 TFEU. This needs to be applied in a consistent way by credit institutions and investment firms. Therefore they should demonstrate a gender neutral remuneration policy.
Amendment 61 #
2016/0364(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point a – point 2 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point a – point 2 a (new)
Directive 2013/36/EU
Article 2 – paragraph 5 – point 24 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 5 – point 24 a (new)
(2a) the following point (24a) is added ‘(24a) In Malta, the "Malta Development Bank";’
Amendment 103 #
2016/0364(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a
Directive 2013/36/EU
Article 3 – point 64 a (new)
Article 3 – point 64 a (new)
(64a) Gender neutral remuneration policy in a credit institution or investment firm means a remuneration policy based on equal pay for women and men for equal work or work of equal value.
Amendment 171 #
2016/0364(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11 a (new)
Directive 2013/36/EU
Article 74
Article 74
(11a) Article 74 is amended as follows: "1. Institutions shall have robust governance arrangements, which include a clear organisational structure with well- defined ,transparent and consistent lines of responsibility, effective processes to identify, manage, monitor and report the risks they are or might be exposed to, adequate internal control mechanisms, including sound administration and accounting procedures, and remuneration policies and practices that are consistent with and promote sound and effective risk management. Those remuneration policies and practices shall be gender neutral. .2. The arrangements, processes and mechanisms referred to in paragraph 1 shall be comprehensive and proportionate to the nature, scale and complexity of the risks inherent in the business model and the institution's activities. The technical criteria established in Articles 76 to95 shall be taken into account 3. EBA shall issue guidelines on the 3. arrangements ,processes and mechanisms referred to in paragraph 1, in accordance with paragraph 2. (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32013L0036&from=EN)One year after the adoption of this directive, EBA will issue guidelines on gender neutral remuneration policy for credit institutions and investment firms. Two years after the publication of these guidelines and based on the information collected by the national competent authorities, EBA will draft a report about the application of gender neutral remuneration policies by credit institutions and investment firms. " Or. en
Amendment 172 #
2016/0364(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12
Directive 2013/36/EU
Article 75 – paragraph 1
Article 75 – paragraph 1
1. Competent authorities shall collect the information disclosed in accordance with the criteria for disclosure established in points (g), (h), (i) and (k) of Article 450(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 and shall use its well as the information provided by credit institutions and investment firms on the gender pay gap and shall use this information to benchmark remuneration trends and practices. The competent authorities shall provide EBA with that information.
Amendment 208 #
2016/0364(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 15 – point b a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 15 – point b a (new)
Directive 2013/36/EU
Article 92 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
Article 92 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
(ba) In paragraph 2, the following point (aa) is inserted: (aa) the remuneration policy is gender neutral: female and male workers will be equally remunerated for equal work or work of equal value.
Amendment 271 #
2016/0364(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 21 – point a
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 21 – point a
Directive 2013/36/EU
Article 104 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 104 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. For the purposes of Article 92(2)(b), Article 97, Article 98(4), Article 101(4) and Article 102 and the application of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013, competent authorities shall have at least the following powers:
Amendment 275 #
2016/0364(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 21 – point a
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 21 – point a
Directive 2013/36/EU
Article 104 – paragraph 1 – point g
Article 104 – paragraph 1 – point g
(g) to require institutions to limit variable remuneration as a percentage of net revenues where it is inconsistent with the maintenance of a sound capital base; and, to require credit institutions and investment firms to comply with the guidelines issued by EBA on gender neutral remuneration policies.
Amendment 243 #
2016/0362(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Directive 2014/59/EU
Article 45c – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 45c – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) the size, the business model, the funding model and the risk profile of the entity; as well as the specificities of the market in which it operates;
Amendment 235 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point i a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point i a (new)
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 115
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 115
(ia) in paragraph 1, point (115) is replaced by the following: "'intangible assets' has the same meaning as under the applicable accounting framework and includes goodwill;" (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32013R0575&from=, with the exception of software and cybersecurity for the purpose of Article 36;" Or. en)
Amendment 766 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 114
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 114
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 428 l – point c a (new)
Article 428 l – point c a (new)
(ca) covered bonds as referred to in Article 52(4) of Directive2009/65/EC or covered bonds that meet the eligibility requirements for the treatment set out in Article 129 (4) or (5) and with a residual contractual maturity less than one year.
Amendment 68 #
2016/0339(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) The objective of this Directive is to improve the resilience of the internal market as a whole against hybrid mismatch arrangements. Tes. Although this cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States acting individually, given that national corporate tax systems are disparate and that independent action by Member States would only replicate the existing fragmentation of the internal market in direct taxation. It would thus allow, fighting inefficiencies and distortions to persist should not come at the cost of compromising the interaction of distinct national measures. This would thus result in a lack of coordination. That objectiveMember States’ flexibility in setting their tax policies. Yet, the objective of coordination can rather, due to the cross-border nature of hybrid mismatch arrangementes and the need to adopt solutions that function for the internal market as a whole, be better achieved at Union level. The Union may therefore 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 that objective. By setting the required level of protection for the internal market, this Directive only aims to achieve the essential degree of coordination within the Union that is necessary to achieve its objectives.
Amendment 45 #
2016/0338(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) Current dispute resolution procedures are too long, costly and often do not result in an agreement, with some cases receiving no acknowledgement at all. Some businesses currently accept double taxation rather than spending money and time on burdensome procedures to eliminate double taxation. For this reason, it is necessary that mechanisms available in the Union ensure the enforceable resolution of double taxation disputes and the effective and timely elimination of the double taxation at stake, with regular and effective communication to the taxpayer.
Amendment 64 #
2016/0338(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) The introduction of an effective and efficient framework for resolution of tax disputes which ensures legal certainty and a business friendly environment for investments is therefore a crucial action in order to achieve a fair and efficient corporate tax system in the Union. The double taxation dispute resolution mechanisms should also create a harmonised and transparent framework for solving double taxation issues and as such provide benefits to all taxpayers.
Amendment 126 #
2016/0338(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 3
Article 5 – paragraph 3
3. In case of rejection of the complaint, the taxpayer shall be entitled to appeal against the decision of the competent authorities of the Member States concerned in accordance with national rules. The taxpayer is entitled to make the complaint to either competent authority. The competent authority to whom the appeal is made shall inform the other competent authority of the existence of the appeal and the two competent authorities shall coordinate when processing the appeal. In the case of SMEs, the financial burden shall be borne by the initially rejecting competent authority when the appeal case is successful .
Amendment 76 #
2016/0337(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) CTax systems across the Union should be encouraged to remain competitive when this contributes to making the economy more attractive for investment and thus allowing for the preservation of a favourable fiscal environment for companies. Concomitantly, companies which seek to do business across frontiers within the Union encounter serious obstacles and market distortions owing to the existence and interaction of 28 disparate corporate tax systems. Furthermore, tax planning structures have become ever-more sophisticated over time, as they develop across various jurisdictions and effectively take advantage of the technicalities of a tax system or of mismatches between two or more tax systems for the purpose of reducing the tax liability of companies. Although those situations highlight shortcomings that are completely different in nature, they both create obstacles which impede the proper functioning of the internal market. Action to rectify thoese problems should therefore address both these types of market deficiencies.
Amendment 95 #
2016/0337(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 2 a (new)
Recital 2 a (new)
(2a) Moreover, diversity of tax regimes may attract foreign investors to invest their funds in peripheral countries, regions and islands. Thus, diversity of tax regimes allows these regions to draw cross border investments that would otherwise locate elsewhere. As such, diversity of tax regimes is accepted as reasonable, useful and sustainable for peripheral regions, in order to stimulate job creation and new economic activities.
Amendment 151 #
2016/0337(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) Taxable revenues should be reduced by business expenses and certain other items. Deductible business expenses should normally include all costs relating to sales and expenses linked to the production, maintenance and securing of income. To support innovation in the economy and modernise the internal market, deductions should be provided for research and development costs, including super-deductions, and those should be fully expensed in the year incurred (with the exception of immovable property). Small starting companies without associated enterprises which are particularly innovative (a category which will in particular cover start-ups) should also be supported through enhanced super- deductions for research and development costs. This condition should prevent large Multinational Enterprises (MNE) from setting up supposed start-up companies, which in fact belongs to a MNE, in order to make use of the enhanced super deduction. Such enhanced super deduction will increase the amount of losses, which may be carried forward to be set off against future profits. Therefore, it provides for a prospective application of the enhanced super deduction. In order to ensure legal certainty, there should also be a list of non- deductible expenses.
Amendment 242 #
2016/0337(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. A taxpayer shall be considered to have a permanent establishment in a Member State other than the Member State in which it is resident for tax purposes when it develops a turnover in that other Member State and when it has a fixed place in that other Member State through which it carries on its business, wholly or partly, including in particular:
Amendment 39 #
2016/0336(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) CTax systems across the Union should be encouraged to remain competitive when this contributes to making the economy more attractive for investment and thus allowing for the preservation of a favourable fiscal environment for companies. Concomitantly, companies which seek to do business across frontiers within the Union encounter serious obstacles and market distortions owing to the existence and interaction of 28 disparate corporate tax systems. Furthermore, tax planning structures have become ever-more sophisticated over time, as they develop across various jurisdictions and effectively take advantage of the technicalities of a tax system or of mismatches between two or more tax systems for the purpose of reducing the tax liability of companies. Although those situations highlight shortcomings that are completely different in nature, they both create obstacles which impede the proper functioning of the internal market. Action to rectify these problems should therefore address both these types of market deficiencies.
Amendment 55 #
2016/0336(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 2 a (new)
Recital 2 a (new)
(2a) Moreover, diversity of tax regimes may attract foreign investors to invest their funds in peripheral countries, regions and islands. Thus, diversity of tax regimes allows these regions to draw cross border investments that would otherwise locate elsewhere. As such, diversity of tax regimes is accepted as reasonable, useful and sustainable for peripheral regions, in order to stimulate job creation and new economic activities.
Amendment 89 #
2016/0336(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5 a (new)
Recital 5 a (new)
(5a) Taking into account the digital change in the business environment, it is necessary to define the concept of a digital business establishment. Companies which raise revenues in a Member State without having a physical establishment in that Member State have to be treated in the same way as companies with a physical establishment.
Amendment 141 #
2016/0336(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The rules of this Directive shall apply to a company that is established under the laws of a Member State, including its permanent establishments and digital business in other Member States, where the company meets all of the following conditions:
Amendment 278 #
2016/0336(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 73 – paragraph 1
Article 73 – paragraph 1
For the purposes of this Directive, the scope of controlled foreign company legislation under Article 59 of Directive 2016/xx/EU shall be limited to relations between group members and entities that are resident for tax purposes, or permanent establishments or digital business establishments that are situated, in a third country.
Amendment 47 #
2016/0287(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Regulation (EU) No 283/2014
Annex – section 4 – paragraph 5
Annex – section 4 – paragraph 5
The available budget shall be allocated in a geographically balanced manner to projects meeting the above conditions in view of the proposals received and, in principle, on a 'first come, first served' basis.
Amendment 97 #
2016/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) The EFSI was established for an initial period of three years and with the aim of mobilising at least EUR 315 billion in investments. Given its partial success, the Commission is committed to the doubling of the EFSI, both in terms of duration and financial capacity. The legal extension covers the period of the current Multiannual Financial Framework and should provide a total of at least half a trillion euro investments by 2020. In order to enhance the firepower of the EFSI even further and reach the aim of doubling the investment target, Member States should also contribute as a matter of priority. In particular, Member States with fiscal space should be encouraged to carry out more expansionary fiscal policy by making full use of the tools of the Investment Plan for Europe and by contributing to the EFSI.
Amendment 118 #
2016/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) The extended EFSI should address remaining market failures and sub-optimal investment situations and continue to mobilise private sector financing in investments crucial for Europe’'s future job creation – including for the youth –, growth and competitiveness with strengthened additionality. They include investments in the areas of energy, environment and climate action, social and human capital and related infrastructure, healthcare, housing projects, research and innovation, cross- border and sustainable transport, as well as the digital transformation. In particular, the contribution of operations supported by the EFSI to achieving the Union's ambitious targets set at the Paris Climate Conference (COP21) should be reinforced. Energy interconnection priority projects and energy efficiency projects should also be increasingly targeted. Given the high rates of poverty and social exclusion in Europe, EFSI operations for investments into enterprises focusing on social infrastructure, social services and education should be reinforced. In addition, EFSI support to motorways should be avoided, unless it is needed to support private investment in transport in cohesion countries or in cross-border transport projects involving at least one cohesion country. For reasons of clarity, although they are already eligible, it should be explicitly laid down that projects in the fields of agriculture, fishery and aquaculture come within the general objectives eligible for EFSI support.
Amendment 139 #
2016/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) Additionality, a key feature of the EFSI, should be strengthened in the selection of projects. In particular, operations should only be eligible for EFSI support if they address clearly identified market failures or sub-optimal investment situations. Operations in infrastructure under the Infrastructure and Innovation Window linking two or more Member States, as well as operations in insular and peripheral EU regions, including e- infrastructure, should be considered additional given their inherent difficulty and their high added value for the Union.
Amendment 150 #
2016/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) Due to their potentialIn order to achieve a wider geographic coverage and to increase the efficiency of the EFSI intervention, blending operations combining non- reimbursable forms of support and/or financial instruments from the Union budget, such as the European Structural and Investment Funds or those available under the Connecting Europe Facility, and financing from EIB Group, including EIB financing under the EFSI, as well as other investors should be encouraged. Blending aims to enhance the value added of Union spending by attracting additional resources from private investors and to ensure the actions supported become economically and financially viable.
Amendment 167 #
2016/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) In order to reinforce the take-up of the EFSI in less-developed and transition regions, the scope of the general objectives eligible for EFSI support should be enlarged. Further action to strengthen technical assistance in these regions is necessary.
Amendment 193 #
2016/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) In line with the exceptional market demand for SME financing under the EFSI which is expected to continue, the EFSI SME Window should be enhanced. Particular attention should be paid to social enterprises, including through the development and deployment of new instruments. Public subsidiaries which fit the employee and profit ceilings established by Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC should be considered to be eligible to apply for funding through the EFSI SME Window.
Amendment 201 #
2016/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) The EIB and the EIF should ensure that the final beneficiaries, including SMEs, are informed of the existence of EFSI support, so as to enhance the visibility of the EU guarantee granted under Regulation (EU) 2015/1017. In this regard, recognizes the role of Local and Regional Authorities in identifying strategic projects and encourages their participation.
Amendment 226 #
2016/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) The European Investment Advisory Hub (EIAH) should be enhanced and its activities should focus on needs not covered adequately under current arrangements in EU Member States and regions which have not yet adequately benefitted from EFSI. It should pay particular attention to supporting the preparation of projects involving two or more Member States and projects that contribute to achieving the objectives of COP21. Notwithstanding its objective to build upon existing advisory services of the EIB and the Commission, so to act as a single technical advisory hub for project financing within the Union, the EIAH should also contribute actively to the objective of sectorial and geographical diversification of the EFSI and support the EIB where needed in originating projects. It should alsostrengthen its cooperation with Local and Regional Authorities, actively contribute to the establishment of investment platforms in regions with low investment capacity and provide advice on the combination of other sources of Union funding with the EFSI, with a focus on SMEs.
Amendment 279 #
2016/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Regulation (EU) No 2015/2017
Article 5 – paragraph 1– subparagraph 3
Article 5 – paragraph 1– subparagraph 3
To better address market failures or sub- optimal investment situations, EIB special activities supported by the EFSI shall typically have features such as subordination, participation in risk-sharing instruments, cross-border or peripheral characteristics, exposure to specific risks or other identifiable aspects as further described in Annex II.
Amendment 287 #
2016/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Regulation (EU) No 2015/1017
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 5
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 5
The projects supported by the EFSI that consist of physical infrastructure linking two or more Member States or of the extension of physical infrastructure or services linked to physical infrastructure from one Member State to one or more Member States, as well as those in peripheral islands of the EU, shall also be considered to provide additionality.
Amendment 347 #
2016/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point -a (new)Regulation (EU) 2015/1017
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point -a (new)Regulation (EU) 2015/1017
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point g – point v
(-a) in Article 9, in paragraph 2 point (g), point (v) is replaced by the following: ‘(iv) social infrastructures, social services and solidarity economy;’
Amendment 407 #
2016/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 – point a – point i
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 – point a – point i
Regulation (EU) No 2015/1017
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – second sentence
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – second sentence
Such support shall include providing targeted support on the use of technical assistance for project structuring, on the use of innovative financial instruments and on the use of public-private partnerships, taking into account the specificities and needs of Member States with less- developed financial markets, as well as administrative and technical capacities.
Amendment 414 #
2016/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 – point b – point i
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 – point b – point i
Regulation (EU) No 2015/1017
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) leveraging local knowledge to facilitate EFSI support across the Union and contributing where possible to the objective of sectorial and geographical diversification of the EFSI referred to in Section 8 of Annex II by supporting the EIB to originate operations; in particular, in less developed, insular as well as peripheral regions, also throughout a better involvement of SMEs;
Amendment 433 #
2016/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 – point c
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 – point c
Regulation (EU) 2015/1017
Article 14 – paragraph 5
Article 14 – paragraph 5
5. In order to achieve the objective referred to in paragraph 1, to overcome any barrier to investment identified during the operations, and to facilitate the provision of advisory support at local level, the EIAH shall seek to use the expertise of the EIB, the Commission, national promotional banks or institutions, and the managing authorities of the European Structural and Investment Funds.;
Amendment 437 #
2016/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 – point d
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 – point d
Regulation (EU) No 2015/1017
Article 14 – paragraph 6 – second sentence
Article 14 – paragraph 6 – second sentence
Cooperation between, on the one hand, the EIAH and, on the other hand, a national promotional bank or institution, an international financing institution or an institution or a managing authority, including those acting as a national advisor, having expertise relevant for the purposes of the EIAH, may take the form of a contractual partnership. The EIAH shall make at least one cooperation agreement with a national promotional bank or any other institution per Member State. In Member States where such an institution does not exist, the EIAH shall provide pro-active advisory support on its establishment, when requested by the Member State in question.;
Amendment 463 #
2016/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12
Regulation (EU) No 2015/1017
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3
In their financing and investment operations covered by this Regulation, the EIB and the EIF shall not make use of or engage in tax avoidance structures, in particular aggressive tax planning schemes, or practices not complying with EU tax good governance principles, as set out in the Union legislation, including Commission recommendations and communications.
Amendment 21 #
2016/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 51 a (new)
Recital 51 a (new)
(51 a) This Regulation calls on the Commission to extend the Schengen area to other Members States that comply with the accession criteria in view of having an adequate response to external security risks and ensuring an EU wide approach.
Amendment 22 #
2016/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) allow to identify and detect overstayers (also within the territory) and enable competent national authorities of the Member States to take appropriate measures including to increase the possibilities for return, with the exception of those seeking international protection
Amendment 33 #
2016/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 a (new)
Article 34 a (new)
Article 34 a The Commission shall ensure that each Member State is provided with sufficient financial support in view of integrating the existing national border infrastructures with the EES via the National Uniform Interfaces. This financial support shall cover all national integration costs and expenses related to the implementation of this Regulation and shall be proportionate to the individual administrative needs of each Member State.
Amendment 34 #
2016/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 64 – paragraph 5
Article 64 – paragraph 5
5. Three years after the start of operations of the EES and every fourtwo years thereafter, the Commission shall produce an overall evaluation of the EES. This overall evaluation shall include an examination of costs and results achieved against objectives ands well as the impact on fundamental rights, and assessing the continuing validity of the underlying rationale, the application of the Regulation, the security of the EES and any implications on future operations, and shall make any necessary recommendations. The Commission shall transmit the evaluation report to the European Parliament and the Council.
Amendment 49 #
2016/0010(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) As regards exchange of information between Member States, Council Directive 2011/16/EU of 15 February 2011 on administrative cooperation in the field of taxation and repealing Directive 77/799/EEC already provides for the mandatory automatic exchange of information in a number of fields. Its scope should be enlarged to provide for the mandatory automatic exchange of country- by-country reports between Member States and the communication of such reports to the Commission. The Commission should make use of the country-by-country reports to assess the compliance of Member States with Union State aid rules. The Commission could also carry out an in-depth analysis on how State aid rules are functioning on the ground especially in the case of sparsely populated, outermost and island regions.
Amendment 59 #
2016/0010(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) The mandatory automatic exchange of country-by-country reports between Member States should in each case include the communication of a defined set of basic information that would be accessible to those Member States in which, on the basis of the information in the country-by- country report, one or more entities of the MNE Group are either resident for tax purposes, or are subject to tax with respect to the business carried out through a permanent establishment of an MNE Group. Member States' specificities require a flexible approach with regard to certain recommendations and options.
Amendment 64 #
2016/0010(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) Union action in the area of country- by-country reporting should continue to take particular account of future developments at OECD level. In implementing this Directive, Member States should use the 2015 Final Report on Action 13 of the OECD/G20 Base Erosion and Profit Shifting Project, developed by the OECD, as a source of illustration or interpretation of this Directive and in order to ensure consistency in application across Member States. Where complex services activities are concerned, including financial, digital and communications services, the presentation of transfer pricing data should be such as to ensure that like is being compared with like, in line with the most up to date accounting practices.
Amendment 69 #
2016/0010(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) It is necessary to specify linguistic requirements for the exchange of information between Member States on country-by-country report. It is also necessary to adopt the practical arrangements necessary for the upgrading of CCN network and to make sure that the duplication of standards resulting in an increase in administrative costs for business operators is avoided. In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of Articles 20(6) and 21(7), implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission. Those powers should be exercised in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Amendment 76 #
2016/0010(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) Since the objective of this Directive, namely the efficient administrative cooperation between Member States under conditions compatible with the proper functioning of the internal market, cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States and can therefore, by reason of the uniformity and effectiveness required, 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 the 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 that objective and is subject to the consideration that 'one-size-fits-all' solutions might not effectively address the different economic and financial realities present in Member States.
Amendment 76 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas, following real convergence in the run-up to the introduction of the common currency, the euro area witnessedas established and enlarged was still far from being an optimal monetary zone, with growing structural disparities between the original members themselves, and later with the inclusion of new members; and whereas subsequently the euro area witnessed continuing and growing structural divergence between 1999 and 2009, which made the euro area as a whole less resilient to shocks; whereas regulatory adjustments and structural reforms aimed at reducing risks and improving convergence have been introduced since 2009 at both European and national level, but some euro area Member States still require solidarity and sustainable reforms in their catching- up process;
Amendment 89 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas not enough progress has been achieved in addressing the flaws of EMU through legislation such as the Six- Pack and the Two-Pack regulations, to tackle the structural imbalances that were allowed to accumulate in the Monetary Union from inception until such imbalances were brutally exposed by the sovereign debt crisis in 2010; .as well as through the introduction of the European Semester and the creation of new instruments such as the ESM;
Amendment 170 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Stresses that the introduction of the euro as a common currency has eliminated tried and tested policy options for counterbalancing asymmetric shocks such as exchange rate fluctuation replacing them with measures of internal devaluation that cause social disruptions and injustices, leading to a loss of social cohesion and encouraging political extremism; reiterates that the relinquishing of autonomy over monetary policy therefore requires alternative adjustment mechanisms to cope with asymmetric macroeconomic shocks in order to make the euro zone an optimal currency area able, inter alia, to implement a proper policy mix;
Amendment 187 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Considers that EMU exposed its vulnerability in the context of the global financial and economic crisis when unsustainable imbalances, triggered by capital flows from core euro area nations to the periphery that were actually facilitated and encouraged by the very existence of the euro, and a rising public spending ratio in some Member States, aggravated and led to a sovereign debt crisis, in which government borrowing costs dramatically increased in some Member States, jeopardising, in the absence of a proper fiscal backstop, the mere existence of the euro area;
Amendment 199 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Points out that beyond the inherent instabilities generated by the gaping structural divergences embedded in the euro area (such as the ‘north’-‘south’ divide), the crisis has also proved that a common monetary policy without a common fiscal policy cannot address asymmetric shocks to the euro area; reiterates that mere coordination of national fiscal policies without credible enforcement mechanisms has not prevented an investment gap, has proved insufficient to trigger growth-enhancing, sustainable and socially balanced structural reforms and has not enhanced the national capacity to absorb economic shocks;
Amendment 258 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Makes it clear that rapid action is needed to ensure the sustainability of the euro; stresses that this requires strong joint efforts on the part of the EU and its Member States to complete the EMU, act meaningfully to reduce structural divergences between and within economies of the euro area, and to restore the trust of citizens and markets;
Amendment 274 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Believes that in order to regain trust, the euro must deliver on its promise of stability, convergence, growth and jobs; regards a fiscal capacity as aone vital element in this enterprise, which can be successful only if solidarity is closely linked to responsibility, meaning that financial support is provided on the basis of clear criteria and if linked directly to meaningful action to reduce structural divergences;
Amendment 293 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Takes the view that incentives for sound fiscal policymaking and for addressing structural weaknesses at national level, taking into account the aggregate euro area fiscal stance and ensuring, that all Eurozone countries contribute to macroeconomic adjustment towards real convergence, including those who have greater fiscal space to be used to the benefit of the monetary union as a whole, are core elements for the functioning of the euro area; considers that beyond a proper use of the MIP between deficit and surplus countries, a fiscal capacity should, moreover, address specific concerns for the euro area in the case of absorbing shocks;
Amendment 366 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Argues in consequence that three pillars of a fiscal capacity should be distinguished, wherein action should be undertaken in the framework of a common toolbox to address the different functions, i.e. incentivising convergence and sustainable structural reforms, absorbing asymmetric shocks, and absorbing symmetric shocks; understands that all this needs to depart from a prior recognition of the political, economic, and social realities concretely characterizing each member state and then to be designed in terms of these realities, in the respect of the values of subsidiarity, transparency and accountability; takes note of the various proposals regarding designs put forward on this matter by politicians and academia;
Amendment 413 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Calls for the ESM, whilst fulfilling its ongoing tasks, to be further developed and turned into a European Monetary Fund (EMF) with adequate lending and borrowing capacities and a clearly defined mandate, including its contribution to a euro area fiscal capacity; stresses that an EMF should be managed by the Commission and held democratically accountable by the European Parliament as well as national Parliaments; emphasises that national parliaments would be fully involved in the process, given that their constitutional prerogatives regarding financial resources could be affected;
Amendment 435 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21a. Points out, further, that there is the need to identify how the Community law could increase the fiscal capacity by creating funds that the newly proposed EMF/ESM could use for the purpose of the Structural Reform Support Programme (SRSP); Underlines that past imbalances have not been addressed except through counter-productive austerity measures and those that are contributing to the imbalances through the surplus side should also make a contribution to regain equilibrium;
Amendment 443 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 b (new)
Paragraph 21 b (new)
21b. Stresses that adequate mechanisms must be built for the equilibrium to be achieved through symmetrical measures for both ends of the disequilibrium, so that structural BoP countries should make automatically triggered fiscal contributions to the ESM/EMF;
Amendment 488 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)
Paragraph 24 a (new)
24a. Considers that structural reforms should be ecologically and socially balanced and aim at strengthening growth potential towards a fully sustainable new growth model, promoting fair and sustainable welfare systems and reducing social inequalities;
Amendment 519 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 – indent 1
Paragraph 26 – indent 1
Amendment 704 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 a (new)
Paragraph 34 a (new)
34a. Stresses that SGP rules should be made more flexible to exclude infrastructural investments co-financed by Member States with the EIB who would have thus satisfied themselves about the economic feasibility of the projects financed to grow the economy much more than the debt being incurred;
Amendment 728 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36
Paragraph 36
36. Considers that instability in the financial sector could also pose severe challenges for the euro area as a whole; urges completion of the Banking Union in order to lessen these challenges; calls for the fiscal capacity to operate as a fiscal backstop, which should be fiscally neutral over the medium term for the Banking Union, as agreed in the SRM;
Amendment 777 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40
Paragraph 40
40. Argues that national ownership could be improved by including national parliaments in the procedures and allowing a genuine and timely dialogue between them and the EP; insists, however, that the competences of the EP and the national parliaments conferred upon these institutions by the Treaties should be respected and that mixing of these competences be avoided;
Amendment 792 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41
Paragraph 41
41. Considers that in order to provide for a genuine EMU, a euro area treasury should be created, with the ability to issue common Euro bonds on a shared basis and with a socially acceptable risk weighting to spread the cost of borrowing in a market oriented but socially just manner, for collective decision- making, supervision and management of the budgetary capacity for the euro area; calls for the inclusion of this treasury within the European Commission with full macroeconomic, fiscal and financial competences; calls for a vice-president of the European Commission to head the treasury and simultaneously to act as president of the Eurogroup; urges full accountability of this treasury to the European Parliament;
Amendment 3 #
2015/2343(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes that recent political developments affecting both the EU and NATO further highlight the utmost urgency of shaping a genuine European Defence Unionopening a discussion on the options for a genuine European Defence Union giving prominence to the Member States which are bound to neutrality by their respective national constitutions;
Amendment 11 #
2015/2343(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Considers that pooling financial resources is a key factor in incentivising the EU and its Member States to act proportionally to the current challenges, especially in the area of security, and defence; points out that the EU’s failure to make full use of the possibilities offered by the Lisbon Treaty means that its action is hindered by complex and unattractive cost-sharing mechanismspossibly at a level of enhanced cooperation in the area of defence; notes the EU’s choice not to make full use of the possibilities offered by the Lisbon Treaty;
Amendment 23 #
2015/2343(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Strongly believes that the use of Union funds through the EU budget on humanitarian missions and security related operations would be a strong expression of cohesion and solidarity and would allow for better and more transparent control of funding;
Amendment 32 #
2015/2343(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 – indent 1
Paragraph 5 – indent 1
- Revision and broadening of the Athena mechanism to ensure more collective funding of the EUEU civilian and humanitarian missions;
Amendment 35 #
2015/2343(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 – indent 2
Paragraph 5 – indent 2
- SIf a group of like-minded Member States is established, consider the setting- up of the permanent structured cooperation (PESCO) and the start-up fund provided for in Article 41(3) TEU;
Amendment 41 #
2015/2343(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 – indent 3
Paragraph 5 – indent 3
Amendment 45 #
2015/2343(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 – indent 4
Paragraph 5 – indent 4
Amendment 54 #
2015/2343(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Believes that, in the long term, the EU should aim at a common budget, financing inter alia the core of the EU integrated military forces, including the command structure, joint operations and equipment, as well as a proper EU programme for CSDP researcha command structure for humanitarian and civilian missions as well as security related joint operations and equipment; looks forward to the presentation of the Commission’s proposal for a European Defence Fund, and stresses that it should be financed by new additional appropriations.
Amendment 3 #
2015/2342(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses that the financial response to the exceptionalongoing influx of refugees has been an ad hoc one and has demonstrated that the Union budget and the multiannual financial framework (MFF) 2014-2020 lack the necessary resources and flexibility for a rapid and comprehensive approach to a major external crisis;
Amendment 13 #
2015/2342(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that the insufficient size of Heading 4 and the Emergency Aid Reserve in particular has led the Commission to resort to satellite budgetary mechanisms, such as trust funds and the Facility for Refugees in Turkey, to top up the funding available; notes that this aim has not always been met with full success; draws the attention to the other refugee and migration emergencies which have for years been reaching Southern Europe through the North African coast;
Amendment 31 #
2015/2342(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes, however, the Commission proposal for a new European External Investment Plan, with a new focus on investment to promote economic and social development in the EU Neighbourhood and Africa; expresses doubts, however, as to whether the proposal is ambitious enough to fully harness the EU’s borrowing and lending potential; calls in this context for a Marshall Plan for Africa;
Amendment 17 #
2015/2326(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes with concern that 11 directives in the area of banking and finance legislation are being infringed by one or more Member States, with Germany being the only country to comply with all existing legislation in this field, and Austria the only other Member State with fewer than three infringements1 ; __________________ 1 Particularly worrying are the cases of Poland (10 infringements), Luxembourg (9) and Slovenia, Spain and Estonia (8 each).;
Amendment 23 #
2015/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the BU is instrumental to ensuring stability and restoring confidence in euro area banks, enhancing financial integration, fostering risk sharing within the monetary union and contributing to breaking the link between sovereigns and banks at national level; subject to the consideration that 'one-size-fits-all' solutions may not effectively address the different economic and financial realities present in Member States;
Amendment 201 #
2015/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Believes that the ECB’s supervisory strategy, while avoiding any differentiation along national lines, should reflect and safeguard pluralism of banking models across the EU, thereby ensuring that the needs of certain Member States are not taken into account at the expense of other Member States;
Amendment 216 #
2015/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)
Paragraph 24 a (new)
24a. Stresses that more attention should be paid to the impact of the new rules introduced with the Banking Union, especially on the changing operating costs of banks and on bank lending propensities, in view of the investment gap that has persisted in the Union over the past years; calls for an in-depth study of the impact of the banking union as it is being implemented on bank credit in general and SMEs in particular with the aim of mitigating any negative consequences in this regard;
Amendment 314 #
2015/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38 a (new)
Paragraph 38 a (new)
38a. Stresses that the new institutions of the Banking Union have to be leading examples in terms of transparency, accountability, technical competence and integrity;
Amendment 25 #
2015/2210(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas youth unemployment has to be addressed as a matter of priority, enhancing the current framework of cooperation between national authorities;
Amendment 32 #
2015/2210(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas, despite the overall improvement in aggregate towards a broadly neutral fiscal stance, the crisis regarding the third bailout for Greece in early summer 2015, again highlighted that the problems arising from divergences in economic and social performance achieved in different parts of the Union, are not being well managed, and this with particular reference to the Eurozone, but also to the Union as a whole;
Amendment 33 #
2015/2210(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D b (new)
Recital D b (new)
Db. whereas there may be a lack of cohesion between the CSRs as separately drafted for different countries of the Union situated in the same regional context, not only with regard to their contingent economic situation but also to the structural reforms they need jointly or separately to undertake so as to overcome intra-regional and intra-national economic divergences;
Amendment 45 #
2015/2210(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the factAppreciates that economic recovery is slowly gaining ground, with GDP in the euro area expected to rise by 2.1% in 2016; notes with concern, however, that its foundations are fragile, mainly owing to the EU's underlying structural weaknesses, regional economic divergences and resulting low international competitiveness;
Amendment 53 #
2015/2210(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Welcomes the Commission's focus in the 2015 Country-Specific Recommendations (CSRs) on the four main priorities for economic growth: boosting investment, implementation of structural reforms in product, service and labour markets, fiscal responsibility and improving employment policy; stresses the importance of these growth drivers, also in the context of achieving the goals set out in the Europe 2020 strategy; points out that this has to be done without weakening employment protection or limiting workers' rights and undermining thus the European social model;
Amendment 58 #
2015/2210(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Welcomes the Commission's new approach to streamlining the European Semester process, i.e. through placing a stronger focus on a limited number of most important priorities and challenges and publishing its country-specific and euro area analysis three months earlier than in previous years; however recommends that all major structural reforms and changes promoted by the CSRs are accompanied by a social impact assessment regarding their short and long term effects especially on the vulnerable sectors of the European population; calls on Member States to involve local and regional authorities and other relevant stakeholders in a more structured manner along those three months;
Amendment 72 #
2015/2210(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Notes with concern the varying degrees of commitment demonstrated by Member States to implementing last year's CSRs; stresses the importance of the implementation of the CSRs in order to ensure consistent and fair implementation of the economic governance framework across Member States; deplores in this context the non-binding nature of the recommendationhowever recognizes that CSRs cannot automatically be assumed to be invariably or infallibly correct in their policy prescriptions and that reasonable and legitimate grounds may exist for national administrations to differ from their conclusions; recommends therefore that an analysis of the relevance or otherwise be conducted of past CSRs for different member states, to assess on a post hoc basis, whether they were valid or remained so, in terms of their scope, timing, phasing and sequencing, not least in terms of their social impact and contribution or otherwise to reduce economic divergences between regions of the Union and between members states;
Amendment 107 #
2015/2210(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Deplores the persistently high unemployment rates across most Member States, in particular the youth and long- term unemployment rates; stresses the need to reform national labour markets in order to increase job creation rates; taking care however to ensure that such reforms do not merely amount in practice, to reductions in labour rights and social protection, or to the promotion of precarious forms of employment;
Amendment 121 #
2015/2210(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Welcomes the entry into force of the regulation on the European Fund for Strategic Investment (EFSI), aimed at boosting private and public investment in the EU, and calls on all relevant stakeholders to ensure its swift and effective implementation; calls Member States to closely involve their local and regional authorities in promoting project pipelines and investment platforms;
Amendment 123 #
2015/2210(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Welcomes the entry into force of the regulation on the European Fund for Strategic Investment (EFSI), aimed at boosting private investment in the EU, and calls on all relevant stakeholders to ensure its swift and effective implementation;
Amendment 126 #
2015/2210(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Notes that further fiscal consolidation is still needed in many Member States in order to comply with the conditions of the Stability and Growth Pact (SGP); notes the Commission's interpretative communication on flexibility in the SGP, aimed at clarifying the scope of the investment clause and allowing for a certain degree of temporary flexibility in the preventive arm of the SGP; sk for extension of the scope including on the establishment of a favourable climate for the development of public- sector investment; wishes in particular the neutralisation in calculations of the debt and deficits of public-sector investments made by public-sector operators of the Member States, in particular in view of the impact of the new accounting standards ESA2010 on the investment capacity of some public authorities;
Amendment 130 #
2015/2210(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. NotApproves that furthergrowth-friendly fiscal consolidation is still, leading to job creation, sustainable growth and lower debt levels is needed in manysome Member States in order to support them to comply with the conditions of the Stability and Growth Pact (SGP); notwelcomes the Commission's interpretative communication on flexibility in the SGP, aimed at clarifying the scope of the investment clause and allowing for a certain degree of temporary flexibility in the preventive arm of the SGPs well as in the corrective arm of the SGP; calls for a "golden rule" for public accounting to keep growth- conducive long-term investments separate from current expenditure;
Amendment 143 #
2015/2210(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Is concerned at the persisting macroeconomic imbalances in some Member States, in particular the high public debt levels and, the large current account gaps and surpluses, as well as the excessive risks in the banking systems; is equally concerned at the widening economic divergences within the Union and the eurozone which are threatening the coherence and cohesiveness of European sectoral policies, as witnessed by the growing regional disparities in employment levels, all of which are being aggravated by the worsening migration challenges that the Union is facing;
Amendment 158 #
2015/2210(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Stresses the importance of access to finance for enterprises, in particular for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), which constitute the backbone of the EU economy; points out the failure of currently low interest rates to boost investment; and strict fiscal consolidation, which has drastically limited the room for national governments to push for economic expansion and boost investment; Calls on the Commission to carry out studies to establish, whether the enhanced regulatory practices rightly introduced as part of the banking union process, have negatively affected the access of SMEs to banking finance so that if necessary, corrective action may be taken;
Amendment 164 #
2015/2210(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Underlines the need to improve the EU's business environment as well as to raise productivity levels; stressReiterates the importance of sound business regulation for the success of the EFSI; calls, therefore, for the removal of administrative barriers, cutting red tape andensuring a quality workforce within the EU and ensuring full respect for the right to health and safety at work; recalls also the urgent need to adapt legislation concerning the posting of workers in order to put an end to the unacceptable practice of social dumping within the Union; calls, therefore, reform of Member States' tax systems;
Amendment 171 #
2015/2210(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Underlines the need to improve the EU's business environment as well as to raise productivity levels; stresses the importance of sound business regulation for the success of the EFSI; calls, therefore, for the removal of administrative barriers, cutting red tape and reform of Member States' tax systemand legal systems; stresses the importance of avoiding one-size-fits-all policies; stresses that the improvement of administrative capacity at all levels of government is a key priority in many Member States;
Amendment 180 #
2015/2210(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Agrees with the Commission that many Member States need to be more ambitious in implementing socially sustainable structural reforms in order to make product and services markets more competitive; insists that due regard should be given to the social and employment impact of these reforms; welcomes, in this context, the Commission's communication on the roadmap for completing the Digital Single Market;
Amendment 186 #
2015/2210(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Underlines that, CSRs and Country Reports often address issues linked to territorial differences in terms of both economic performance and administrative capacity, and stresses that policy objectives should systematically take these differences into account, also encouraging regionally-differentiated contributions to the Europe 2020 goals;
Amendment 196 #
2015/2210(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Stresses the need for Member States to adapt their public finances by conducting a counter-cyclical policy when necessary and making full use of the existing flexibility clauses foreseen in the legislation; considers that Member States with high debt levels in particular must continue with growth-friendly fiscal consolidation and urgently implement the recommended structural reforms, while those with more fiscal space should use it to accelerate investment; stresses the need for a better coordination between the EU, national and sub-national budgets;
Amendment 219 #
2015/2210(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Stresses the role of flexible labour markets in combatting unemployment, in particular the negative impact on job creation rates of rigid rules on dismissal, excessive minimum wage levels and lengthy labour disputes; calls for a shift away from labour taxes to other sources of taxation;importance to preserve the quality workforce; Ask for a real plan to combat unemployment; calls for a better repartition of taxation between labour, consumption and capital.
Amendment 229 #
2015/2210(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Stresses the role of flexiblecrucial role of robust labour markets in combatting unemployment, in particular the negative impact on job creation rates of rigid rules on dismissal, excessive minimum wage levels and lengthy labour disputes; stresses however that any reform in the labour market must fully respect the European social model, not least by safeguarding labour rights and the ability of trade unions to protect such rights, while ensuring that precarious employment is curtailed and discouraged; calls for a shift away from labour taxes to other sources of taxation;
Amendment 251 #
2015/2210(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Deplores the fact that the CSRs suffer from lack of ownership at national level and from a democratic accountability mechanism; calls, in this context, for an increased role for national parliaments, as well as for local and regional authorities, in the preparation of the National Reform Programmes (NRPs); stresses that increased ownership is a crucial factor for the successful implementation of the CSRs and, in the longer term, for the success of the Europe 2020 strategy;
Amendment 270 #
2015/2210(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Underlines the destructive impact of high debt levels and low investment environment on economic growth in the EU; calls on the Commission to explore innovative ways of speeding up and lessening the negative impact of deleveraging in the banking, private and public sectors; and especially safeguarding debt sustainability;
Amendment 278 #
2015/2210(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
Amendment 104 #
2015/2147(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Believes that the development of a European digital economy requires a sufficient level of competition and plurality of service providers, and underlines that the presence of network effects allows for the creation of semi-monopolistic positions; supports the Commission’s efforts in preventing and punishing abuses; encourages the Commission to remove barriers to entry in the field of digital economy in sectors where few players, according to the Commission’s competition standards, are dominant; considers that state aid under conditions of full transparency might be an optimal solution in ensuring that first entries in the digital market are able to consolidate their market position; supports actions for stronger interoperability and portability across all digital sectors as a further way of opening the market to competition.
Amendment 10 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 9 a (new)
Citation 9 a (new)
– having regard to the European Parliament resolution of 8 October 2015 on mortgage legislation and risky financial instruments in Spain (based on petitions received) (2015/2740(RSP)),
Amendment 13 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the European Union is established as an open market economy with free competition aimed at increasing consumer welfare and the standards of living of all EU citizens;
Amendment 18 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the strong application of competition-law principles under the EU Treaty has the aim to primarily benefits consumers, and promotes innovation and growth, and by controlsling and restrictsing unfair market practices as well asresulting from monopolies and dominant market positions;
Amendment 29 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas in recent years, in particular, the dynamism in the digital economy but also distortions of competition as a result of national taxation policy which is deemed to causinge considerable harm to the internal market have brought with them new challenges for the Commission and all market players;
Amendment 44 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Welcomes the fact that Competition Commissioner Vestager wishes to develop competition policy as one of the key instruments of the European Union towards making the common internal market a reality, so long as proper care is taken not to let internal EU competition policy hobble EU firms in their endeavours to compete on global markets with non-EU players;
Amendment 50 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Stresses that a successful competition policy must not be directed exclusively towards bringing down prices for consumers, but must also be mindful of the innovativeness of the European economy and, special competitive conditions for small and medium-sized businesses, as well as specific economic, social and geographic conditions which call for a different approach in the application of competition rules;
Amendment 60 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Stresses that the social impact of pro- competition decisions must be taken fully into account, and should be specifically described and assessed when such decisions have an impact on employment, the economic condition of neighbourhoods and populations living in remote or isolated areas, as well as in cases where social and cultural deprivation is rife;
Amendment 62 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Considers that the specific nature of the digital economy, characterized by decreasing and tending to zero marginal costs and by strong network effects, favours the increase in the level of concentration in key markets; invites the EC to adapt its competition policy to the specificities of this sector;
Amendment 65 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Stresses that free and fair competition is an indispensable pre-requisite for the creation of a true digital single market; encourages the EC to encompass the key concepts of interoperability and net neutrality into all its future proposals on the digital single market;
Amendment 67 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 c (new)
Paragraph 4 c (new)
4c. Recalls that the data economy is an important part of the digital economy; considers that the property of user generated data should stay with the users and that portability of data should be ensured; highlights that accessibility of user generated data, in an anonymous and aggregated form, is instrumental in ensuring competition in this market segment is maintained;
Amendment 76 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls on the Commission to refine the internal market in areas where it is still fragmented and incomplete, and to end market restrictions and distortions of competition as soon as possible wherever they are found; However also calls on the Commission to ensure that one size fits all calculations do not define competition policies, since these undermine social cohesion across the Union, promote policy options that potentially are economically flawed, and in the medium term, inhibit the Union’s competitiveness vis-à-vis other continental trading and investment blocs;
Amendment 86 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Calls on the Commission to increase its efforts as regards to investigations on the abuse of dominant market positions towards consumers in the EU;
Amendment 91 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Considers that no action was taken so far by the Commission to address the abusive clauses and practices used by the banking sector in consumer contracts; calls on the Commission to take effective measures towards prevention and their elimination, especially on those Member States with systematic infringement of the Directive 93/13/EEC, in order to guarantee the full compliance of the Directive by national authorities;
Amendment 94 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7b. Recommends that ongoing efforts are maintained by the Commission to reduce all forms of bureaucratic and regulatory red tape in the management of competition policy, as well as to continually strive to simplify and streamline reporting procedures that define regulatory and monitoring exercises in areas relevant to competition policy;
Amendment 95 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 c (new)
Paragraph 7 c (new)
7c. Believes that further thought should be given to how European companies must be supported as they compete on a global basis with other like sized operations from different parts of the world, which do not have to follow the same competitive rules that European entities must satisfy on their home turf;
Amendment 123 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Queries the long duration of the investigations into American Internet giant Google and regrets the fact that these investigations have already dragged on for several years with no result, because until 2014 the Commission was reluctant to indicate its intention to abolish market restrictions; Supports Commission actions aimed at stronger interoperability and portability across all digital sectors avoiding a winner-takes-all scenario; Stresses the importance of equipping the Commission with the right tools to keep an up-to-date overview of the swift development in the digital market;
Amendment 144 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Calls on the Commission, in the Member States and at regional and communal administrative levels, to actively promote compliance with European competition policy and to explain the legal position; sees a need for action particularly in raising awareness in all parts of the European Union with regard to the classification and granting of illegal State aid; considers however that isolated and/or peripheral regions and islands should be allowed wider margins for the implementation of state aid provisions than is currently being done, not least under conditions of double isolation or insularity, especially when such provisions would have limited to minimal effect on the wider European market, and when they are intended to help stimulate economic activity and social cohesion in ways that would not otherwise be feasible in the short to medium term;
Amendment 147 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Welcomes the simplified procedures utilised for the purpose of state-aid assessment of projects funded by the EFSI; highlights that the EFSI aims to overcome current market failures by addressing market gaps, thus favouring the well-functioning of the markets;
Amendment 148 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Considers that the Commission, particularly in State aid proceedings, must examine more rigorously the facts which States provide and improve fact security, since attempts are increasingly being made to flout the legal position and the conditions or to seek more or fewer borderline compromises on the understanding that such examination should be premised on a realization that states need to ensure total security and continuity of supply and provision for all their citizens in strategic and vital sectors like energy, transport and health care;
Amendment 152 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Stresses that state aid is sometimes necessary in order to assure the delivery of services of general economic interest (SGEI) including energy, transport and telecommunication; Emphasises that state intervention is often the best possible policy tool to assure services crucial for the support of economic and social conditions in isolated, remote or peripheral regions and islands in the Union;
Amendment 156 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Welcomes the adoption by the Commission in 2014 of the new Guidelines on State aid for environmental protection and energy and its implementation of this as the general block exemption regulation (GBER); Points out the need to differentiate conceptually and policy-wise between competition rules and social policy of the respective Member State; Recognises it is every government’s obligation to intervene in order to avoid energy poverty on its citizens;
Amendment 157 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Welcomes the inclusion of social aid for transport residents of remote regions in the GBER where the problem of connectivity is being recognised; Stresses that the connectivity of peripheral island regions is also essential for sustaining and developing acceptable levels of economic and social initiative by maintaining vital business connections;
Amendment 163 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Considers that state aid under conditions of full transparency might be an optimal solution in ensuring that first entries in the digital market can consolidate their market position, thus guaranteeing a better competitive scenario in the digital market;
Amendment 166 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 b (new)
Paragraph 15 b (new)
15b. Requests a separate study from the Commission to assess whether EU state aid provisions are inhibiting the consolidation and strengthening of competitiveness among European firms vis-à-vis their global competitors, not least with regard to state procurement mechanisms, and also in the perspective of the recent conclusion of the TPP;
Amendment 182 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Considers that particularly in the digital economy additional new criteria must be introduced in assessing mergers, such as the purchase price, possible market entry barriers and network effects, social aspects such as workers protection, job creation and job retention, as well as the control of personal data; Calls on the Commission to give particular consideration to the commercial model of businesses in the digital economy and possible market entry barriers;
Amendment 200 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Stresses that the temporary State aid in the financial sector for the stabilisation of the global financial system was necessary but on completion of the Banking Union must be quicklyphased out on the understanding that such reducedtion or totally removed and scrutinised removal of temporary state aid does not serve to provide undeserved windfall profits or benefits to private entities;
Amendment 209 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19a. Considers that remarkable disparities between Member States in the use of State aid in the financial sector in recent years, can potentially distort competition in this sector; invites the EC to clarify the rules and the procedures under which State aid in the financial sector can be authorised;
Amendment 219 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Welcomes the investigations initiated by the Commission in 2014 into unlawful State aid through unfair tax competition favouring certain individual companies over others and calls on Member States in future to present the Commission with information about their taxation practice in good time and ultimately to comply with the obligation to declare special arrangements to the detriment of other Member States;
Amendment 225 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20a. Considers that, in order to grant fair competition among companies, in line with the Commission Regulation (EU) No 651/2014, companies located in regions experiencing temporary or permanent disadvantages should be supported and increased flexibility should be granted to Regions experiencing severe economic problems, such as the Regions included in the Convergence and in the Competitiveness Objective, and to insular regions;
Amendment 246 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Considers that healthy tax competition is one of the constitutive elements of the internal market of the Union but unfair tax competition must be prevented through minimum rates of taxat; Notes that this should be done while in the same time appropriate transfer mechanisms are being set up to compensate for the increasing structural economic divergences between different regions and harmonised tax basesstates of the Union, especially the eurozone;
Amendment 255 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Considers that in view of an estimated volume of tax fraud and tax avoidance of up to one billion euros a year the Member States must ultimately tackle and restrict this practice; Requests an assessment of the economic, financial and competitive impact on the EU and on national economies, of the funds that were deviated by firms from tax payments in 2014 and earlier, by way of their having been held as corporate cash, deployed for investment purposes, used to fund takeovers etc.;
Amendment 266 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Welcomes the intention of the Competition Commissioner to reorganise the control of State aid as part of a fair tax burden for all; Expects that prior to this reorganisation there will be an unconditional and complete evaluation and calls on the Member States to abandon their current blockade mentalitytake a constructive position on this issue keeping in mind that different Member States must respond to different policy imperatives on the basis of their situation, size, physical and other endowments, as well as their state of economic and social development;
Amendment 17 #
2015/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas core inflation rates, that is exclusive of energy, have at best only marginally improved as a result of the quantitative easing programme that the ECB has rightly launched this year, an outcome which gives rise to concern, especially since there has been a deterioration in the performance of the Chinese economy and of emerging markets, which threatens to further compound deflationary forces;
Amendment 31 #
2015/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Recital E a (new)
Ea. whereas, despite the overall improvement in aggregate towards a broadly neutral fiscal stance, the crisis regarding the third bailout for Greece agreed on the 12th of July 2015, again underlined that the problems arising from divergences in economic and social performance achieved in different parts of the Union, are not being well managed, and this with particular reference to the Eurozone, but also to the Union as a whole;
Amendment 64 #
2015/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Deplores the existing gap between financing rates granted to SMEs and those granted to bigger companies; considers that this long-standing problem is not appropriately addressed by the recent measures implemented by the ECB to boost bank lending; recommends to carry out studies establishing whether the enhanced regulatory practices rightly introduced as part of the banking union process, have negatively affected the access of SMEs to banking finance so that if necessary, corrective action may be taken;
Amendment 145 #
2015/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Stresses that the high and divergent levels of public and private indebtedness in some Member States are obstacles to the correct transmission of monetary policy, and that the non-conventional monetary policy implemented by the ECB is not able to change this situation; believes that a sustainable, political solution is still needed to ensure both the stability of state financing and addressing the millstone of high debt levels. Eurobonds could provide a remedy for this in certain circumstances.
Amendment 186 #
2015/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16a. Notes that the ECB in its statements remains publicly insistent on the need for Eurozone countries to maintain a steady pace in the introduction of structural reforms; Calls on the ECB to evaluate and take into account when it makes its recommendations, the critique that independent economic and financial experts have been making of European structural reform programmes, namely that they have been simultaneously launched over too wide a policy spectrum, which has made them frequently counterproductive and prone to create logjams for each other, as well as that structural reforms should have been organised on a limited basis, prioritised according to what would have produced the quickest and deepest impact, and then sequenced on a stage by stage basis.
Amendment 8 #
2015/2052(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses the importance of the European Structural and Investment (ESI) Funds in providing urgently needed investment for jobs and growth for regions in the EU, also including those which are suffering most from the financial, economic and social crisis; welcomes the objective of making the use of these funds more effective and efficient by strengthening their link with the EU's economic governance framework; regrets the ongoing erosion of the European social model; stresses the need to prioritise on smart, sustainable, long- term and inclusive growth; points out that projects funded by the ESI should as a precondition have a high societal and economic value, particularly a positive impact on quality job creation and EU added value, like spending in healthcare and education services as investment;
Amendment 27 #
2015/2052(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses the need for a stable and predictable investment environment, not least with a view to attracting private investment; underlines the role of sound economic governance in the creation of this kind of favourable investment environment; emphasises the need for an overall investment framework in the EU, while taking into full account the special situation of peripheral islands and regions and avoiding one-size-fits-all approaches;
Amendment 99 #
2015/0270(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EU) No 806/2014
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) credit institutions established in a participating Member State, including those affiliated to an institutional protection scheme as referred to in Article 113(7) of Regulation No 575/2013;
Amendment 117 #
2015/0270(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point9
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point9
Regulation (EU) No 806/2014
Article 19 – paragraphs 3 5 7 and 10
Article 19 – paragraphs 3 5 7 and 10
Amendment 208 #
2015/0270(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Regulation (EU) No 806/2014
Article 41 o –title
Article 41 o –title
Article 41o Repayment of funding and determination of excess loss and lossliquidity
Amendment 211 #
2015/0270(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Regulation (EU) No 806/2014
Article 41 o – paragraph 1
Article 41 o – paragraph 1
1. The participating DGS shall repay the fundingliquidity support provided by the Board under Article 41n, less the amount of any excess loss cover in case of coverage under Article 41a in accor dany loss cover in case of coverage under Article 41d orce with a repayment plan as referred to in paragraph 2 of this Article 41h.
Amendment 213 #
2015/0270(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Regulation (EU) No 806/2014
Article 41 o – paragraph 2
Article 41 o – paragraph 2
2. UntilWithin 3 monthsof the determinationof the insolvency or resolution procedure, the Board shall determine, on an annual basis, the amount the participating DGS has already recovered from the insolvency procedure or has already be referred to in Article 41m, the Board, after consulting the relevant designated authority, shall establish a repayment paid in accordance with Article 75 of Directive 2014/59/EU. The participating DGS shalllan that ensures that the funding provide tod by the Board all information necessary to make this determination. The participating DGS shall pay to the Board a share of that amount which corresponds to the share that is covered by EDIS in accordance with Article 41a, Article 41d or Article 41hunder Article 41n will be repaid in full within six years by the participating DGS.
Amendment 215 #
2015/0270(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Regulation (EU) No 806/2014
Article 41 o – paragraph 3
Article 41 o – paragraph 3
3. In case of coverage under Article 41a, the participating DGSshall also pay to the Board, by the end of the first calendar year after the funding was provided, an amount equal to the ex-post contributions that the participatingDGS may raise within one calendar year in accordance with the first sentence of the first subparagraph of Article 10(8) of Directive 2014/49/EU, less the amount of ex-post contributions it raised in accordance with point (b) of Article 41b(1) of this RegulationThe repayment plan initially shall, to the largest extent possible, be based on the expected funding from the sources referred to in paragraph 5.
Amendment 221 #
2015/0270(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Regulation (EU) No 806/2014
Article 41 o – paragraph 4
Article 41 o – paragraph 4
4. After the termination of the insolvency procedure or resolution procedure of the credit institution concerned, the Board shall without delay determine the excess loss in accordance with Article 41d or the loss in accordance with Article 41h. Where this determination results in arepayment obligation ofthe participating DGS that differs from the amounts repaid in accordance with the second and third paragraph, the difference shall be settled between the Board and the participating DGS without deThe following conditions for the repayment planshallapply: (a) the minimum annualrepayment bythe participating DGS shall be on average 10% of the funding provided by the Board under article 41n; and b) each year, the Board shall reassess the level of expected recoveries and recalibrate the repayment plan for the remaining years in accordance with that assessment, and assess any need to extend the repayment playn.
Amendment 223 #
2015/0270(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Regulation (EU) No 806/2014
Article 41 o – paragraph 4a (new)
Article 41 o – paragraph 4a (new)
4a. As long as a participating DGS has liquidity support outstanding with the DIF, at least 50% of any extraordinary contributions raised in accordance with Article 10(8) of Directive 2014/49/EU, at least 50% of any recoveries on the DGS’s claims pursuant to Article 9(2) of Directive 2014/49/EU and Article 75 of Directive 2014/59/EU, and at least 50% of any repayment of or income derived from measures taken in accordance with Article 109 of Directive 2014/59/EU or Article 11(3) and 11(6) of Directive 2014/49/EU shall be repaid to the DIF. This shall be reflected in the repayment plan.
Amendment 232 #
2015/0270(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Regulation (EU) No 806/2014
Article 41 q a (new)
Article 41 q a (new)
Article 41qa Terms of loans provided by the DIF 1. The Board shall determine the key financial terms and conditions of the liquidity facility in a standardised agreement. 2. The Board and the participating DGS that has requested liquidity support in accordance with Article 41a shall enter into an agreement based on the standardized agreement as referred to in paragraph 1. 3. In case the participating DGS requests an extension of the maturity of the loan in accordance with Article 41o(7), an interest rate not higher than the ECB marginal facility rate may be charged until the remaining time to maturity of the loan.
Amendment 269 #
2015/0270(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 34
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 34
Regulation (EU) No 806/2014
Article 74 c – paragraph 5 –subparagraph 1
Article 74 c – paragraph 5 –subparagraph 1
The Commission shall be empowered to adopt adelegated acts in accordance with Article 93 in order to specify a risk-based method for the calculation of contributions in accordance with paragraph 2 of this Article.
Amendment 270 #
2015/0270(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 34
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 34
Regulation (EU) No 806/2014
Article 74 c – paragraph 5 –subparagraph 2
Article 74 c – paragraph 5 –subparagraph 2
Amendment 273 #
2015/0270(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 34
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 34
Regulation (EU) No 806/2014
Article 74 c – paragraph 5 –subparagraph 3
Article 74 c – paragraph 5 –subparagraph 3
Amendment 278 #
2015/0270(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point34
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point34
Regulation (EU) No 806/2014
Article 74 c – paragraph 5 –subparagraph 4 – introductory part
Article 74 c – paragraph 5 –subparagraph 4 – introductory part
Amendment 280 #
2015/0270(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 34
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 34
Regulation (EU) 806/2014
Article 74 c – paragraph 5 –subparagraph 4 – point d
Article 74 c – paragraph 5 –subparagraph 4 – point d
(d) the quality of the institution’s assets, including its level II and III assets;
Amendment 309 #
2015/0270(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 39 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 39 a (new)
Regulation (EU) No 806/2014
Article 94 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 94 – paragraph 3 a (new)
39a. in Article 94, the following paragraph is added: 3a. By [insert one year after entry into force of this amending Regulation] the Commission shall review and assess the functioning of EDIS I and the transition to a fully mutualised insurance scheme that provides funding to and covers the losses of participating deposit guarantee schemes. It shall review the functioning of EDIS I in order to create a single European deposit insurance scheme, possibly backed by a publicly funded liquidity mechanism. The review shall assess in particular the following: (a) the adequacy of the funding mechanism and the target level of EDIS I, and the cases of use of the liquidity mechanism; (b) the scope of the measures financed by EDIS I under article 41a and by the entities referred to in Article 2(2), point (b); (c) the conditions for an extension of EDIS I from providing liquidity support to a loss coverage mechanism and its features; (d) the appropriateness of introducing a publicly funded backstop mechanism to support the DIF. By [insert one year after the date referred to in the first paragraph] the Commission shall submit a report to the European Parliament and the Council on the basis of this assessment. The report shall be accompanied by a legislative proposal, where appropriate.
Amendment 321 #
2015/0270(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 40
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 40
Regulation (EU) No 806/2014
Article 99 – paragraph 5 a
Article 99 – paragraph 5 a
5a. By way of derogation from paragraph 2, Article 1(2), Part IIa and Part III, Title V Chapter 2 Section 1a shall apply without undue delay and from [OP insert date of entry into force of this Regulation];
Amendment 102 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) Certain issues in Directive 91/477/EEC need further improvement in order to help Member States tackle cross- border illegal arms trafficking for criminal or terrorist purposes whilst also taking into account the proportionality principle when it comes to persons that lawfully acquire or possess a firearm for legal purposes such as shooting sports, hunting and collectors.
Amendment 149 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) Bodies and collectors concerned with the cultural and historical aspects of weapons and recognised as such by the Member State in whose territory they are established and holding in their possession firearms classified in category A acquired before the date of entry into force of this Directive should be able to keep those firearms in their possession subject to authorisation by the Member State concerned and provided that those firearms have been deactivated. or, if they are exempt from deactivation on necessary educational, cultural, research and historical grounds or for national defence purposes, provided that stricter rules for authorisation and safekeeping are complied with.
Amendment 170 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
Recital 5
Amendment 178 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5 a (new)
Recital 5 a (new)
(5a) Member States shall ensure that minimum criteria for safe storage and secure premises for firearms or ammunition are respected so that any person that lawfully acquires or possess a firearm is granted a license on the condition that the approved firearms and ammunition are kept locked safely and separately within such premises and that such firearms be kept unloaded.
Amendment 188 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) Taking into consideration the high risk of reactivating badly deactivated weapons and in order to enhance security across the Union, deactivated firearms should be covered by this Directive. Additionally, for the most dangerous firearms stricter rules should be introduced in order to ensure that those firearms are not allowed to be owned or traded. Thosereactivated illegally. Stricter rules should also apply to firearms of that category even after theythat have been deactivated. Where those rules are not respected, Member States should take appropriate measures including the destruction of those firearmsto safeguard public security and safety.
Amendment 209 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) In order to ensure the traceability of deactivated firearmsall firearms covered by this Directive, they should be registered in national registries that need to be interlinked at a European level to facilitate the cross-border exchange of information between all Member States.
Amendment 226 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) Some semi-automatic firearms can be easily converted to automatic firearms, thus posing a threat to security. Even in the absence of conversion to category "A", certain semi-automatic firearms may be very dangerous when their capacity regarding the number of rounds is exceptionally high. Such semi-automatic weapons should therefore be banned fo object to stricter rules in order to better control and restrict their civilian use.
Amendment 256 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) Selling arrangements of firearms and, their essential components and ammunition by means of distance communication may pose a serious threat to security as they are more difficult to control than the conventional selling methodif not monitored properly by the competent authorities of the Member States, especially as regards the on line verification of the legality of authorisations. It is therefore appropriate to limit thecontrol more efficiently selling of firearms and essential components by means of distance communication, notably internet, to dealers and brokersregistered brokers, so that the actual handing over of the firearm, essential component or ammunition is done at the premises of and by a dealer, broker, local police station or another body authorised under the national law of the Member State concerned.
Amendment 271 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 12 a (new)
Recital 12 a (new)
(12a) Activities of an authorised dealers and brokers, falling under the scope of this Directive, should include purchase, sale, importation, export, display, assembly, modification, conversion, maintenance, storage, transportation, shipping, distribution, delivery, exchange or hiring of any firearms and essential components of firearms. Dealers and brokers should sell, transfer or deliver firearm and essential components only to persons who hold an adequate authorisation or licence, should keep a record of their sales and should inform the competent authorities of the Member States of any sale, transfer or delivery.
Amendment 321 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 1 – point a
Article 1 – point 1 – point a
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 1 – paragraph 1b
Article 1 – paragraph 1b
1b. For the purposes of this Directive, "essential component" shall mean the barrel, frame, receiver, slide or cylinder, bolt or breaech block, magazine and any other device designed or adapted to diminish the sound caused by firing a firearmin such a way that the firearm cannot discharge any shot, bullet or missile, and which, being separate objects, are included in the category of the firearms on which they are or are intended to be mounted.
Amendment 334 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 1 – point b
Article 1 – point 1 – point b
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 1 – paragraph 1e
Article 1 – paragraph 1e
1e. For the purposes of this Directive, "broker" shall mean any natural or legal person, other than a dealer whose trade or business consists wholly or partly in buying, selling or arranging the transfer within a Member State, from one Member State to another Member State or exporting to a third country fully assembled firearms, their parincluding their essential components and ammunition.
Amendment 335 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 1 – point b a (new)
Article 1 – point 1 – point b a (new)
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 1 – paragraph 1e a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1e a (new)
(ba) The following paragraph is inserted: "1ea. For the purposes of this Directive, "collector" shall mean any natural or legal person, other than a dealer or broker, who is dedicated to the conservation and academic or practical study of firearms, ammunition and associated artefacts for historical, cultural, scientific, technical, educational, aesthetic or heritage purposes, and who as such is licensed and registered in a public registry in the relevant Member State to acquire, keep or possess firearms, their essential components and ammunition. A collector shall not transport or publicly display firearms from his collection or from a part thereof without a permit from the relevant competent authorities of the Member States."
Amendment 342 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 1 – point b b (new)
Article 1 – point 1 – point b b (new)
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 1 – paragraph 1e b (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1e b (new)
(bb) The following paragraph is inserted: "1eb. For the purposes of this Directive, "museums" shall mean permanent institutions in the service of society and its development, open to the public, which acquire, conserve, research and exhibit firearms, essential components thereof and ammunition for the purpose of gathering, conservation and academic or practical study of firearms, ammunition and associated artefacts for historical, cultural, scientific, technical, educational, aesthetic or heritage purposes."
Amendment 377 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 1 – point c
Article 1 – point 1 – point c
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 1 – paragraph 1i
Article 1 – paragraph 1i
1i. For the purposes of this Directive, "deactivated firearms" shall mean firearms thatwhich have been modified with the purpose of rendering themrendered and certified as permanently unfit for use by deactivation, ensuring that all essential parts of the firearm have been rendered permanently inoperable and incapable of removal, replacement or a modification that would permit the firearm to be reactivated in any way.
Amendment 379 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 1 – point d
Article 1 – point 1 – point d
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. For the purposes of this Directive, "dealer" shall mean any natural or legal person, other than a broker, whose trade or business consists wholly or partly in any of the following:
Amendment 380 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 1 – point d
Article 1 – point 1 – point d
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point i
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point i
(i) the manufacture, trade, exchange, hiring out, repairpurchase, sale, trade, transfer, exchange, hiring out, display, assembly, modification, repair, maintenance or conversion of fully assembled firearms;
Amendment 384 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 1 – point d
Article 1 – point 1 – point d
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point ii
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point ii
(ii) the manufacture, trade, exchange, hiring out, repair or conversion of parpurchase, sale, trade, transfer, exchange, hiring out, display, assembly, modification, repair, maintenance or conversion of essential components of firearms;
Amendment 394 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 1 – point d
Article 1 – point 1 – point d
(iii) the manufacture, trade, exchangpurchase, sale, trade, transfer, exchange, hiring out, display, assembly, modification, repair, maintenance or conversion of ammunition.
Amendment 399 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 1 – point d a (new)
Article 1 – point 1 – point d a (new)
(da) In paragraph 2, the following subparagraph is added: "No dealer, broker or other person shall sell or otherwise deal in, dispose or transfer under any title whatsoever any firearms, essential components or ammunition, without a licence or authorisation from the competent authorities of the Member States where it is established."
Amendment 417 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 2
Article 1 – point 2
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 2 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Amendment 501 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 4 a (new)
Article 1 – point 4 a (new)
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 4 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 4 a (new)
(4a) In Article 4, the following paragraph is inserted: "4a. No dealer or broker shall sell, transfer or deliver any firearms, essential components or ammunition to another person who does not hold a licence or authorisation for such firearm or ammunition."
Amendment 517 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 6
Article 1 – point 6
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Without prejudice to Article 3, Member States shall permit or authorise the acquisition and possession of firearms only by persons who have good cause and who:
Amendment 523 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 6
Article 1 – point 6
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) are at least 18 years of age, except in relation to the acquisition, other than through purchase, and possession, of firearms for hunting and target shooting, provided that in that case persons of less than 18 years of age have the consent of the person having legal authority, have parental permission, or are under parental guidance or the guidance of an adult with a valid firearms or hunting licence, or are within a licenced or otherwise approved training centre;
Amendment 543 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 6
Article 1 – point 6
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 5 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Member States shall lay down proportionate rules on safe storage and secure premises to ensure that the grant of a licence to any person lawfully acquiring or possessing a firearm or ammunition is subject to the condition that the approved firearms and ammunition are to be kept locked safely and separately within such premises and that such firearms are to be kept in an unloaded state.
Amendment 554 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 6
Article 1 – point 6
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Member States shall provide for standard medthe possibility of medical or psychological tests for issuing or renewing authorisations as referred to in paragraph 1 to establish that a person's state of physical or mental health is not such as to be incompatible with possession of firearms, and shall withdraw authorisations if any of the conditions on the basis of which it wasthey were granted is no longer met.
Amendment 583 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 6
Article 1 – point 6
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Member States shall take all appropriate steps to prohibit the acquisition and the possession of the firearms, essential components and ammunition classified in category A and to destroy those firearms and ammunition held in violation of this provison and seized. , unless such firearms are deactivated or unless such possession or intended use has been authorised by the competent authorities in exceptional cases, for national defence, educational, cultural, research and historical purposes and where this is not contrary to public security or public order.
Amendment 600 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 6
Article 1 – point 6
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 6 – paragraph 2
Article 6 – paragraph 2
Member States may authorise museums, licensed collectors or similar institutions and bodies concerned with the cultural and historical aspects of weapons, and recognised as such by the Member State in whose territory they are established, to keep in their possession firearms classified in category A acquired before [the date of entry into force of this Directive] provided they have been deactivated in accordance with the provisions that implement Article 10(b), provided they have been registered with the competent authorities of the Member State.
Amendment 631 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 6
Article 1 – point 6
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 6 – paragraph 3
Article 6 – paragraph 3
Amendment 770 #
2015/0269(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 13 – point a – point i
Article 1 – point 13 – point a – point i
Directive 91/477/EEC
Annex I – part II – point A – category A – point 7
Annex I – part II – point A – category A – point 7
7. Semi-automatic firearms for civilian use which resemble weapons with automatic mechanismith magazines capable of holding more than 20 rounds;
Amendment 260 #
2015/0268(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point i – introductory part
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point i – introductory part
(i) non-equity securities issued in a continuous or repeated manner by a credit institution, where the total aggregated consideration in the Union for the securities offered is less than EUR 75150 000 000 per credit institution over a period of 12 months, provided that those securities:
Amendment 271 #
2015/0268(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 3 – point b a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 3 – point b a (new)
(ba) an offer of securities whose denomination per unit amounts to at least EUR 100 000;
Amendment 402 #
2015/0268(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 6 – point c
Article 7 – paragraph 6 – point c
(c) under a sub-section titled 'What are the key risks that are specific to the issuer?' a brief description of no more than five of the mostall material risk factors specific to the issuer contained in the category of highest materiality according to Article 16.
Amendment 424 #
2015/0268(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 1 – point d
Article 7 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 1 – point d
(d) under a sub-section titled 'What are the key risks that are specific to the securities?' a brief description of no more than five of the mostall material risk factors specific to the securities, contained in the category of highest materiality according to Article 16.
Amendment 445 #
2015/0268(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 10 – subparagraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 10 – subparagraph 1
An offer to the public may continue after the expiration of the base prospectus under which it was commenced provided that a succeeding basen application for prospectus is approval has been submitted no later than the last day of validity of the previous base prospectus. The final terms of such an offer shall contain a prominent warning on their first page indicating the last day of validity of the previous base prospectus and where the succeeding base prospectus will be published. The succeeding base prospectus shall include or incorporate by reference the form of the final terms from the initial base prospectus and refer to the final terms which are relevant for the continuing offer.
Amendment 91 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) The economic and financial crisis has led to a lowering of the level of investments within the Union. Investment has fallen by approximately 15% since its peak in 2007. The Union suffers in particular from a lack of investment as a consequence of market uncertainty regarding the economic future and the fiscal constraints on Member Statefiscal constraints on Member States and sluggish growth, thereby resulting in market uncertainty regarding the economic future. Fiscal consolidation has drastically limited the room for national governments to push for sustainable economic growth, which would provide the incentive that SMEs would need to grow and provide jobs. This lack of investment, which has been particularly severe in Member States most affected by the crisis, slows economic recovery and negatively affects job creation, long-term growth prospects and competitiveness.
Amendment 100 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) The economic and financial crisis has led to a lowering of the level of investments within the Union. Investment has fallen by approximately 15% since its peak in 2007. The Union suffers in particular from a lack of investment as a consequence of market uncertainty regarding the economic future and the fiscal constraints on Member States. This lack of investment and the severe capital exit in some member states slows economic recovery and negatively affects job creation, long-term growth prospects and competitiveness.
Amendment 107 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) Comprehensive action is required to reverse the vicious circle created by a lack of investment. Socially sustainable structural reforms and fiscal responsibility are necessary preconditions for stimulating investment. Along with a renewed impetus towards investment financing, these preconditions can contribute to establishing a virtuous circle, where investment projects help support employment and demand and lead to a sustained increase in growth potential.
Amendment 134 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) On 26 November 2014, the Commission presented a communication entitled ‘An Investment Plan for Europe’1 that envisaged the creation of a European Fund for Strategic Investments ('EFSI'), a transparent pipeline of investment projects at European level, the creation of an advisory hub (European Investment Advisory Hub – 'EIAH') and an ambitious agenda to remove obstacles to investment and complete the Single Market. __________________ 1 Communication to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Central Bank, the European Economic and Social Committee, the Committee of the Regions and European Investment Bank entitled ‘An Investment Plan for Europe’. COM(2014) 903 final
Amendment 187 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) The EFSI should support strategic investments with high economic value added contributing to achieving Union policy objectives and national strategic goals.
Amendment 225 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) Many small and medium enterprises, as well as mid-cap companies, across the Union require assistance to attract market financing, especially as regards investments that carry a greater degree of risk, and in particular those member states with a dysfunctional banking system. The EFSI should help these businesses to overcome capital shortages by allowing the EIB and the European Investment Fund ('EIF') to provide direct and indirect equity injections, as well as to provide guarantees for high-quality securitisation of loans, and other products that are granted in pursuit of the aims of the EFSI.
Amendment 252 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) The EFSI should target projects delivering high societal and economic value. In particular, the EFSI should target projects that promote job creation, technological innovation, long- term growth and competitiveness. The EFSI should support a wide range of financial products, including equity, debt or guarantees, to best accommodate the needs of the individual project. This wide range of products should allow the EFSI to adapt to market needs whilst encouraging private investment in the projects. The EFSI should not be a substitute for private market finance but should instead catalyse private finance by addressing market failures so as to ensure the most effective and strategic use of public money. TWhile taking into full account the special situation of peripheral islands and regions, the requirement for consistency with State aid principles should contribute to such effective and strategic use, by avoiding one-size-fits-all approaches.
Amendment 301 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) The EFSI should target projects with a higher risk-return profile than existing EIB and Union instruments to ensure additionality over existing operations. The EFSI should finance projects across the Union, including particular in the countries most affected by the financial crisis. The EFSI should only be used where financing is not available from other sources on reasonable terms.
Amendment 308 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) The EFSI should target investments that are expected to be economically and technically viable, which may entail a degree of appropriate risk and/or a delayed payback, whilst still meeting the particular requirements for EFSI financing.
Amendment 316 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) The EFSI should target investments that are expected to be economically and technically viable and may contribute to the Union's strategy goals, including EU Energy Security Strategy, which may entail a degree of appropriate risk, whilst still meeting the particular requirements for EFSI financing.
Amendment 409 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) In accordance with the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, Infrastructure and project investments supported under EFSI should be consistent with State aid rules, while taking into full account the special situation of peripheral islands and regions. To that end, the Commission has announced that it will formulate a set of core principles, for the purpose of State aid assessments, which a project will have to meet to be eligible for support under the EFSI. If a project meets these criteria and receives support from the EFSI, the Commission has announced that any national complementary support, will be assessed under a simplified and accelerated State aid assessment whereby the only additional issue to be verified by the Commission will be the proportionality of public support (absence of overcompensation). The Commission has also announced that it will provide further guidance on the set of core principles with a view to ensuring an efficient use of public funds. The said guidance needs to be finalised and made publicly available as early as possible, at latest by the finalisation of the rules governing the Fund.
Amendment 468 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29
Recital 29
Amendment 549 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
For the purposes of this Regulation, the following definition apply: National promotional banks or institutions´ means legal entities carrying out a financial activity on a professional basis and upon which are conferred a public mandate by a Member State, whether at central, regional or local level, to carry out public development or promotional activities on a non- commercial basis, seeking to address market failures by providing counter- cyclical finance;
Amendment 562 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
The purpose of the EFSI shall be to support investments in the Union and to ensure increased access to financing for companies having up to 3000 employees, with a particular focus on micro, small and medium enterprises, through the supply of risk bearing capacity to the EIB ('EFSI Agreement').
Amendment 586 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2
Article 1 – paragraph 2
2. The EFSI Agreement shall be open to accession by Member States. Subject to the consent of existing contributors, the EFSI Agreement shall also be open to accession by other third parties, including national and regional promotional banks or public agencies owned or controlled by Member Sstates, and private sector ent/or regional authorities.
Amendment 671 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point j a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point j a (new)
(ja) provisions covering the manner in which the EFSI can be dissolved and its operations wound down;
Amendment 729 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 3
Article 2 – paragraph 3
3. Member Sstates that become parties to the EFSI Agreement shall be able to provide their contribution, in particular, in the form of cash or a guarantee acceptable to the EIB of through a transfer to the EFSI of funds allocated to them under the Structural Funds programmes which remain unutilised. Other third parties shall be able to provide their contribution only in cash.
Amendment 789 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
Each Member States shall appoint a representative to the Steering Board to attend its meetings as a non-participating, non-voting observer.
Amendment 807 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3 a (new)
The minutes of Steering Board meetings shall be published as soon as they have been approved by the Board.
Amendment 914 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
The EU guarantee shall be granted for EIB financing and investment operations approved by the Investment Committee referred to in Article 3(5) or funding to the EIF in order to conduct EIB financing and investment operations in accordance with Article 7(2). The operations concerned shall be consistent with Union policies and support non-exclusively any of the following general objectives:
Amendment 926 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
The EU guarantee shall be granted for EIB financing and investment operations approved by the Investment Committee referred to in Article 3(5) or funding to the EIF in order to conduct EIB financing and investment operations in accordance with Article 7(2). The operations concerned shall be consistent with Union policies and strategic goals including the EU Energy Security Strategy, address high investment needs in the EU, in particular in the countries mostly affected by the financial crisis and support any of the following general objectives:
Amendment 950 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) development of infrastructure, including in the areas of transport, particularly in industrial centres; energy, in particulartransport, energy, inter alia energy interconnections;, and digital infrastructure;
Amendment 985 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point c
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point c
(c) expansion of renewable energy and energy and resource efficiency; and development and utilisation of the Union's energy resources
Amendment 1021 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
In addition, the EU guarantee shall be granted for support of dedicated investment platforms and national, or regional promotional banks, via the EIB, that invest in operations meeting the requirements of this Regulation. In that case, the Steering Board shall specify policies regarding eligible investment platforms.
Amendment 1037 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
The pursuit of the Union objective of smart, sustainable, long-term and inclusive growth and having high societal and economic value, the highest possible positive impact on quality job creation, and EU added value, like spending in health, care and education services as investment – and not just as current expenditure that add to public deficits – as it builds and sustains the social and human capital of our economies in the long-run.
Amendment 1149 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
An assessment of the effects of the different funds within the EU budget in its relation to the EU 2020 priorities shall be presented ahead of the review/revision of the EU multi-annual financial framework, as to foster a balanced debate on the funding of the EFSI Guarantee Fund, taking in account all means available under the EU budget.
Amendment 1373 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1
Article 16 – paragraph 1
1. (a) In its financing and investment operations, the EIB shall not support any activities carried out for illegal purposes, including money laundering, financing of terrorism, tax fraud and tax evasion, corruption, or fraud affecting the financial interests of the Union or of member states. In particular the EIB shall not participate in any financing or investment operation through a vehicle located in a non- cooperative jurisdiction, in line with its policy towards weakly regulated or non- cooperative jurisdictions based on policies of the Union, the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development or the Financial Action Task Force. (b) In its financing and investment operations, the EIB shall ensure that financed projects are in their performance complying with applicable obligations in the fields of environmental, social and labour law established by Union law, national law, or by the international environmental, social and labour law provisions recognised in the EU
Amendment 10 #
2014/2241(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Draws the attention to the crucial role played by digital revolution in the tourism industry; calls on the Commission to ensure that all tourism sectors and businesses, and in particular SMEs, make the best use of new technologies offered by the internet, in order to expand their electronic commerce in the internal market and move towards higher value digitalised products and processes, whilst at the same time ensuring that citizens and consumers have fair and affordable access to high quality and safe services;
Amendment 19 #
2014/2241(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Stresses that the promotion of more Visa Tourism platforms with a cautious approach towards the simplification of the Visa Code is an important component to increase tourists from outside Europe; highlights the potential of touring visas for groups or tourists who had already been in the country and the importance of implementing more visa waiver agreements in order to make optimum use of international tourist arrivals;
Amendment 36 #
2014/2241(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Stresses that Europe must keep its position as the world's number one tourist destination; welcomes the organisation of events and communication campaigns that promote Europe as a tourism destination in particular with third countries' markets and calls on all stakeholders involved to jointly promote Europe not only as a tourist destination, but as well as a destination of excellence with a diversity of national destinations, cultures and tourism services without distorting competition between them;
Amendment 40 #
2014/2241(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Calls on the Commission to explore the possibility of creating a European Tourism Calendar to coordinate information about European tourism destinations from all member States in all official languages in order to improve consumer's information services and help them find guidance and directions about events, places, and festivals among others;
Amendment 93 #
2014/2241(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Calls on the Commission to ensure that consumers, who are increasingly using electronic means to plan and purchase their travel arrangements, are to be provided with objective information concerning their rights and with efficient, expedient and affordable means of redress to protect their rights;
Amendment 25 #
2014/2240(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas there is a great deal of ignorance about the seas and oceans, their resources and biodiversity, and the ways in which these interact with human activities – whether taking place or still to be developed – and whereas inadequate knowledge on those points severely inhibits sustainable use of the resources concerned and poses an obstacle to innovation;
Amendment 87 #
2014/2240(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls for clear-cut objectives and time- frames to be laid down with a view to making data – whether relating to the sea- floor or to the water column and living resources – more accessible and, more fully interoperable and harmonised for information about seas and oceans to be supplied to the public;
Amendment 141 #
2014/2240(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Calls for an appropriate financial framework to be established in order to stimulate the development of the blue economy and job creation, combining and, coordinating and facilitating the access to the financial instruments available – structural and investment funding (EMFF, ERDF, ESF, Cohesion Fund), the research framework programme, and so forth; points out that the instruments should be better geared to the needs of individual stakeholders – public institutions, businesses, especially SMEs, non- governmental organisations, etc. – and the opportunities being offered widely publicised;
Amendment 161 #
2014/2240(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 – point a (new)
Paragraph 14 – point a (new)
(a) Considers that environmentally healthy coastal and maritime areas are key for sustainable human activities; calls therefore for the full implementation of the Marine Strategy Framework directive;
Amendment 219 #
2014/2240(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 – point a (new)
Paragraph 22 – point a (new)
(a) Emphasises the importance of promoting socially, economically and environmentally sustainable forms of tourism that can constitute a significant source of added value for maritime areas;
Amendment 1 #
2014/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 10 a (new)
Citation 10 a (new)
- having regard the Communication of the Communication of 28 November 2014 on the 'Annual Growth Survey 2015' (COM(2014) 902),
Amendment 2 #
2014/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 10 b (new)
Citation 10 b (new)
- having regard the Communication of the Communication of 13 January 2015 on 'making the best use of the flexibility within the existing rules of the stability and growth pact' (COM(2015) 12),
Amendment 3 #
2014/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the economic recovery in the EU slowed down considerably in the course of 2014 but has a prospect of catching up in 2015 and of doing even better inCommission did not anticipate the significant decrease of inflation and the slowdown of the economic recovery in the EU in the course of 20164;
Amendment 9 #
2014/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas after five years of the beginning of the financial crisis in 2008, the euro area is still facing record unemployment levels over 12%; whereas weak growth has compounded disinflationary trends;
Amendment 13 #
2014/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the investment level has fallen by EUR 470 billion since the peak of the crisis, and the investment gap on a conservative estimate is EUR 230- 370 billion compared to its long-term trends;
Amendment 16 #
2014/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Amendment 17 #
2014/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B b (new)
Recital B b (new)
Bb. whereas the response to the euro sovereign debt crisis and the revealed failure of the European institutional framework has been substantial, but not sufficient to give a strong enough momentum to the euro area economy in order to exit the recession it entered 6 years ago;
Amendment 18 #
2014/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B c (new)
Recital B c (new)
Bc. whereas surplus countries should have taken much earlier symmetrical action to stimulate demand and ensure faster growth of nominal wages and prices; to respond to the revealed failure of the European institutional framework;
Amendment 20 #
2014/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes that growth in 2014 is more broadly based; believes, howeverPoints out, that the recovery is still fragile and should be enhanced if it is to deliver substantially moreor problematic and it has clearly failed to deliver growth and jobs in the medium term;
Amendment 31 #
2014/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. WelcomNotes the Commission’'s Annual Growth Survey 2015, which endeavours to promote a return to higher growth levels and to strengthen the recovery; supports the three main pillars approach (boosting investment, accelerating structural reforms and pursuing responsible growth friendly fiscal consolidation) as the right way to achieve these goals; welcomeSupports the Commission’'s suggestions for improving the European Semester by simplifying procedures and increasing national ownership as needed, considering that only 10-15 % of the Country Specific Recommendations are fully implemented by the Members States;
Amendment 34 #
2014/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Welcomes the Commission’s Annual Growth Survey 2015, which endeavours to promote a return to higher growth levels and to strengthen the recovery; supports the three main pillars approach (boosting investment, accelerating structural reforms and pursuing responsible growth friendly fiscal consolidation) as the right way to achieve these goals and thus should be better reflected in the adopted Country Specific Recommendations; welcomes the Commission’s suggestions for improving the European Semester by simplifying procedures and increasing national ownership as needed, considering that only 10-15 % of the Country Specific Recommendations are fully implemented by the Members States;
Amendment 45 #
2014/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Welcomes the proposal by the Commission to streamline and reinforce the European Semester in order to increase political ownership, accountability and acceptance of the process. Points out, however, that the Commission should not carry forward one-size fits all approaches that quickly become economically and socially counter-productive;
Amendment 52 #
2014/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Believes that the lack of investment is caused by excessive fiscal consolidation, low confidence, high indebtedness, slow deleveraging and subdued expectations of demand;
Amendment 56 #
2014/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Stresses that the Stability and Growth Pact rules requiring appropriate deficit to GDP measures made governments reduce investment commitments rather than cutting recurrent expenditures; recommends therefore the technical assessment of SGP rules in order to give greater incentives to public investment decisions. Considers the Communication of the Commission on 'making the best use of the flexibility within the existing rules of the Stability and Growth Pact', as a first step into the right direction.
Amendment 64 #
2014/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes the Investment Plan for Europe, which is an important instrument for increasing private and public investment; notes that the plan is meant to trigger additional investment, develop new projects, attract investors and restore confidence;. Points out however, that the investment initiative proposed by the Commission needs still to be evaluated in terms of its capacity to increase investment in Europe, as well as its deployment of "fresh" money.
Amendment 78 #
2014/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls especially on those Members States with a high surplus, to actively to support the Investment Plan, and to contribute to the European Fund for Strategic Investment, supplementing the amounts provided through the EU budget and by the EIB, in order to guide and encourage the private sector to invest; welcomes the principle of using public money to leverage and attract additional private capital;
Amendment 100 #
2014/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Is still concerned about the lack of progress in reducing excessive private debt levels; points out that this is not only a concern for financial stability, as it also limits the EU’s growth potential and makes the ECB’s monetary policy less effective; calls on the Commission to make proposals for the preparation of effective procedures for private sector deleveraging, including bankruptcy and insolvency procedures, as the huge debt burden weighing on companies and households is one of the key factors limiting private investment;
Amendment 108 #
2014/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Welcomes the ambitiousNotes the structural reforms implemented by those Member States most affected by the crisis; welcomNotes as well the fact that those Member States that have successfully implemented adjustment programmes or financial sector programmes have been able to return to the capital markets, where they now access capital at low interest rates;. Regrets however that these reforms have failed to create economic growth, jobs or to reduce poverty and promote inclusion across Europe.
Amendment 122 #
2014/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Calls on the Member States to make their labour markets more efficient, to modernise social protection systems, including pensions, and to improve and streamline the legal and administrative environment for business investment; stresses that structural reforms need tothereby leading to a decrease in operating costs within the national economies, not least with regard to the operating costs of SMEs and traditional industries. Stresses that structural reforms need to lead to real, sustainable and socially balanced growth, employment, strengthened competitiveness and increasing convergence and should be complemented by well-targeted, longer- term investments in education, research and development, innovation, infrastructure, ICT and sustainable energy;
Amendment 138 #
2014/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Points out that EU financial assistance to certain Member States, provided on terms combining solidarity with conditionality, has proved to be most successful when there was a strong ownership and commitment to reform has to be complemented by long-term investment in the fields of education, research, innovation and sustainable energy; reminds the Commission and the Member States that they need to explore ways of bringing the financial assistance under the EU framework;
Amendment 142 #
2014/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Urges the Commission and the Member States, to incorporate financial assistance and the ad hoc system of the Troika into an improved legal structure compliant with the EU economic governance framework and community law, thereby guaranteeing democratic accountability; stresses the importance of ensuring the follow-up of the Troika reports adopted in March 2014 by the European Parliament in particular in view of recent economic developments; calls on the Commission to implement the conclusions of these reports;
Amendment 143 #
2014/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 b (new)
Paragraph 12 b (new)
12b. Believes that the trend towards more skill-intensive and demanding jobs, high unemployment and weak employment demand may increase. Therefore, matching skills supply and demand better, as well as job and career guidance will be of great importance in the future; believes that more mobility may help to reduce the high levels of unfilled job vacancies that persist alongside high unemployment;
Amendment 151 #
2014/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Calls for urgent action to be taken by the Commission to fight tax fraud and tax evasion; calls for a tax system that is simple and transparent; reiterates its call on the Member States to shift taxes away from labour to consumption;
Amendment 168 #
2014/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Underlines the fact that the absence of a well-functioning internal labour market that maintains the integrity of the European social model and of a balanced approach to immigration is hampering growth in the EU;
Amendment 173 #
2014/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Reiterates the importance of ensuring labour mobility (both cross-border and cross-sectoral), enhanced labour productivity (connected with skills trainings to improve employability) and labour market flexibility, while preserving the necessary scope of work securitywork security and quality jobs;
Amendment 183 #
2014/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Welcomes the strongNotes the decrease in the number of countries under the excessive deficit procedure – down to 11 in 2014 from 24 in 2011; notes that due to this fiscal improvement the fiscal stance in the EU is now expected to remain broadly neutral in the coming years; expresses its concern, however, about the still very high indebtedness of a number of Member States in the euro area, a circumstance that not only hinders growth but also constitutes a substantial risk in case of possible future shocks. Expresses however concerns about the level of long-term unemployment which is still dangerously high (just above 5% of the labour force in the EU 28 corresponding to some 12 million people having been unemployed for a year or more);
Amendment 185 #
2014/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Welcomes the strong decrease in the number of countries under the excessive deficit procedure – down to 11 in 2014 from 24 in 2011; notes that due to this fiscal improvement the fiscal stance in the EU is now expected to remain broadly neutral in 2015; asks the cComing yearsmission to ensure that the EU fiscal stance is compatible with the required level of investment; expresses its concern, however, about the still very high indebtedness of a number of Member States in the euro area, a circumstance that not only hinders growth but also constitutes a substantial risk in case of possible future shocks;
Amendment 189 #
2014/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18a. Calls on the Commission to a adopt a prudent and conservative interpretation of the growth indicators and to review the quality of economic forecasts as previous Commission forecasts have too often been revised downwards;
Amendment 195 #
2014/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Agrees with the CommissionNotes that most Member States need to continue to pursue growth-friendly fiscal consolidation; invites Member States with sufficient fiscal space tCalls on the Commission to come up with concrete recommendations to the Member States, including those still under the economic adjustment programmes so that they do not only address fiscal consolidation but also econsider reducing taxes and social security contributions with a view to stimulating private investmentomic growth, supported by sustainable and socially balanced structural reforms that lead to, quality employment creation, strengthened competitiveness and increasing convergence;
Amendment 196 #
2014/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Agrees with the Commission that most Member States need to continue to pursue growth-friendly fiscal consolidation; invites Member States with sufficient fiscal space to consider reducing taxes and social security contributions with a view to stimulating private investment by fully using the Communication of the Communication of 13 January 2015 on 'making the best use of the flexibility within the existing rules of the stability and growth pact'; invites Member States with sufficient fiscal space to use it to enhance long-term growth;
Amendment 207 #
2014/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19a. Calls on the Commission to avoid promoting double-standards when it calls for the need to invest in growth by imposing as a precondition for a "growth- friendly fiscal consolidation" the existence of fiscal room of manoeuvre; stresses that back-loading of fiscal consolidation must still be taken into account as it could leave more room for counter-cyclical investments;
Amendment 210 #
2014/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Notes the Commission assessment of the Member States’' draft budgetary plans; stresses that the examination of draft budgetary plans should aim at sustainable finance; insists on the strict application of fiscal rules and on respect for the equal treatment principl and provide a long-term vision for more Europe, which would address immediate challenges and national shortcomings; Points out that the right political and social environment needs first to be created for investments which will then lead to growth in Europe;
Amendment 215 #
2014/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Notes the Commission assessment of the Member States’ draft budgetary plans; stresses that the examination of draft budgetary plans should aim at sustainable finance; insists on the strict application of fiscal rulesimportance of applying fiscal rules, including by using existing flexibility and on the respect for the equal treatment principle;
Amendment 218 #
2014/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Is concernedNotes that only five Member States were found to be fully compliant with the provisions of the Stability and Growth Pact (SGP);
Amendment 231 #
2014/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Welcomes the Alert Mechanism Report; welcomes the gradual reduction of internal imbalances in the EU economy; draws attention to the external imbalances, including the large trade surpluses; Underlines, that the Commission should apply a symmetrical treatment between countries with a current account surplus and those with a deficit;
Amendment 240 #
2014/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)
Paragraph 23 a (new)
23a. Stresses that the European Semester must in no way jeopardise the role of the European Parliament and of the national parliaments; urges the Commission to ensure the proper formal involvement of the European Parliament in all the steps of the European Semester process in order to strengthen democratic accountability to the European Parliament;
Amendment 103 #
2014/2158(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. (a) Notes that SGEIs represent a significant share of total service provision in Member States, and maintains that their more efficient provision can deliver significant gains; stresses the Commission’s responsibility to ensure that compensation granted to SGEIs is compatible with EU state aid rules; expresses its concern regarding the exemption of too many services from the scrutiny of competition authoritiesbelieves that exemptions of services from the scrutiny of competition authorities should be allowed, in line with the general Commission guidelines regarding SGEIs, in order to guarantee accessibility of SGEIs for households and businesses alike; (b) Highlights that special treatment should be given to the areas of energy, transport and communication; notes that competition rules should work in parallel to the overarching goal of enhancing the living conditions of EU citizens; stresses that where economies of scale do not allow for a profit-based provision of services, such as is often the case for sparsely populated regions and peripheral islands, Government intervention aimed at ensuring the continuous and efficient delivery of services of General Economic Interest is to be allowed and indeed promoted;
Amendment 147 #
2014/2158(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Stresses the importance of affordability, sustainability and security of energy supply; considers competition policy to be of vital importance in encouraging unbundling and addressing the current fragmentation of the market; stresses that the regulation of state aid in this field must be carried out in the same spirit as in any otherobserved, subject to the priority that households and businesses must retain full access to these services, and thereby underpin the general prosperity of the local, regional and national economy in which they are located;
Amendment 223 #
2014/2158(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Recognises the need in the transport sector for a level playing field which allows free but also fair competition; considers that in the scenario of market failure, government intervention in the form of State Aid can act as an essential factor in guaranteeing continued transport service; highlights that the transport sector is an essential part of the infrastructure that guarantees the survival and well-being of local residents and businesses, especially in sparsely populated regions and peripheral islands;
Amendment 235 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Notes that in the wake of such cumulative structural reforms which in effect amounted to an internal devaluation, economic institutions and entrepreneurship at micro and regional levels have been weakened, not least due to an increase in general risk averseness, business pessimism about future prospects and greater prudence by lending institutions;
Amendment 236 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Notes that there exists an inherent ambiguity regarding the formulation and design of Country Specific Recommendations, and this with regard to whether they should reflect the overall interests of the euro zone as a whole, or of the national entity to which they refer, or to a balance between the two, and if the latter, as to what guidelines should be followed to secure such a balance;
Amendment 320 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Believes that since public accounts are not kept according to a coherent accruals systems, provisions under the SGP should give a differentiated weighting to all public investment commitments in the national budgets, so that such investment is not treated in the same light as recurrent expenditure.
Amendment 355 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Regrets however that to establish the EFSI, instead of drawing on fresh public and private money, recourse has been had to drawing on funds that had been earmarked for research, when research is a key element in laying the foundations for the investment of the future;
Amendment 408 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Recommends consequently that further proposals for structural reforms should be accompanied by a social impact assessment, that estimates their impact on the lowest income strata of society, those that are at risk of poverty and the poor, while also proposing measures that would mitigate such impact.
Amendment 461 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Stresses that fiscal and macroeconomic frameworks should also be worked out at regional levels, since economic divergence has increased not just between member states but also within them; that comprehensive regional data at par and in line with national data should be made available for such an exercise; and that a discussion of existing or emerging regional disparities should be a staple item of the 6 plus 2 pack review;
Amendment 462 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 b (new)
Paragraph 15 b (new)
15b. Believes that more attention needs to be devoted to how convergence or divergence between member states and between regions in the euro zone is defined, tracked and measured in both economic and social terms; that rules about how this is to be updated should be drawn up and published; and outcomes recorded on the basis of such established criteria should regularly be published as part of the European semester process.
Amendment 550 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20a. Believes that that a social impact assessment should be carried out of the long term effects that internal devaluation as implemented since 2008 has had on European peoples, especially the lower income and poor categories, which assessment should be accompanied by proposals regarding possible remedial measures;
Amendment 683 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
Paragraph 33
33. Requests that a reassessment of the Eurogroup’s decision-making process be conducted so as to provide for appropriate democratic accountability; bBelieves that in the long term the Commissioner for Economic Affairs should assume the role of President of the Eurogroup;, a high representative for the eurozone acting through the eurogroup should be appointed with functions equivalent to those of the high representative for foreign affairs as well as with senior Vice Presidency status in the European Commission, having powers to represent the eurozone at all relevant levels.
Amendment 690 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 a (new)
Paragraph 33 a (new)
33a. Notes that due to inadequate structural arrangements that contributed to crisis. the European Central Bank has been assuming and implicitly receiving powers that go beyond its mandate and that create lack of transparency about how decisions need to be taken, while increasing the political powers of the Bank; that this is not conducive to the long term stability of the system while undermining its democratic accountability; and that therefore on the Bank's board there should be representatives whose remit is uniquely that of focussing on the state of financial health of the eurozone as a whole, rather than that of its component parts.
Amendment 707 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 a (new)
Paragraph 34 a (new)
34a. Notes that there exist no arrangements for an orderly withdrawal by members from the eurozone, one which is democratically transparent, fair to all concerned, conscious of the need to protect the welfare of all European peoples, especially those who are less well off, and tuned to the exigencies of globalised financial, product and service markets; and therefore requests that such arrangements are discussed and eventually put in place.
Amendment 86 #
2014/2059(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Stresses, therefore, the importance of continuing the process of deep and sustainable structural reforms to deliver on growth and jobs; reiterates, in this connection, the fact that the EU cannot compete on costs alone, but needs to invest more in research and development, industrial renewal, education and skills, and resource efficiency, both at national and European level;
Amendment 122 #
2014/2059(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Calls, in this connection, on the future Commission to put forward a proposal on the single external representation of the euro area based on Article 138 TFEUfive year forecast of how the growing economic divergences within different countries and territories of the euro area can be expected to shape up under prevailing policies, analysing the emerging trends and the reasons for their establishment;
Amendment 128 #
2014/2059(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Calls on the Commission to strengthen the European Semester process by, inter alia, makingwhile taking care not to carry forward one-size fits all approaches that quickly become economically and socially counter-productive, make sure that sufficient time and resources are allocated to the design and follow-up to the recommendations, thereby making the recommendations as relevant as possible for EU- and national-level economic policy-making;
Amendment 213 #
2014/2059(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Encourages Member States to overcome domestic political oppositionpromote and launch full and democratic debate regarding the need to modernise their economies, social security systems and health care, with a view to achieving national consensus on the way forward, in order to avoid placing an excessive burden on future generations;
Amendment 231 #
2014/2059(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Points out that the absence of a well functioning internal labour market that maintains the integrity of the European social model and of a positive approach to immigration hampers growth in the EU; calls on the Commission and the Member States to establish a common labour market which preserves and enhances the institutions and practices of social solidarity and a modern immigration policy;
Amendment 258 #
2014/2059(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Reiterates the fact that structural reforms must be complemented by longer- term investment in education, research, innovation and sustainable energy; stresses, however, the fact that private investment is more conducive to growth than public investmentnotes that desirable rates of growth can best be achieved by ensuring that greater levels of investment are promoted at both public and private levels on a complementary basis;
Amendment 271 #
2014/2059(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Points out that government-induced growth risks being unsustainable over the medium term in the absence of a complementary surge in private investment; stresses the fact that the already high levels of public debt do not allow for a significant increase in spending, if the reform and consolidation efforts are not to be in vain;
Amendment 328 #
2014/2059(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
Paragraph 33
33. Stresses the importance of the expedition and completion of the banking union; believes that completion of the banking union must be achieved by means of an insurance and markets union that does not lead to an increase in operating costs within the national economies, not least with regard to the operating costs of SMEs and traditional industries; ;
Amendment 17 #
2014/0807(CNS)
Draft regulation
Article 1 – point 2
Article 1 – point 2
Regulation (EC) No 2532/98
Article 1 a – paragraph 3
Article 1 a – paragraph 3
3. The ECB mayshall, according to a transparent procedure and rules which it will make public, publish any decision imposing on an undertaking administrative pecuniary penalties for breaches of directly applicable Union law and sanctions for breaches of ECB regulations or decisions, both in the supervisory and non- supervisory fields, whether such decision has been appealed or not. The ECB shall carry out such publication in accordance with relevant Union law, irrespective of any national law or regulation and, where relevant Union law is composed of Directives, of any national legislation transposing those Directives.
Amendment 182 #
2014/0020(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31
Recital 31
(31) Separation has a significant impact on banking groups’ legal, organisational and operational structure. To insure an effective and efficient application of separation and to prevent separation of groups along geographic lines, separation decisions should be taken at group leveljointly by the consolidating supervisor, having consulte and the competent authorities of a banking group’s significant subsidiaries as appropriate.
Amendment 776 #
2014/0020(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Article 26 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 53 #
2013/0432(COD)
Draft legislative resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend its proposal substantially or replace it with another textwithdraw its proposal;