1591 Amendments of Molly SCOTT CATO
Amendment 9 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 8 a (new)
Citation 8 a (new)
8a having regard to its resolution of 11 April 2018 on protection of investigative journalists in Europe: the case of Slovak journalist Jan Kuciak and Martina Kušnírová
Amendment 12 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 8 a (new)
Citation 8 a (new)
- having regard to its resolution of 29 November 2018 on The Cum Ex Scandal: financial crime and the loopholes in the current legal framework;
Amendment 19 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 19 a (new)
Citation 19 a (new)
- having regard to the infringement procedures against 21 Member States for having not or only partially transposed AMLD4 into national law of which three are currently at the stage of court referrals (Romania, Ireland and now Luxembourg), with one on hold (Greece), nine at the stage of Reasoned Opinions, and eight at the stage of Letters of Formal Notice,
Amendment 20 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 20 a (new)
Citation 20 a (new)
- having regard to the Commission Communication on strengthening the Union framework for prudential and anti- money laundering supervision,
Amendment 21 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 21 a (new)
Citation 21 a (new)
- having regard to the Recommendation of the EBA to the Maltese FIAU,
Amendment 22 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 21 b (new)
Citation 21 b (new)
- having regard to the Formal Opinion to the Maltese FIAU of the Commission,
Amendment 26 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 25 a (new)
Citation 25 a (new)
- having regard to reports on tax avoidance and tax evasion as challenges for governance, social protection and development in developing countries1a, and gender equality and taxation policies in the EU1b; _________________ 1a Report on tax avoidance and tax evasion as challenges for governance, social protection and development in developing countries (2015/2058(INI)) (http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/get Doc.do?pubRef=- //EP//TEXT+REPORT+A8-2015- 0184+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN) 1b Gender equality and taxation policies in the EU (2018/2095(INI)) (https://oeil.secure.europarl.europa.eu/oei l/popups/ficheprocedure.do?lang=&refere nce=2018/2095(INI)
Amendment 41 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Notes that money laundering, tax evasion and tax avoidance have important economic, political, and social impacts, including loss of tax revenue, productivity loss, unfair competition and inequality, and incentivise certain economic outcomes that undermine both the countries’ political stability and social contract; stresses that the negative effects on public resources also impact the realisation of the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs);
Amendment 45 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1 b. Notes with regret that tax fraud, tax evasion and aggressive tax planning are important factors causing income and wealth inequality, and have shifted the tax burden from rich individuals to poorer citizens, from capital income to labour income and consumption, from MNEs to SMEs and from the financial sector to the real economy; notes that this has resulted in weaker and less efficient tax-and- transfer systems that are essential to finance public goods and stabilise the economy;
Amendment 47 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 c (new)
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1 c. Notes that tax evasion and tax avoidance are major contributors to gender inequality in the Union and globally as they limit the resources available to governments to increase equality at national and international level; calls on the Commission, the Council and the Member States to include a gender perspective in the formulation of its proposal to tackle tax evasion;
Amendment 51 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Stresses that during the work of the TAX3 Special Committee more revelations concerning financial crimes, tax evasion and tax avoidance have come to light, particularly connected to cases such as those of the ABLV Bank in Latvia, the murder of investigative journalists Ján Kuciak and Martina Kušnírová, the Danske Bank in Denmark and Estonia or the Cum Ex scandal involving at least 11 EU countries; stresses that as a result of the Panama Papers scandal, four people have been charged in the US;
Amendment 60 #
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 before the end of this legislature, particularly the key legislative proposals for public Country by Country reporting, Common Corporate tax Base and Common Consolidated Corporate tax base and digital taxation; 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;
Amendment 63 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Regrets that the Council has repeatedly failed to pass the measures that are necessary to require transnational corporations to fulfil their part of the social contract; notes that such failure undermines faith in the ability of democratic politicians to solve issues of injustice that are deeply troubling for our citizens;
Amendment 70 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3 b. Regrets that due to resistance of Member States, several legislative proposals in the field of tax justice have not been adopted yet to the detriment of European citizens.
Amendment 75 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Deplores again ‘the lack of reliable and unbiased statistics on the magnitude of tax avoidance and tax evasion [and] stresses the importance of developing appropriate and transparent methodologies to quantify the scale of these phenomena, as well as their impact on countries’ public finances, economic activities and public investments’; notes that transparency in general is central to the fight against money laundering, tax evasion and tax avoidance, and that some jurisdictions have interest in keeping the secrecy at place;
Amendment 84 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls on the Council and Member States to prioritise projects, notably with the support of the Fiscalis programme, aimed at quantifying the magnitude of tax avoidance in order to better address the current tax gap; urges the Commission and Member States to analyse their tax gaps in the EU and Member States including VAT gaps in order to design tax policies in an effective manner.
Amendment 86 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Calls on the Member States to estimate their tax gaps, and publish the results annually;
Amendment 91 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Highlights that close to 40 % of MNEs’ profits are shifted to tax havens globally each year and recognizes that certain jurisdictions within the EU, namely Luxemburg, Ireland and the Netherlands, are regular receivers of financial flows and reported profits generated elsewhere in the Union due to their very low or zero corporate, dividend and capital gains tax rates, and special tax provisions25 ; _________________ 25 Tørsløv, Wier and Zucman ‘The missing profits of nations’, National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper 24701, 2018.
Amendment 94 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8 a. Notes the tendency of corporations to produce their own estimates of ETRs - often based on bogus methods - which are then used to influence policy in a way that diminishes their tax liabilities;
Amendment 98 #
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 and could be considered illegal; however, recalls with concern that this strict distinction ignores the existence of grey areas and fails to take sufficient account of the ability of powerful players to change tax law to suit themselves;
Amendment 107 #
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 and could be considered illegal;
Amendment 111 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10 a. Notes that the growing role of intangible assets in the MNE value chain and harmful R&D tax incentives are conducive to aggressive tax planning.;
Amendment 123 #
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 intermedia, in this regard, that for the wealthy most of their income arrives in setting up such schemethe form of capital gains rather than earnings;
Amendment 128 #
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 with a clear follow-up, as well as the greater stability of public revenue in the long run; regrets that so far no recommendations to end harmful tax practices have been put forward by the Commission in the course of the European Semester country reports, calls on the Commission to ensure full transparency of this exercise, including the follow-up, and to give countries concrete recommendations regarding the fight against aggressive tax planning strategies;
Amendment 143 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Reiterates its call on companies, as taxpayers, to fully comply with their tax obligations and refrain fromstop any forms of aggressive tax planning leading to BEPS, and to consider fair taxation strategy as an important part of their corporate social responsibilityto recognise their business is enabled by tax-funded social, legal and physical infrastructure and public services, and to embrace fair taxation strategy as an important part of their corporate social responsibility; reminds them that rising inequality and the gap between the wealthy and corporate elites is undermining the cohesion of societies and faith in democratic politics;
Amendment 149 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14 a. Urges Member States to review and update bilateral taxation agreements between Member States and with third countries to close loopholes that incentivise tax-driven trading practices with the purpose of tax avoidance;
Amendment 156 #
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; especially since it is required to fund the public services that the corporations themselves depend on;
Amendment 157 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15 a. Deplores the drop in nominal corporate tax rates all over Europe in recent years and the proliferation of incentives to lower the effective tax rate (ETR) compared to the statutory corporate tax rate; notes with concern that, regarding effective tax rates in the EU, in addition to Luxembourg (2.2%), the lowest ETRs are to be found in Hungary (7.5%), Bulgaria (9.5%), Cyprus (9.6%) as well as in the Netherlands (10.4%) and Latvia (10.6%) and that most countries appear to tax MNEs regressively: the larger the MNE, the lower the ETR;
Amendment 159 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 b (new)
Paragraph 15 b (new)
15 b. Acknowledges the harmful consequences that tax competition between jurisdictions and the resulting "race to the bottom" have on public revenues and the progressivity of taxation; underlines that the further lowering of corporate taxes will eventually put the sustainability of the Union's public finances at stake; calls on the European Commission to propose a Directive that ensures minimum effective corporate tax rates of at least 20% in the European Union;
Amendment 173 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16 a. Acknowledges that special tax and deduction regimes, including those in non-EU countries like Switzerland, bear substantial responsibility for the global downward spiral of corporate taxes rates; notes that the effective tax rate is much lower than nominal rates in most EU countries, and important disparities and pressure on lower tax rates lead to a race to the bottom;
Amendment 175 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 b (new)
Paragraph 16 b (new)
16 b. Regrets that profit shifting is often used by companies to put pressure on governments and employees, demanding weaker regulation and labour standards with the excuse of low profit margins, even though the company is operating successfully;
Amendment 192 #
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; regrets that OECD BEPS Action Plan concerns only tax base competition and does not address tax rate competition;
Amendment 196 #
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; notes with regret however that BEPS so far failed to deliver on the most effective solution against the base erosion and profit shifting, deplores the fact that OECD still remain rather an exclusive club of countries rather that an open global platform that could keep up with the pace and deliver the solutions to minimise the negative impacts and risks of globalisation; 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;
Amendment 204 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Points out that some countries have recently adopted unilateral countermeasures against harmful tax practices (such as the UK’s Diverted Profits Tax and the Global Intangible Low- Taxed Income (GILTI) provisions of the US tax reform) to ensure that the foreign income of MNEs is duly taxed at a minimum effective tax rate in the parent’s country of residence; calls for an EU assessment of these measures and a legislative proposal, if appropriate, considering the negative potential tax base and strategic spillovers the US reform can have on the EU;
Amendment 225 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Reiterates its call for a clear definition of permanent establishment, including the concept of a ‘significant digital presence’, so that companies cannot artificially avoid having a taxable presence in a Member State in which they have economic activity;
Amendment 239 #
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 significant burden on responsible taxpayers, particularly SMEs;
Amendment 245 #
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; notes that there are continuing loopholes in the DAC regime that need to be closed1; __________________________ [1] Greens/EFA Report Reporting taxation: Analysing loopholes in the EU’s automatic exchange of information and how to close them, October 15 2018
Amendment 247 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28 a (new)
Paragraph 28 a (new)
28 a. Is concerned by the trend amongst some Member States of facilitating onshoring of IP from low tax Third Countries to EU Member States, through the provision of amortisation relief on IP acquirement, the proliferation of ‘patent boxes’ providing reduced taxation rates on certain IP profits, high or complete capital allowances for intellectual property and the introduction or extension of research and development credits1; notes that this while may conform with the BEPS actions’ substance requirements, it is in contrast with the spirit of BEPS; reiterates concerns expressed by the European Parliament2 and European Commission in relation to revenue losses associated with such measures3; _______________________ [1] Eurodad et. al., Tax Games: the Race to the Bottom, Europe’s role in supporting an unjust tax system 2017, December 2017, pp. 22 – 24; and IMF, Fiscal Monitor: Acting Now, Acting Together, April 2016, p 44. [2] 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. 26, paragraph 117. [3] European Commission, DG TAXUD, Tax Policies in the European Union. 2016 Survey, 26 October 2016, 2.1.3 R&D tax incentives, p 2.
Amendment 250 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28 c (new)
Paragraph 28 c (new)
28 c. Calls on EU Institutions and Member States to support a global tax reform based on the principles of formulary apportionment as included in the CCCTB proposal;
Amendment 254 #
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; calls on the Commission to make full use of this information and give concerned countries precise recommendations in its Specific Country Recommendations’ (SCRs) reports; urges Member States to swiftly follow the Commission's recommendations to fight ATP; _________________ 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 268 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
32. Calls on the Commission to issue a proposal aimed at repealoutlawing patent boxes, and calls on Member States to favour non- harmful and, if appropriate, direct support for R&D; reiterates, in the meantime, its call to ensure that current patent boxes establish a genuine link to economic activity, such as expenditure tests, and that they do not distort competition; welcomes the improved definition of R&D costs in the common corporate tax base (CCTB) proposal;
Amendment 269 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 a (new)
Paragraph 32 a (new)
32 a. Calls on both the EU institutions and Member States to ensure public procurement contracts do not facilitate tax avoidance or benefit ATP by suppliers. Member States should monitor and ensure that companies or other legal entities involved in tenders and procurement contracts do not participate in tax evasion and avoidance by interacting with financial intermediaries established in offshore centres and tax havens, or by facilitating illicit capital flows, and to increase their transparency policies by requiring annual public country-by-country reporting, tracing beneficial ownership and controlling transfer pricing in order to ensure the transparencyof investments and prevent tax evasion and tax avoidance; calls on the Commission to clarify existing procurement practice under the EU procurement directive, and if necessary, propose an update to it that does not prohibit the application of tax related considerations as criteria for exclusion or even as selection criteria in public procurement1. ______________ [1] Initiatives such as www.tenderhaven.eu have attempted to introduce more transparency.
Amendment 286 #
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 digitalisationdeplores the continued refusal of certain Member States to support this proposal and the failure of EU solidarity that this refusal represents;
Amendment 289 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 a (new)
Paragraph 33 a (new)
33 a. Urges the Council to adopt these legislative proposals as soon as possible and before the end of this legislature, taking into consideration Parliament’s opinion that already includes the concept of virtual permanent establishment; considers that the deployment of this legislation would significantly contribute to closing the remaining loopholes and level the playing field in light of digitalisation and the growing role of intangible assets in the MNE value chain, which have exacerbated the problems with transfer pricing systems; however, expresses concern about the inclusion of a super-deduction for research and development1; ________________ [1] Council of the European Union, Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee, ECO/419,5.4 (http://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/docu ment/ST-12848-2017-INIT/EN/pdf)
Amendment 315 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
Paragraph 35
35. Welcomes the digital tax package adopted by the Commission on 21 March 2018; calls on the Council to swiftly adopt these proposalsdeplores the slow approach by the Council and its inability to come to an agreement on this package yet; points out that this already led to the distortion of the Single Market as national solutions have been put in place in different Member States and warns that the distortion risks worsening as other Member States consider to put in place national digital taxes; calls on the Council to adopt these proposals as soon as possible and before the end of this legislature, taking into account Parliament’s opinion on them;
Amendment 320 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35 a (new)
Paragraph 35 a (new)
35 a. Recalls that the digital services under the scope of the digital tax package should be the processing and sale of data, online advertisement, digital interfaces and the provision of digital content; deplores that the Council is currently considering a proposal that is much less ambitious in scope than the Commission’s proposal and than the Parliament’s position;
Amendment 328 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36
Paragraph 36
36. Understands that the so-called interim solution is not optimal; believnotes that it will help speed up the search for a better solution at global level, while levelling the playing field in local markets to some extent and preventing further distortion of EU Single Market; insists on the need to take a more optimal and long-term approach by adopting the Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Basis (CCCTB) with a digital factor in the formula apportionment, as voted by the Parliament in March 2018, together with the new definition of a Significant Digital Presence (SDP); strongly believes that it is the best way to tackle tax evasion of digital multinationals and deplores that these files are not progressing in the Council;
Amendment 335 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 a (new)
Paragraph 36 a (new)
36a. Reiterates its call on the Commission to use the power vested in the article 116 TFEU and to make proposals in the area of taxation under this article, in particular for the adoption of the Digital Services Tax (DST) and the CCCTB; believes that the conditions set out in Article 116 are met since there is a clear evidence that competition in the internal market between digital and traditional firms is distorted and that the Council failed to come to an agreement to eliminate the distortion;
Amendment 347 #
2018/2121(INI)
38a. Calls on the Commission to tackle existing loopholes in automatic exchange of information, particularly coming from the DAC3 revision; stresses in this regard that this should cover national rulings and rulings with natural persons, that information should be made public, and that information on rulings should be better exchanged with third countries;
Amendment 350 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39
Paragraph 39
39. Reiterates, furthermore, its call to ensure simultaneous tax audits of persons of common or complementary interests (including parent companies and their subsidiaries), and its calcalls on the Commission to present a legislative proposal to further enhance tax cooperation between Member States through an obligation to answer group requests on tax matters;
Amendment 355 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40
Paragraph 40
40. Emphasises that not only information exchanges between, but also the sharing of best practices among tax authorities contribute to more efficient tax collection; calls on the Commission and the Member States to give priority to the sharing of best practices among tax authorities;
Amendment 360 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42
Paragraph 42
42. Welcomes the automatic exchange of financial account information based on the global standard which has been developed by the OECD with Andorra, Liechtenstein, Monaco, San Marino and Switzerland; calls on the Commission and the Member States to upgrade the Treaty provisions so as to match the DAC as amended; regrets that Andorra, Liechtenstein, San Marino and Switzerland are moving from secrecy jurisdictions to low taxation jurisdictions, and still have harmful regimes according to the Council assessment on the EU list;
Amendment 370 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44 a (new)
Paragraph 44 a (new)
Amendment 378 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44 b (new)
Paragraph 44 b (new)
44b. Calls on the Commission to assess the state of play of all potentially harmful taxation agreements and any possible loophole in the EU rules on common taxation of parent companies and their subsidiaries, to come up with new upgraded policy measures to tackle dividend arbitrage practices and to take the necessary steps to prevent traders from exploiting loopholes in the law;
Amendment 383 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44 c (new)
Paragraph 44 c (new)
44c. Calls on the Commission to make a proposal to strengthen the DAC6 in order to require the mandatory disclosure of dividend arbitrage schemes and all information on capital gains, including the granting of dividend and capital gains tax refunds;
Amendment 398 #
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; deplores the lack of progress and cooperation from the Council since 2016; urges for progress to be made in the Council so that it enters immediately into negotiations with Parliament as soon as possible and find agreement before the end of this legislature;
Amendment 406 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45 a (new)
Paragraph 45 a (new)
45a. Notes that transparency is still lacking in numerous areas of taxation in the EU not limited to the corporate taxation; calls on the Commission and on Member States to collect and publish data on non-doms and CBI/RBI schemes; calls on the Commission to present a proposal to make the publication of tax rulings mandatory;
Amendment 408 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45 b (new)
Paragraph 45 b (new)
45b. Calls on the Commission to issue a proposal that would oblige Member States to ensure that economic operators participating in public procurement procedures comply with a minimum level of transparency regarding tax, particularly public CBCR and transparent ownership structures;
Amendment 409 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45 c (new)
Paragraph 45 c (new)
45c. Reminds Member States of the legal base of the proposal for public CBCR as found in the impact assessment of the Commission published 12 April 2016; recalls that the measures on corporate tax transparency cannot be regarded as relating to fiscal provisions affecting the establishment or functioning of the internal market in the sense of Article 115 TFEU;
Amendment 413 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 47
Paragraph 47
47. Calls on the Commission to assess possible measures to discourage Member States from granting such State aid in the form of a tax advantage, and to develop a robust method for measuring such indirect state aid;
Amendment 419 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 48 a (new)
Paragraph 48 a (new)
48a. Is concerned by the lack of transparency of tax rulings and notes that the tax rulings investigated by the Commission were only available to them because of revelations by investigative journalists, civil society organisations and trade unions.
Amendment 424 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 49
Paragraph 49
49. Notes that despite the fact that the Commission found McDonald’s benefited from double non-taxation on certain of its profits in the EU, no decision under EU State Aid rules could be issued, as the Commission concluded that the double non-taxation stemmed from a mismatch between Luxembourg and US tax laws and the Luxembourg-United States double taxation treaty38 ; calls on the Commission to put forward a legislative proposal to harmonise double taxation treaties of Member States and terminate existing mismatches in the qualification of profits and expenses; _________________ 38 http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP- 18-5831_en.htm
Amendment 433 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 51
Paragraph 51
51. Reiterates its calls to the European Commission for guidelines clarifying what constitutes tax-related State aid and ‘appropriate’ transfer pricing, with a view to removing legal uncertainties for both compliant taxpayers and tax administrations, and providing a framework for Member States’ tax practices accordingly;
Amendment 436 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 51 a (new)
Paragraph 51 a (new)
51a. Points out that the scope of state aide cases proves the urgent need to for a systemic change and approval of EU-wide reforms to curb tax avoidance including mandatory public Country-by-Country Reporting, Common Corporate Tax Base and Common Consolidate Corporate Tax Base or digital taxation; calls for a reform of the European State Aid framework in order to make tackling tax avoidance schemes between multinationals and Member States faster and more effective;
Amendment 441 #
Amendment 445 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 52
Paragraph 52
52. Notes that there is no single definition of letterbox companiesshell companies; notes, however, that they are characterised by the absence of real economic activity in the Member State of registration, and are a means for treaty abuse or treaty shopping, usually used with the purpose of circumventing labour laws and social contributions, aggressive tax planning and tax evasion, money laundering and/or terrorist financing;
Amendment 448 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 52 a (new)
Paragraph 52 a (new)
52a. Notes that shell companies offer anonymity to its ultimate beneficiaries and allow them to abuse tax treaties; notes in this regard that the central register on the beneficial ownership foreseen in AMLD4 covers shell companies but regrets that the threshold for disclosure (25% of shareholding) will not prevent owners from remaining hidden; highlights that shell companies can be used as a vehicle for money laundering, tax evasion and tax avoidance; calls on the Commission to propose an amendment to the AMLD5 requiring obliged entities to file a suspicious transaction report whenever they enter into business or help setting up a shell company;
Amendment 452 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 53
Paragraph 53
53. Points out national measures to specifically ban commercial relationships with letterboxshell companies; highlights, in particular, the Latvian legislation which defines a letterboxshell company as an entity having no actual economic activity and holding no documentary proof to the contrary, as being registered in a jurisdiction where companies are not required to submit financial statements, and/or as having no place of business in its country of residence;
Amendment 454 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 53 a (new)
Paragraph 53 a (new)
53a. Notes that Latvia adopted in May 2018 a law banning financial institutions, as well as intermediaries, from cooperating and doing business with shell companies; calls on the Commission to put forward a legislative proposal to introduce the Latvian legislation in EU legislation and to encourage all EU Member States to follow this example;
Amendment 468 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 55
Paragraph 55
55. Underlines that a high share of foreign direct investment held by special purpose entities (SPEs) exists in several Member States, particularly in Malta, Luxembourg and the Netherlands;41 highlights that foreign direct investments through SPEs can be considerably affected by small legislative changes, whether domestically or abroad, affecting tax revenues and financial stability of the concerned countries and of the EU as a whole; _________________ 41 Kiendl Kristo I. and Thirion E., op. cit., p.23.
Amendment 486 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 58
Paragraph 58
58. Urges the Commission and the Member States to establish coordinated, binding, enforceable and substantial economic activity requirements as well as expenditure tests;
Amendment 490 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 59
Paragraph 59
59. Calls on the Commission to carry out, within two years, fitness checks of the interconnected legislative and policy initiatives aimed at addressing the use of letterboxshell companies in the context of tax fraud, tax evasion, aggressive tax planning and money laundering; calls on the Commission to make a proposal to ban shell companies in the EU, regarding that their use is associated with aggressive tax planning indicators;
Amendment 495 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 59 a (new)
Paragraph 59 a (new)
Amendment 502 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 61
Paragraph 61
61. Regrets, however, that every year, large amounts of the expected VAT revenue are lost because of fraud; highlights that according to the Commission’s statistics, the VAT gap in 2016 amounted to EUR 147 billion, which represents more than 12 % of the total expected VAT revenue43 ; notes that the Commission estimates that around EUR 50 billion – or EUR 100 per EU citizen each year – is lost to cross-border VAT fraud44 ; while the Europol estimates around 60 billion EUR of the VAT gap is connected to VAT fraud, partly used also organised crime and terrorism financing; _________________ 43 Study and Reports on the VAT Gap in the EU-28 Member States: 2018 Final Report / TAXUD/2015/CC/131. 44 See Commission press release: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-17- 3443_en.htm
Amendment 504 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 61 a (new)
Paragraph 61 a (new)
61a. Highlights with concern that the VAT gap in 2016 amounted to EUR 147 billion; notes that the Commission estimates that around EUR 50 billion each year is lost to cross-border VAT fraud and that the proceeds from criminal activity in the EU are estimated to amount to EUR 110 billion per year; notes that the UNODC estimates that between 2 and 5% of global GDP is laundered each year;
Amendment 506 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 62
Paragraph 62
62. Calls for additional statistics to estimate the VAT gap; stresses that there is no common approach to data collection and sharing within the EU; urges the Commission to ensure that harmonised statistics are collected and published regularly in Member States;
Amendment 510 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 63
Paragraph 63
63. Underlines that the feature of the current VAT (transitional) regime of applying an exemption to intracommunity supplies and exports within the EU has been abused by fraudsters, in particular in the VAT carousel fraud; stresses that cash transactions still remain a very high risk regarding VAT fraud;
Amendment 535 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 70 a (new)
Paragraph 70 a (new)
70a. Regards with concern the Council's adoption of a Proposal to amend the common system of value added tax as regards the temporary application of a generalised reverse charge mechanism (GRCM) in relation to supplies of goods and services above a certain threshold of 2 October 2018, which allows for a GRCM with much weaker criteria than those approved by the European Parliament; acknowledges that a generalised application of the RCM shifts the tax liability to the retail stage, transforming the VAT system into a Sales Tax, jeopardising the in-built faithful reporting incentives of the VAT fractional payments system by concentrating the risk of fraud at the end of the value chain; notes that this creates risks for other types of fraud to arise, through underreporting of sales volumes and the exploitation of the variability of VAT rates across Member States, and that VAT fraud can be passed on to neighbouring countries, creating market disruptions in those borders where some Member States apply GRCM and others do not; calls on the Commission to closely monitor the application and consequences of this new legislation;
Amendment 560 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 76
Paragraph 76
76. Calls on the Commission and Member States to ensure that EPPO towill begin operating as soon as possible and by 2022 at the latest; calls for exemplary sanctions to be pronounced; considers that anyone engaged in an organised VAT fraud scheme should be severely sanctioned in order to avoid a perception of impunity;
Amendment 568 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 78 a (new)
Paragraph 78 a (new)
78a. Highlights the importance of the implementation of a register of beneficial owners as an important tool to tackle VAT fraud; stresses the need and calls on Member States to create specialised units of police and tax services as well as to appoint specialised prosecutors and judges to deal with this type of fraud;
Amendment 583 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 81
Paragraph 81
81. Emphasises that natural persons do not generally exercise their freedom of movement for the purposes of tax fraud, tax evasion and aggressive tax planning; underlines, however, that some natural persons have a tax base large enough to span several tax jurisdictions; with high income and/or high wealth use inconsistent definitions of tax residence, special regimes and insufficient enforcement within or beyond the EU to achieve double non-taxation of their income
Amendment 588 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 82
Paragraph 82
82. Regrets that even without shifting tax residence 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; deplores that some EU Member States have implemented tax schemed to attract high net worth individuals and create space for double non-taxation;
Amendment 592 #
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, undermining the social contract and requiring law-abiding citizens to contribute a higher proportion of their earnings to the exchequer, as well as increasing inequality between those benefiting from the schemes and those who do not;
Amendment 594 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 83 a (new)
Paragraph 83 a (new)
83a. Notes that the threat of tax evasion and avoidance has created a race to the bottom regarding taxation of wealth, inheritance and capital incomes visible in the fact that – even without all the loopholes and avoidance strategies – the headline rates for labour income are usually higher than for effortless income from wealth and capital throughout the EU;
Amendment 595 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 83 b (new)
Paragraph 83 b (new)
83b. Recognizes that low top marginal rates, whether on labour income or on capital income, incentivise certain behaviour from Chief Executive Officers that result in poorer corporate economic governance and increased income inequality;
Amendment 601 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 84
Paragraph 84
84. Deplores the fact that some Member States, such as Portugal, 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; these regimes offer benefits such as such as non-taxation of foreign possessions and income, lump-sum tax on foreign income, tax-free allowances on a part of incomes earn in the country, lower tax rate on pensions remitted to the country;
Amendment 605 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 84 a (new)
Paragraph 84 a (new)
84a. Reminds that the Commission in its communication of 2001 suggested to include special regimes for expatriates in its list of harmful tax practices1 but has not provided any data on the scope of the problem since; calls on the Commission to reactivate its work on this issue and to start by collecting information on the users and costs of existing regimes, including the costs of double non-taxation of cross-border capital income that is usually ignored by cost estimates of national tax agencies. __________________ [1] COM (2001) 260: Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament and the Economic and Social Committee Tax policy in the European Union - Priorities for the years ahead (https://eur- lex.europa.eu/procedure/EN/164839)
Amendment 615 #
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, whether they are from EU or non-EU countries, 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 made; _________________ 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 623 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 86 a (new)
Paragraph 86 a (new)
86a. Notes that Citizenship by investment and residency by investment schemes in Member States such as Latvia, Austria or the UK have been used by a significant number of actors originating from Russia and countries under Russian influence; deplores that the secrecy surrounding these money flows has significantly increased the political, economic and security risks for European countries, particularly the risks of money laundering.
Amendment 624 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 86 b (new)
Paragraph 86 b (new)
86b. Notes that CBI and RBI schemes offered by third countries might pose EU security risks regarding visa issuing, and may increase the potential for tax evasion; highlights that, according to the OECD, CBI and RBI schemes are even more problematic when implemented by low or no-taxation jurisdiction and when no minimum presence is required;
Amendment 631 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 87
Paragraph 87
87. Stresses that CBI and RBI schemes carry significant risks, including a devaluation of EU citizenship and the potential for corruption, money laundering and tax evasion as well as security risks; 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 by competent authorities; notes that the obligations contained in AMLD5 subjecting obliged entities to consider CBI or RBI applicants as a high-risk factor in the course of their due diligence process do not mitigate the risks associated with the schemes and should not constitute a way to absolve Member States from their responsibility to establish, abide by and monitor enhanced due diligence standards; 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; notes that one Member State’s decision to implement CBI and RBI schemes have spillover effects on other EU Member States;
Amendment 640 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 88 a (new)
Paragraph 88 a (new)
88a. Deplores that the financial benefits of such schemes accrue to a limited number of Member States whereas the potential costs of providing services to those who buy them may be borne by other states, creating an injustice across the Union;
Amendment 643 #
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; appreciates the fact that somenotes that only a minority of Member States make explicit the name and nationalities of the individuals who are granted citizenship or residency under these schemes; calls on the Member States implementing these schemes to publish and share with other EU countries the names of all applicants, or at least the names of the politically exposed persons;
Amendment 653 #
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; notes with concern that Member States that offer this kind of schemes and refuse at the same time to receive information from other non-EU Member States via CRS create a loophole in automatic exchange of information systems; _________________ 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 659 #
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 allban existing CBI or RBI schemes as soon as possible; 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 AMLD5nd monitored by competent authorities; and urges the Commission to identify legislative instruments to set and impose EU – wide harmonised standards of these schemes; calls on Member States to ensure that competent authorities bear the ultimate responsibility for assessing due diligence findings and decision-making, and make explicit the name and the nationalities of the individuals who are granted citizenship or residency under these schemes; 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 and start infringement procedures;
Amendment 667 #
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 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; calls on Member States to require physical presence in the country as a condition for benefiting from CBI and RBI schemes before the phase out;
Amendment 675 #
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; urges the Commission to examine whether, and, if so, which of these schemes posed a threat to EU legislation; calls on the Commission to assess the risks associated with the selling of citizenship and residence as part of its next Supranational Risk Assessment; urges the Commission to also assess the risks associated with the adoption of visa- waiver agreements with third countries that have CBI or RBI schemes in place; calls on the Commission to expand the scope of obliged entities covered by AMLD5 to include all agents or firms acting as intermediaries in the trade of citizenship and residency or acting as advisors in residence and citizenship planning; calls on the Commission to establish mechanisms for coordinating information sharing between Member States on rejected applications; calls on the Commission to assess the extent to which these schemes have been used by EU citizens;
Amendment 686 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 95
Paragraph 95
95. Notes that free ports within the EU can be established under the ‘free zone’ procedure; notes that free zones are enclosed areas within the customs territory of the Union where non-Union goods can be introduced free of import duty, other charges (i.e. taxes) and commercial policy measures; highlights with concern that free ports can be also used for the purpose of tax evasion;
Amendment 694 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 97
Paragraph 97
97. Notes that, apart from secure storage, the motivations for the use of free ports include a high degree of secrecy and the deferral of import duties and indirect taxes such as VAT or user tax; recognizes that the purpose of free ports is not to constitute a place for the safe and tax-free storage of value for the wealth of individuals while it has been found that they are frequently used as such;
Amendment 697 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 99
Paragraph 99
99. Observes that under the Union Customs Code, customs warehouses are on an almost identical legal footing with free ports; recommends, therefore, they be put on an equal footing with free ports under legal measures aimed at mitigating money laundering and tax evasion risks therein, such as AMLD5; considers that warehouses should be equipped with the adequate staff to be able to undertake the necessary scrutiny of the operations that they host;
Amendment 700 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 101
Paragraph 101
101. Notes that under DAC5, as of 1 January 2018, direct tax authorities have ‘access upon request’ to a broad information set with regard to ultimate beneficial ownership (UBO) information collected under the AMLD; notes that EU AML legislation is built on the trust in reliable CDD research and the diligent reporting of suspicious transactions by obliged entities, which will become AML gatekeepers; notes with concern that ‘access upon request’ to information held by free ports may only have very limited effect in specific cases63 ; takes the view that direct tax offices should be able to fish into UBO data as part of their surveillance tasks; _________________ 63 EPRS study entitled ‘Money Laundering and tax evasion risks in free ports’, October 2018, PE: 627.114; ISBN: 978-92- 846-3333-3.
Amendment 710 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 102 a (new)
Paragraph 102 a (new)
102 a. Calls on the Commission to begin the process and propose concrete steps for the phasing out of the system of free ports in Europe;
Amendment 712 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 103
Paragraph 103
Amendment 715 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 103 a (new)
Paragraph 103 a (new)
103 a. Points out that tax amnesties represent a high risk of decreased tax compliance in the long run and a threat to the rule of law and the fight against money laundering;
Amendment 716 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 103 b (new)
Paragraph 103 b (new)
103 b. Calls on the Member States to refrain from further using tax amnesties as this measure only represents a source of quick tax collection in the short run while has a significantly negative impact on the overall tax systems;
Amendment 726 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 106 a (new)
Paragraph 106 a (new)
106 a. Call on Member States to do group requests and to harmonise the definition of tax crimes; call on the Commission to eliminate any obstacles in administrative and legal cooperation;
Amendment 727 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 106 b (new)
Paragraph 106 b (new)
106 b. Calls on the Commission to assess and presents proposals to close loopholes in the DAC2, particularly by including hard assets and cryptocurrencies in the scope of the directive, by prescribing sanctions for non-compliance or false reporting from financial institutions, as well as by including more types of financial institutions and types of accounts that are not being reported at the moment, such as pension funds;
Amendment 728 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 106 c (new)
Paragraph 106 c (new)
106 c. Considers that coordinated on-site inspections and joint audits should be part of the European framework of cooperation between tax administrations;
Amendment 737 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 108 a (new)
Paragraph 108 a (new)
108 a. Notes that, according to AMLD4, the Commission shall identify high risk third countries presenting strategic deficiencies in their regime on anti-money laundering and countering terrorist financing; welcomes in this regard the adoption by the Commission in June 2018 of the methodology for identifying high risk third countries; urges the Commission to publish first results as soon as possible, and acknowledges that, in the meantime, the Commission uses the list from the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), however excluding Serbia, which is on the FATF list;
Amendment 741 #
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 that 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 to swiftly remedy this situation; reminds Member States of their legal obligation to respect the deadline of 10 January 2020 for the transposition of AMLD5 into their domestic legislation; and calls on the Commission to ensure that the AMLD5 is transposed fully in a timely manner or to consider using the legal tool of a regulation instead; _________________ 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. Moreover, on 8 November 2018, the Commission adopted a negative opinion on the Maltese Financial Intelligence Analysis Unit and required it to continue taking additional measures to fully comply with its obligations.
Amendment 746 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 110
Paragraph 110
110. Recalls the crucial importance of CDD as part of the know-your-customer (KYC) obligation which consists of obliged entities having to properly identify their customers and the source of their funds as well as the ultimate beneficial owners of the assets, including the immobilisation of anonymous accounts; notes that adequate resources within tax administrations are necessary for the effective implementation of this obligation;
Amendment 758 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 112
Paragraph 112
112. Recalls that KYC and CDD continues throughout the business relationship, and that customers’ transactions have to be monitored for suspicious or unusual activities; recalls, in this context, the obligation for obliged entities to promptly inform national FIUs, on their own initiative, of transactions suspected of ML, associate predicate offences or terrorist financing; is concerned that AMLD5 continues to allow for managing directors to be registered as beneficial owners while the real beneficial owner of a company or trust is not known; calls on the Commission to present a legislative proposal to end the practice of accepting the ultimate beneficial owners to hide behind straw men and to urge other jurisdictions at international level to do the same; calls on the Member States when transposing AMLD5 into national law to ensure that obliged entities terminate the business relationship with another company whose ultimate beneficial owners are not known;
Amendment 782 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 116 a (new)
Paragraph 116 a (new)
116 a. Is aware that the 500 euro note, the issuing of which has been abandoned by the ECB, continues to be used for money laundering and criminal activities; notes that some Member States are considering banning it; recalls that for such a measure to be effective the ban needs to be extended to all countries where the euro is accepted as a currency;
Amendment 791 #
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; calls on the Commission to make, in the meantime, full use of the instruments at hand to enforce AML legislation in the Member States, starting with formal opinions and ending with infringement procedures or to consider the legal tool of a regulation instead;
Amendment 796 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 117 a (new)
Paragraph 117 a (new)
117 a. Deplores cases such as the Russian Laundromat, the Danske Banks case, the ABLV case and the Azerbaijan Laundromat that have demonstrated how hundreds of billions of euros of dirty Russian money connected to Russian ruling elites and oligarchs have been laundered via EU banks and offshore jurisdictions;
Amendment 799 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 117 b (new)
Paragraph 117 b (new)
117 b. Notes with concern that undetected flow of Russian money to Europe can create political, economic and security risks that have become clearly visible in cases such as the Salisbury attacks or the case of Cambridge Analytica and other interference in the democratic process in Europe;
Amendment 800 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 117 c (new)
Paragraph 117 c (new)
117 c. Calls on the Commission and the Council to ensure that the issues of money laundering and illicit financial flows are given an adequate degree of attention in EU sanction programmes in order to cut oligarchs off from their funds; calls for an EU wide Magnitsky Act to freeze assets of human rights violators; considers that it is time to end the free flow of money from Russia to EU banks; calls on the European Commission to explore the option of reversing the burden of proof so that Russian-origin money is considered suspect until proven otherwise;
Amendment 805 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 121
Paragraph 121
121. Concludes that the current level of coordination of anti-money laundering and combating the financing of terrorism (AML/CFT) supervision of financial institutions, particularly in AML/CFT situations with cross-border effects, is not sufficient to address current challenges in this sector and that the Union’s ability to enforce coordinated AML rules and practices is currently inadequate; acknowledges that smaller EU Member States have been targeted for money laundering as a result of their lack of capacity to police illegal flows adequately; calls therefore for a new centralised system at EU level for AML/CFT supervision, with proper resources; calls on the Commission to develop specialized trainings for FIUs, particularly with respect to capacities in smaller Member States;
Amendment 810 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 122
Paragraph 122
122. Calls for an assessment of long- term objectives leading to an enhanced AML/CFT framework as mentioned in the ‘Reflection Paper on possible elements of a Roadmap for seamless cooperation between Anti Money Laundering and Prudential Supervisors in the European Union’, such as the establishment at EU level of a mechanism to better coordinate the activities of AML/CFT supervisors of financial sector entities, notably in situations where AML/CFT concerns are likely to have cross-border effects, and a possible centralisation of AML supervision via an existing or new Union body empowered to enforce harmonised rules and practices in EU Member States;
Amendment 817 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 124
Paragraph 124
124. Stresses that ESAs, and in particular the EBA, should be provided with sufficient resource capacity to carry out their oversight functions and improve AML supervision; notes the recommendation to the Maltese FIAU of the EBA pointing to uncertainties in the current banking legislation preventing the EBA from taking further actions to effectively enforce the Union law and calls on Member States to swiftly transpose the recently adopted changes to the Capital Requirements Directive into national law;
Amendment 828 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 126
Paragraph 126
126. Recalls that pursuant to AMLD5 Member States are obliged to set up automated centralised mechanisms enabling swift identification of holders of bank and payment accounts, and to ensure that any FIU is able to provide information held in those centralised mechanisms to any other FIU in a timely manner; calls on the Member States to speed up the establishment of these mechanisms so that Member States’ FIUs are able to cooperate effectively with each other in order to detect and counteract money-laundering activities; recalls that EU FIUs are strongly encouraged to use the FIU.net system; highlights that information sharing between FIUs and Law Enforcement Agencies, including with Europol, should be improved;
Amendment 843 #
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); considers that in any resulting agreement proper consideration should be given to the protection of personal data in accordance with Directive (EU) 2016/680;
Amendment 850 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 128
Paragraph 128
128. Points out that the non- standardisation of suspicious transaction report formats and non-standardisation of suspicious transaction report thresholds among Member States and with respect to the different obliged entities leads to difficulties in the processing and exchange of information between FIUs; calls on the Commission to explore mechanisms to set up standardised reporting formats for obliged entities in order to facilitate the exchange of information between FIUs in cases with a cross-border dimension; and to reflect on the standardisation of suspicious transaction thresholds
Amendment 857 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 129 a (new)
Paragraph 129 a (new)
129 a. Considers the established swift information exchange by the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) of the United States Department of the Treasury as a model for the EU and calls on the Commission to put forward a legislative proposal to set up a European Financial Intelligence Unit (EFIU) to facilitate coordination, including the exchange of information between FIUs within the Union; considers that this EFIU shall coordinate, assist and support Member Sates FIUs in cross-border cases, shall lend support to those Member States especially in maintaining and developing the technical infrastructure for ensuring the exchange of information, assisting them in joint analysis of cross-border cases and strategic analysis, and shall coordinate the work of Member States FIUs for cross-border cases; requires the Commission to provide the EFIU with adequate financial, human and technical resources in order to fulfil its tasks;
Amendment 865 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 130
Paragraph 130
130. Welcomes the fact that AMLD5 has broadened the list of obliged entities to include providers engaged in exchange services between virtual currencies and fiat currencies, custodian wallet providers, art traders and free ports; calls on the Commission to further broaden the list of obliged entities to include agents and service providers engaged in the trade of citizenship and residency or acting as advisors in residence and citizenship planning;
Amendment 875 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 133
Paragraph 133
133. Notes that the Union’s AML legislation obliges Member States to establish central registers containing complete beneficial ownership data for companies and trusts, and that it also provides for their interconnection; welcomes the fact that AMLD5 obliges Member States to ensure that the information on beneficial ownership of companies is accessible in all cases to any member of the general public; deplores that the information on beneficial ownership of trusts is, as a general rule, subject to legitimate interest and calls, therefore, on Member States to make use of the option in AMLD5 to grant open access also to information on trusts, and calls on the Commission to put forward a legislative proposal to amend AMLD5 to make open access to information of trusts compulsory; stresses that the interconnection of registers should be ensured by the Commission; considers that the Commission should closely monitor the functioning of this interconnected system and assess within a reasonable time whether it is working properly and whether it should be supplemented by the establishment of an EU public register of beneficial ownership;
Amendment 877 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 133
Paragraph 133
133. Notes that the Union’s AML legislation obliges Member States to establish central registers containing complete beneficial ownership data for companies and trusts, and that it also provides for their interconnection; welcomes the fact that AMLD5 obliges Member States to ensure that the information on beneficial ownership is accessible in all cases to any member of the general public; calls on Member States to establish freely accessible and open data registers; stresses that the interconnection of registers should be ensured by the Commission; calls on the Commission to develop and issue technical guidelines to facilitate convergence of format, interoperability and interconnection of Member States’ registers considers that the Commission should closely monitor the functioning of this interconnected system and assess within a reasonable time whether it is working properly and whether it should be supplemented by the establishment of an EU public register of beneficial ownership;
Amendment 883 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 133 a (new)
Paragraph 133 a (new)
133 a. Is concerned of the poor quality of the beneficial ownership information collected in the national registers and calls on the EBA to monitor the correctness of the information;
Amendment 889 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 136
Paragraph 136
136. Underscores the problem of money laundering through investment in real estate in European cities through foreign shell companies; recognises that these type of practices have serious externalities on house prices in local markets that negatively affect the access to affordable housing of the residents in those cities; recalls that the Commission should assess the necessity and proportionality of harmonising the information in the land and real estate registers and assess the need for the interconnection of those registers; calls on the Commission, if appropriate, to accompany the report with a legislative proposal; is concerned that money laundering is also done through life insurance contracts and financial instruments and is, therefore, of the opinion that beneficial ownership information on these assets should also be available to authorities; is of the opinion that also beneficial owner should be registered in real estate registers and not only mere legal owners possibly hiding the ultimate beneficial owner and calls on the Commission to put forward a legislative proposal to amend the AMLD5 in this regard;
Amendment 896 #
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, to evade taxes 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;
Amendment 903 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 138 a (new)
Paragraph 138 a (new)
138 a. Notes that because of the anonymity provided to users by virtual currencies, transactions cannot be monitored by authorities, increasing the risk of money laundering and tax evasion; stresses in this regard that virtual currencies can be used to circumvent the exchange of information system;
Amendment 905 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 138 b (new)
Paragraph 138 b (new)
138 b. Acknowledges that the decentralised aspect of virtual currencies and the lack of clear intermediaries complicates regulation activities; welcomes the fact that AMLD5 includes some virtual currencies’ actors; regrets however that some important actors are not covered by anti-money laundering rules, like cryptocurrency exchanges, trading platforms, or software or hardware wallets;
Amendment 906 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 138 c (new)
Paragraph 138 c (new)
138 c. Calls on the Commission to issue a proposal for a EU regulation of virtual currencies, including licensing requirements and uplifting anonymity;
Amendment 926 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 141
Paragraph 141
141. Recalls that EU AML legislation requires Member States to lay down sanctions for breaches of anti-money laundering rules; stresses that these sanctions must be effective, proportionate and dissuasive; recalls that EU AML legislation requires Member States to publish information and statistics on AML enforcement actions, and in particular that a decision imposing an administrative sanction or measure for breach of EU AML legislation shall be published by the competent authorities on their official website immediately after the person sanctioned is informed of that decision and that the publication shall include at least information on the type and nature of the breach and the identity of the persons responsible; urges Member States to also publish the nature and value of the sanctions imposed; calls on Member States to also apply sanctions and measures to the members of the management body and to other natural persons who under national law are responsible for a breach of anti-money laundering rules;
Amendment 935 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 145
Paragraph 145
145. Takes note of the Methodology for identifying high-risk third countries under Directive (EU) 2015/849 published on 22 June 2018 (SWD(2018)0362) and calls on the Commission to make the blacklisting process fully transparent to the public;
Amendment 947 #
2018/2121(INI)
147. Is worried about the accelerating corporate, dividend or capital gains tax race to the bottom worldwide in terms of nominal tax rate76 77 ; _________________ 76 The average corporate income tax rate across the OECD dropped from 32.5 % in 2000 to 23.9 % in 2018. Overall, 22 of the 38 countries surveyed in the latest tax policy reform 2018 report from the OECD now have combined statutory corporate income tax rates equal to or below 25 %, compared with only six in 2000. Source: OECD and Selected Partner Economies, Tax Policy Reforms 2018. 77 It is also worth noting that the EU 28 are already well below this level, with an average corporate income tax rate in 2018 of 21.9 %, down from 32 % in 2000, according to the Commission: Taxation Trends in the European Union - Data for the EU Member States, Iceland and Norward, 2018 Edition (page 36) and Taxation Trends in the European Union - Data for the EU Member States, Iceland and Norward, 2015 Edition (page 147).
Amendment 951 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 149
Paragraph 149
149. Calls on the Commission to conduct a mapping exercise to analyse the extent of reciprocity in the exchange of information between the US and Member States; calls on the Council to give a mandate to the Commission to negotiate an agreement with the US to ensure reciprocity in the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA); calls on the Commission and Council to consider sanctions, like withholding tax on payments of EU-source income or the introduction on the list of non-cooperative jurisdictions for tax purposes, if the US does not ensure reciprocity in the FATCA;
Amendment 960 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 150
Paragraph 150
150. Recalls the importance of a common EU list of non-cooperative jurisdictions for tax purposes (hereinafter ‘EU list’) based on comprehensive, transparent, robust, objectively verifiable and commonly accepted criteria that is regularly updated, accompanied by appropriate and dissuasive countermeasures;
Amendment 966 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 151
Paragraph 151
151. Welcomes the adoption by the Council of the first EU list on 5 December 2017 and the ongoing monitoring of the commitments made by third countries; is of the opinion that also EU countries should be included in the screening of non- cooperative jurisdictions for tax purposes; notes that the list has been updated several times on the basis of the assessment of those commitments; underlineregrets that this assessment is based on criteria deriving from a technical scoreboard and that Parliament had no legal involvement in this process; calls in this context on the Commission and the Council to inform Parliament in detail ahead of any proposed change to the list; calls on the Council to publish a regular progress report regarding black- and grey-listed jurisdictions as part of the regular update from the CoC Group to the Council;
Amendment 978 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 152
Paragraph 152
152. Deeply regrets the lack of transparency during the initial listing process; welcomes, however, the improvement in transparency made by the disclosure of letters sent to jurisdictions screened by the CoC Group, as well as the set of commitment letters received; calls for all remaining undisclosed letters to be made publicly available to ensure scrutiny and proper implementation of commitments; recommends to put countries that refuse to disclose their commitment letter on the blacklist;
Amendment 980 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 152 a (new)
Paragraph 152 a (new)
152 a. Recommends that the blacklisting process be made by a panel of independent experts rather than by the CoC group, so as to increase the objectivity and transparency of the EU list and to make it free from any political interference; believes that a more transparent and objective EU list will improve the credibility of the EU in its fight against tax havens;
Amendment 983 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 153
Paragraph 153
153. Welcomes the recent clarifications from the CoC Group on fair taxation criteria, especially regarding the lack of economic substance for jurisdictions having no corporate income tax rate or a rate close to 0 %; calls on the Member States to work towards the gradual improvement of the EU listing criteria to cover all harmful tax practices79 , including criteria like the advantages given to non- residents or the transparency of the tax ruling system; _________________ 79 Work on fair taxation criteria 2.1 and 2.2 of Council conclusions 14166/16 of 8 November 2016.
Amendment 996 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 154 b (new)
Paragraph 154 b (new)
154 b. Notes that the negotiations between the EU and Switzerland on the revision of the bilateral approach to reciprocal market access are still ongoing; calls on the Commission to ensure that the final agreement between the EU and Switzerland contains a tax good governance clause including specific rules on State aid under the form of a tax advantage, transparency requirements regarding the automatic exchange of information on taxation and beneficial ownership as well as anti-money laundering provisions;
Amendment 998 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 154 a (new)
Paragraph 154 a (new)
154 a. Is concerned that Austrian residents who hold bank accounts with credit institutions in Liechtenstein are not affected by the Act on Common Reporting Standards if their capital incomes are yielded from asset structures (private foundations, establishments, trusts and the like), and the credit institution in Liechtenstein takes care of the taxation in accordance with bilateral treaties; calls on Austria to change its law in this regard so as to close the loophole of the CRS;
Amendment 1009 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 155 a (new)
Paragraph 155 a (new)
155 a. Calls for the setting up of dissuasive and EU-wide harmonised sanctions for the blacklisted countries; recommends that the coordinated denunciation by Member States of bilateral tax treaties with those countries be considered as one of the last resort sanctions;
Amendment 1014 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 156 a (new)
Paragraph 156 a (new)
156 a. Notes that sanctions and countermeasures are essential to fight against money laundering, tax evasion and tax avoidance; notes in this regard that the economic weight of the European Union is a strength and can be a deterrent for tax havens and non-cooperative jurisdictions that would politically and economically suffer from such sanctions;
Amendment 1018 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 158
Paragraph 158
158. Reiterates its call for the EU to have a leading role in the global fight against tax evasion, aggressive tax planning and money laundering, in particular through Commission initiatives in all related international forums; considers that the EU should also lead by example, and calls on the Commission to ensure that those with a commercial or vested interest in promoting tax avoidance and tax evasion should not have a role in guiding or advising the EU's policy- making on these matters;
Amendment 1032 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 159 a (new)
Paragraph 159 a (new)
159 a. Calls on the Commission to take a leading role in the global debate and to urgently explore the ways for the pricing of digital assets; encourages the EU institutions to take the lead in the taxing of Tech Giants to speed up the work at OECD and UN levels; recalls, however, that the EU shall not wait for a global solution and shall immediately act;
Amendment 1033 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 159 b (new)
Paragraph 159 b (new)
159 b. Asks Member States to delegate to the Commission the power to renegotiate on their behalf the tax treaties with third countries, so as to integrate the new definition of a significant digital presence in a harmonised way once it is adopted at EU level; strongly believes it is essential in order to avoid creating any loopholes in the international tax environment;
Amendment 1037 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 160
Paragraph 160
160. Calls for a global summit on remaining necessarythe urgently needed fundamental global tax reforms in order to enhance tax revenue collection, ensure an equitable tax system, strengthen international cooperation and put pressure on all countries, in particular their financial centres, to comply with transparency and fair taxation standards; calls for the Commission to take the initiative for such a summit and for the summit to allow for the establishment of the abovementioned global tax body;
Amendment 1044 #
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 mobilisationretain and mobilise their own resources for sustainable economic development;
Amendment 1050 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 161 a (new)
Paragraph 161 a (new)
161 a. Notes that the intensity of losses due to tax avoidance is substantially greater in low and middle-income countries, especially in sub-Saharan Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean, and in South Asia compared to other regions1; notes furthermore that bilateral tax treaties signed by developing countries with developed countries negatively impact their tax revenues2; ____________________ [1] Cobham, A and Petr Janský (2017) Global Distribution of Revenue Loss from Tax Avoidance https://www.wider.unu.edu/sites/default/fil es/wp2017-55.pdf [2] http://www.actionaid.org/publications/imp act-tax-treaties-revenue-collection-case- study-developing-and-least-developed
Amendment 1060 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 164
Paragraph 164
164. Welcomes the participation on an equal footing of all countries involved in the Inclusive Framework, which brings together over 115 countries and jurisdictions to collaborate on the implementation of the OECD/G20 BEPS Package; calls on the Member States to support a reform of both the mandate and functioning of the Inclusive Framework to ensure that developing countries’ interests are taken into consideration; recalls the exclusion of over 100 developing countries in negotiating the BEPS actions; recalls calls from the Group of 77 (G77) and developing countries for global reform and decision-making to take place within a global tax body under the auspices of the UN;
Amendment 1062 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 165
Paragraph 165
165. Recalls that public development aid should be directed to a greater extent towards the implementation of an appropriate regulatory framework and the bolstering of tax administrations and institutions responsible for fighting illicit financial flows; calls for this aid to be provided in the form of technical expertise in relation to resource management, financial information and anti-corruption rules; calls for this aid to also favour regional cooperation against tax fraud, tax evasion, aggressive tax planning and money laundering; stresses that this aid should include support to civil society and media in developing countries to ensure public scrutiny over domestic tax policies;
Amendment 1064 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 166
Paragraph 166
166. Expects the Commission to come up with adequate resources to implement the ‘Collect More – Spend Better’ approach, notably through its flagships programmes81 ; calls on the Commission to further develop the element of fairness of tax systems under the ‘Collect more’ pillar, focusing on progressive taxation in order to distribute tax contributions fairly and bridge economic and gender inequalities; _________________ 81 European Commission discussion paper: A Contribution to the Third Financing for Development Conference in Addis Ababa.
Amendment 1068 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 167
Paragraph 167
167. Recalls the need for fair treatment of developing countries when negotiating tax treaties, taking into account their particular situation and ensuring a fair allocation of tax rights according to genuine economic activity and value creation; calls, in this regard, for adherence to the UN model tax convention to be used as a minimum standard and for transparency around treaty negotiations to be ensured; acknowledges that the OECD model tax treaty grants more rights to the country of residence, favouring European and North-American multinational companies; calls on EU Member States to consider as well the Model Double Taxation Agreement developed by the African Tax Administration Forum (ATAF);
Amendment 1070 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 167 a (new)
Paragraph 167 a (new)
167 a. Calls on Member States to undertake spillover analyses when negotiating tax treaties with developing countries and when adopting its tax policies; urges the Commission to consider spillover effects of EU tax regulations, in line with the Policy Coherence for Development and produce an impact assessments of European tax policies on developing countries, in order to take better into account negative spillovers on developing countries and the special needs of those countries;
Amendment 1073 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 167 b (new)
Paragraph 167 b (new)
167 b. Notes the particular importance of transparency, including through public CBCR and public registers of beneficial owners, given the limited capacity of developing countries to meet requirements through existing exchange of information procedures; calls on the EU and its Member States to enforce the principle that listed or unlisted multinational companies of all countries and sectors, and especially those companies extracting natural resources, must adopt CBCR as a standard, requiring them to publish, as part of their annual reporting and on a country-by-country basis for each territory in which they operate, the names of all subsidiaries and their respective financial performance, relevant tax information, assets and number of employees, and to ensure that this information is made publicly available, while minimising administrative burdens by excluding micro-enterprises; calls on the European Union and its Member States to ensure that, when negotiating tax and investment treaties with developing countries, income or profits resulting from cross-border activities should be taxed in the source country where value is extracted or created;
Amendment 1088 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 170 a (new)
Paragraph 170 a (new)
170 a. Recalls the article 79 of the Political Declaration Setting Out The Framework For The Future Relationship Between the European Union and The United Kingdom and insists that the future relationship must ensure open and fair competition and that provisions to ensure this should cover State Aid, competition, social and employment standards, environmental standards, climate change, and relevant tax matters, building on the level playing field arrangements provided for in Withdrawal Agreement and commensurate with the overall economic relations;
Amendment 1094 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 170 b (new)
Paragraph 170 b (new)
170 b. Notes with concerns the fact the United Kingdom was ranked 2nd biggest conduit for tax havens after The Netherlands1, and ranked 23rd on the 2018 Financial Secrecy Index, accounting for 17% of the global market in off shorefinancial services; deplores the fact the UK remains in the centre of a largenetwork of British secrecy jurisdictions, notably the Crown Dependencies Jersey, Guernsey and the Isle of Man and to Overseas Territories including tax havens such as Cayman Islands, British Virgin Islands or Bermuda; underlines that the Cayman Islands ranked on the 3rd place, Guernsey on the 10th place, British Virgin Islands on 16th and Jersey on 18th place of the respective index; ________________ [1] Offshore Financial Centers and the five largest value conduits in the world, July 2017, University of Amsterdam. http://corpnet.uva.nl/ofcs/
Amendment 1095 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 170 c (new)
Paragraph 170 c (new)
170 c. Notes that 90 % of the biggest global companies have a presence in a UK tax haven; states that the very light regulation in the past in the area of tax and money laundering encouraged criminal around the globe to use the UK and the City of London for their illegal activities; underlined that according to the National Crime Agency GBP 90 billion – about 4% of UK’s GDP – is laundered into the UK annually, large number coming from Russia;
Amendment 1096 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 170 d (new)
Paragraph 170 d (new)
170 d. Demands that the future deal must include a tax good governance clause and that the UK abides by exiting and ongoing EU tax legislation in return to any access to Single Market for those offering financial, legal or accountancy services;
Amendment 1098 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 170 e (new)
Paragraph 170 e (new)
170 e. Notes that Brexit will create a divergence of policies against financial crimes, tax evasion and tax avoidance between the EU and the United Kingdom, which will constitute new economic, fiscal and security risks; stresses the urgency to approve the necessary reforms in these areas and the need to reassess the financial agreements with the UK that will become a third country vis-à-vis the EU in the event of Brexit, both regarding London as a global financial center as well as its Overseas territories;
Amendment 1099 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 170 f (new)
Paragraph 170 f (new)
170 f. Calls on the Council to promptly assess the situation of Gibraltar once the Brexit is effective to include the territory in the EU list of non-cooperative jurisdictions as it is obviously non- compliant with the Council’s criteria;
Amendment 1114 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 172 a (new)
Paragraph 172 a (new)
172 a. Notes that double taxation treaties between Member States and developing countries do not usually promote source taxation, therefore benefiting multinational corporations at the expense of mobilisation of domestic resources by developing countries; notes that the lack of domestic resource mobilisation prevents fully financed public services such as healthcare or education in these countries, which disproportionately impacts women and girls; urges the Member States to mandate the Commission to review existing double taxation treaties so as to examine and address these problems, and to ensure that future double taxation treaties include gender equality provisions in addition to general anti-abuse provisions;
Amendment 1128 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 177 a (new)
Paragraph 177 a (new)
177 a. Reiterates the need for enhanced cooperation between tax administrations and financial supervisors for a joint and effective surveillance of the role of financial intermediaries and in the light that some tax-driven financial instruments may pose a risk to financial market stability and market integrity;
Amendment 1131 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 177
Paragraph 177
177. Welcomes the broad definition of both ‘intermediary’ and ‘reportable cross- border arrangement’ in the recently adopted DAC683 ; calls on all Member States to deliberately apply the EU reporting obligation also to purely domestic cases; _________________ 83 OJ L 139, 5.6.2018, p. 1.
Amendment 1146 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 178 a (new)
Paragraph 178 a (new)
178 a. Recognizes that the divergent interests between the commercial interests of the tax avoidance industry and the public mandate of the EU to minimise tax avoidance can clash in situations where conflicts of interest arise, such as public procurement contracts that require the provision of paid advice, the provision of informal or unpaid advice via official advisory and expert groups, and via revolving doors;
Amendment 1151 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 178 b (new)
Paragraph 178 b (new)
178 b. Calls on the Commission and Member States to ensure that those with a commercial or vested interests in promoting tax avoidance and tax evasion, such as big accountancy firms like Deloitte, PWC, EY and KPMG, do not have an advising role in policies to fight tax avoidance and evasion; for instance, restricting their membership in advisory and expert groups, not commissioning tax-related studies and impact assessments to these actors, regulating revolving doors, and implementing full lobby transparency rules;
Amendment 1154 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 178 c (new)
Paragraph 178 c (new)
178 c. Stresses the role played by intermediaries as facilitators and beneficiaries of ATP schemes and deplores that such intermediaries develop bespoke schemes for customers in a way that undermines the cohesion of society and operate with a business model that runs counter to the social contract;
Amendment 1156 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 179
Paragraph 179
179. Reiterates that financial institutions, advisors and other intermediaries that knowingly, systematically and repeatedly facilitate, engage or participate in money laundering or tax evasion activities should face effective, proportional and dissuasive penalties, their licences to operate should undergo serious revision and, where applicable, be prestricvented from operating in the single marketSingle Market; re-iterates its request that self-regulating professions such as lawyers and auditors should be subject to an independent oversight and calls on the Commission to put forward a proposal to amend AMLD5 in this regard;
Amendment 1171 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 181
Paragraph 181
181. Worries that whistle-blowers are often discouraged from reporting their concerns for fear of retaliation; considers that the recognition in AMLD5 of the right of whistle-blowers to present a complaint in a safe manner to the respective competent authorities when exposed to a threat or retaliation and of their right to an effective remedy constitutes a significant improvement of the situation of individuals reporting suspicions of money laundering or terrorist financing internally within the company or to a FIU; calls on Member States to implement fully-fledged whistleblower protection when transposing the AMLD5 into national law;
Amendment 1178 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 182 a (new)
Paragraph 182 a (new)
182 a. Welcomes the European Commission’s April 2018 publication of a horizontal proposal on whistleblower protection; regrets that EU staff members were not incorporated in the scope; recognizes that EU staff members are not currently afforded the same level of protections as in the proposal; urges all EU institutions, agencies, and bodies to immediately address this situation by adapting their internal rules in line with international best practices for the protection of whistleblowers;
Amendment 1188 #
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 ; underlines that according to the Council of Europe, abuses and crimes committed against journalists have a deeply chilling effect on freedom of expression and amplify the phenomenon of self- censorship; _________________ 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 1193 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 186
Paragraph 186
186. Urges theCalls on Maltese authorities to deploy all available resources to make progress in identifying the instigator of the murder of Daphne Caruana Galizia;
Amendment 1197 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 187 a (new)
Paragraph 187 a (new)
187 a. Calls on Slovak authorities to fully investigate cases of large-scale tax evasion schemes, VAT frauds and money laundering cases brought to light by Jan Kuciak´s investigations;
Amendment 1199 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 187 b (new)
Paragraph 187 b (new)
187 b. Calls on the Commission and Bulgaria to ensure the protection of Bulgarian investigative journalists in the context of the scandal revealed by Bivol, related to the use of shell companies to misuse EU funds in the country;
Amendment 1201 #
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 Commission and Member States to put in place mechanismslegislative and non- legislative proposals to protect journalists and 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; calls on the Commission to assess the possibility of taking legislative action in this area;
Amendment 1208 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 188 a (new)
Paragraph 188 a (new)
188 a. Calls on the European Commission to set up a financial support scheme for investigative journalism as soon as possible, including a permanent and dedicated budget line for the support of independent, quality media and investigative journalism in the post-2020 MFF;
Amendment 1210 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 188 b (new)
Paragraph 188 b (new)
188 b. Regrets that the Bulgarian Presidency of the Council of the EU refused to participate in a TAX3 committee hearing, failing to comply with the principle of sincere cooperation enshrined in the artcilec 4 of the TEU;
Amendment 1213 #
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 civil society concerns and expertise are heard by Member States and the Commission, but considers that intermediaries with a commercial interest in tax avoidance should no longer be members; 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) so long as they do not have a commercial interest in these issues;
Amendment 1222 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 192 a (new)
Paragraph 192 a (new)
192 a. Deplores that the Council failed to cooperate with the TAX3 Committee by not allowing the access to its documents or by doing so with a significant delay, and thus failed to comply with principle of sincere cooperation and breach of article 4 of TEU; deplores that the Bulgarian Presidency repeatedly refused to come to speak to the Committee about matters concerning the tax agenda;
Amendment 1223 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 193
Paragraph 193
193. Notes the increased communication from the CoC Group and welcomes in particular the biannual publication of its report to the Council, as well as the letters sent to jurisdictions and commitments received in the context of the EU listing process of the EU tax blacklist;
Amendment 1227 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 196 a (new)
Paragraph 196 a (new)
196 a. Calls on the CoC Group to take further measures to ensure transparency of its meetings particularly recording and publishing minutes of meetings including the positions of the different Member States on the discussed agenda;
Amendment 1229 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 197
Paragraph 197
197. Believes that the mandate of the CoC Group needs to be updated, since it addresses matters beyond the assessment of harmful EU tax practices, which is more than simply providing technical input to the decisions made by the Council; calls on the extension of the scope of the CoC Group, to enable it to deal with personal taxation issues, including CBI/RBI schemes, special schemes provided by Member States, and amnesties; calls, based on the nature of the work undertaken by the Group which is also of a political nature, for such tasks to be brought back under a framework which enables democratic control or supervision, starting by applying transparency; urges the CoC Group to apply transparency principles to its decision-making process, publishing not only the final position of the Group but also the positions of its members;
Amendment 1238 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 201
Paragraph 201
201. Takes note of the persons who refused to participate in TAX3 committee hearings as referred to in Annex XX; requests to deny non-cooperative parties the access to the European Parliament and calls on the Council and the Commission to do the same;
Amendment 1275 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 206
Paragraph 206
206. Stresses that all scenarios should be envisaged and not only shifting from unanimity to qualified majority voting through a passerelle clause, since the latter clause also requires unanimity in the Council to be triggered; calls on the Commission to issue its proposal before the end of its current mandate, early 2019;
Amendment 1283 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 208
Paragraph 208
208. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the European Council, the Council, the Commission, the ESAs, EPPO, the ECB, Moneyval, the Member States, the national parliaments, the UN, the G20, the FATF and the OECD.
Amendment 4 #
2018/2102(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
B a. Whereas the European Commission set up an expert group in January 2016 (‘Agricultural Markets Task Force - AMTF’) with a view to improve the position of farmers in the food chain; whereas its final report presented in November 2016 makes suggestions, inter alia, on how to strengthen market transparency, how to improve contractual relations within the chain and to develop legal possibilities for organising farmers’ collective action;
Amendment 5 #
2018/2102(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital B b (new)
Recital B b (new)
B b. Whereas producers do not engage sufficiently in collective price negotiations for several reasons, including the exemption in the Milk Package for milk processed by co-operatives from collective negotiations, and pooling thresholds that are too low to allow farmers to negotiate with dairies on an equal footing;
Amendment 8 #
2018/2102(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
C a. Whereas by signing the Sustainable Development Goals and the Paris Agreement, the European Union committed itself to ensuring coherence of all its policies with sustainable development, including its ecological, social and economic dimensions;
Amendment 9 #
2018/2102(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital C b (new)
Recital C b (new)
C b. Whereas the following public interest concerns that relate to the agri- food system are enshrined in the TFEU and therefore must be integrated when decisions on mergers, acquisitions and competition are taken: - a social market economy (Article 3); - a high level of employment, the guarantee of adequate social protection, the fight against social exclusion, and a high level of education, training and protection of human health (Article 9); - environmental protection with a view to promoting sustainable development (Article 11); - a high level of human health protection (Article 168); - economic, social and territorial cohesion (Article 175); - objectives of development cooperation (Article 208);
Amendment 11 #
2018/2102(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas Article 39 TFEU gives the CAP the objective of ensuring a fair standard of living for the agricultural community; whereas the future CAP should likewise aim to foster a smart, resilient and diversified agricultural sector ensuring food security; to bolster environmental care and climate action and to contribute to the environmental- and climate-related objectives of the Union; and to strengthen the socio- economic fabric of rural areas;
Amendment 20 #
2018/2102(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
D a. whereas there has been a trend of consistently rising prices of agricultural inputs over recent decades 1b , while farm gate prices farmer receive for their produce have stagnated. _________________ 1b - Eurostat Data on Price indices of agricultural products (apri_pi); also Report of European Parliament on the farm input supply chain: structure and implications (2011/2114(INI)), recital B
Amendment 22 #
2018/2102(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital D b (new)
Recital D b (new)
D b. whereas significant horizontal and vertical restructuring is underway across food systems and a spate of mega-mergers is sparking unprecedented consolidation in the seed, agro-chemical, fertiliser, animal genetics and farm machinery industries, while creating ever-bigger players in the processing and retail sectors 1c _________________ 1c Too big to feed: Exploring the impacts of mega-mergers, consolidation and concentration of power in the agri-food sector. http://www.ipes- food.org/images/Reports/Concentration_E xecSummary.pdf
Amendment 24 #
2018/2102(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital D c (new)
Recital D c (new)
D c. whereas even before the current wave of mergers between agrochemical- seed corporations, some crop species showed extreme market concentration and control by 4-5 international companies of between 75-95% of the European market 1a; Whereas most economists agree that 60% dominance is unhealthy for competition; _________________ 1a Study on Market Concentration in the EU Seed Sector http://extranet.greens- efa.eu/public/media/file/1/5728
Amendment 27 #
2018/2102(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital D d (new)
Recital D d (new)
D d. whereas EU anti-dumping rules (2013/0103(COD)) that apply to the agricultural sector, amongst other sectors, consider that environmental dumping creates unfair competition;
Amendment 28 #
2018/2102(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital D e (new)
Recital D e (new)
D e. notes that market speculation on food prices can distort the market, creating unfair competition within food supply chain; notes that food should not be treated as a commodity within financial markets;
Amendment 29 #
2018/2102(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital D f (new)
Recital D f (new)
D f. whereas the high and rapidly increasing levels of concentration in the agri-food sector reinforce the industrial food and farming model, exacerbating its social and environmental fallout and aggravating existing power imbalances; whereas breaking up these power imbalances is of paramount importance in order to achieve the goals of the CAP;
Amendment 41 #
2018/2102(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Stresses that consumers have further interests than low prices alone, including animal welfare, environmental sustainability, rural development, initiatives to reduce antibiotic use and stave off antimicrobial resistance, etc;
Amendment 43 #
2018/2102(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1 b. Considers that EU competition policy has favoured consumers’ interests and failed to ensure adequate competition between large agribusiness corporations, which has led to excessive pressure on farmers;
Amendment 53 #
2018/2102(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Takes the view that the specific characteristics of agricultural activities make it essential to have collective organisations to enable the objectives of the CAP to be attained and that such organisations and their activities must be considered compatible with Article 101 TFEU;
Amendment 56 #
2018/2102(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Takes the view that it is necessary to encourage producers to engage in collective price negotiations more strongly and effectively by raising pooling thresholds in collective negotiations and by including milk from co-operatives;
Amendment 57 #
2018/2102(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Considers that the inter-branch organisations model is the most successful form of organisation, because it provides a structure for all the players in a sector; considers that this model should be promoted by the CAPcan certainly contribute to greater transparency of market data, but practice shows that they cannot stabilise the market, because they group together producers and processors that have completely opposing interests with regard to quantities and prices on the market;
Amendment 64 #
2018/2102(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Notes the different scales of competition, and that producers not well- suited to exporting on the global market should be empowered and helped by EU policy to compete on local and regional scales, thereby enriching rural economies and counteracting rural depopulation; notes in this respect the flexibility in competition rules needed, for example to allow for procurement rules giving preference to local producers, thereby creating shorter food circuits and reviving regional and rural economies;
Amendment 69 #
2018/2102(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3 b. Expresses disappointment that the European Commission did not include in its proposal on the CMO any suggestions proposed by the Agricultural Markets Task Force;
Amendment 72 #
2018/2102(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 c (new)
Paragraph 3 c (new)
3 c. Considers that the costs of production must become the basis for price formation in contracts between retailers/processors and producers, guaranteeing at least cost-covering prices and taking into account production costs;
Amendment 84 #
2018/2102(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Notes that the highest standards of environmental and animal welfare can mean higher costs and hence that lowering standards can result in anti- competitive behaviour; Recommends the Commission to explore ways of extending the scope of competition policy to prevent such dumping within the single market and from imports to the single market;
Amendment 85 #
2018/2102(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4 b. Expresses concern about the market concentration and control allowed by the merger of giant agrochemical and seed companies. Expresses concern about the increasing market concentration and control in the agri-food sector, especially in the light of the recent decision to allow Bayer and Monsanto to merge and become “the world's largest integrated pesticides and seeds company” 1a ; Expresses concern because the EU- Commission admitted that it disregarded goals enshrined in the TFEU, notably food safety, protection of consumers, the environment and the climate, in its decision on the Bayer-Monsanto merger 2a ; _________________ 1a http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP- 17-2762_en.htm 2a European Commission – Press Release: Mergers: Commission clears Bayer’s acquisition of Monsanto, subject to conditions, Brussels, 21 March 2018, available from http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP- 18-2282_en.htm
Amendment 89 #
2018/2102(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls therefore on the Commission to ensure that the interests of farmers are protected following the acquisition of Monsanto by the Bayer group, which coul, the environment, biodiversity, climate, food security, consumer protection, social cohesion and jobs are protected following the acquisition of Monsanto by the Bayer group, which could, among other risks, reduce biodiversity of cultivated and wild plants, lead to a consolidation of lobby power by the newly formed agrochemical giant, and damage competition in the field of access to crop protection products and seeds.;
Amendment 95 #
2018/2102(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Asks for the introduction of the requirement for an impact assessment to be carried out for mega-mergers that also includes social and environmental impacts as well as effects on farmers, particularly small farmers and other public policy objectives enshrined in the TFEU;
Amendment 97 #
2018/2102(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5 b. Calls on the Commission to issue guidelines that clarify how to integrate the goals enshrined in the TFEU into future decisions on mergers, acquisitions and competition;
Amendment 98 #
2018/2102(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 c (new)
Paragraph 5 c (new)
5 c. 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 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;
Amendment 99 #
2018/2102(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 d (new)
Paragraph 5 d (new)
5 d. Deplores that the purchase of staple crops for speculative gain can not only result in hunger and starvation but also distort market competition for these widely traded commodities; Calls upon the Commission to review MiFID II to curb speculation, creating fairer competition.
Amendment 2 #
2018/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 10
Citation 10
— having regard to the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action adopted by the Fourth World Conference on Women on 15 September 1995, and to the subsequent outcome documents adopted at the UN Beijing +5 (2000), Beijing +10 (2005) Beijing +15 (2010) and Beijing +1520 (20105) special sessions,
Amendment 10 #
2018/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 21 a (new)
Citation 21 a (new)
— having regard to the Concluding observations of the CEDAW Committee on extraterritorial obligations regarding the gender impact of illicit financial flows and corporate tax avoidance of Switzerland in 2016 and of Luxembourg in 2018 1a, __________________ 1a CEDAW/C/CHE/CO/4-5, para. 40- 43(Switzerland 2016); CEDAW/C/LUX/CO/6-7, para. 10, 15, 16 (Luxembourg 2018).
Amendment 11 #
2018/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 23 a (new)
Citation 23 a (new)
Amendment 16 #
2018/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas the Charter of Fundamental Rights contains rights and principles that refer to the prohibition of direct and indirect discrimination (Art. 21 I CFREU) and equality between men and women (Art. 23 CFREU); and the rights stipulated in the CFREU are directly relevant for Member States when implementing Union law (Art. 51 CFREU) 1a __________________ 1a European Parliament Policy Department C (2017) - Gender equality and taxation in the European Union.
Amendment 25 #
2018/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) requires that families are based on principle of equality, justice and individual fulfilment for each member, treating women and men equally also in tax laws, as individuals, autonomous citizens rather than as dependents of men;
Amendment 27 #
2018/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B b (new)
Recital B b (new)
Bb. whereas Member States as signatories of the International Covenant on economic and social and cultural (ESC) have committed to comply with the obligation to mobilise the maximum resources available in order to have funds available to progressively realize Economic, Social and Cultural rights;
Amendment 28 #
2018/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B c (new)
Recital B c (new)
Bc. whereas personal income tax regulations, which implicitly disadvantage women regarding access to and conditions of employment or employer-provided pensions may violate Art. 14 of Directive 2006/54/EC on the implementation of the principle of equal opportunities and equal treatment of men and women in matters of employment 1a; __________________ 1a European Parliament Policy Department C (2017) - Gender equality and taxation in the European Union.
Amendment 50 #
2018/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I a (new)
Recital I a (new)
Ia. whereas tax cuts seem to have increased after 2015, and some multinational corporations already manage to limit their effective tax rates to less than 1% thanks to the generous possibilities provided by some Member States 1a; __________________ 1a Eurodad.(2017). Tax Games: the Race to the Bottom, Europe’s role in supporting an unjust global tax system AND European Commission (2018) 2018 European Semester: Country Reports, 7 March 2018.
Amendment 51 #
2018/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I b (new)
Recital I b (new)
Ib. whereas the loss of tax revenue to the EU through aggressive corporate tax planning is estimated to be at least 50-70 billion euro per year 1a; whereas this results in missing revenues for Member States having to either raise revenues through other forms of taxation or cutting expenditures, policies which either way impact women more; __________________ 1a http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/e tudes/STUD/2015/558773/EPRS_STU(20 15)558773_EN.pdf
Amendment 55 #
2018/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital J a (new)
Recital J a (new)
Amendment 56 #
2018/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital J b (new)
Recital J b (new)
Jb. whereas it is the poorest and most vulnerable women in all countries who face the double burden of unpaid care work and low paid precarious work1a: __________________ 1a Institute of Development Studies (2016) Redistributing Unpaid Care Work – Why Tax Matters for Women’s Rights. Policy Briefing. Issue 109. January 2016.
Amendment 65 #
2018/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital L a (new)
Recital L a (new)
La. whereas in some Member States families can still have tax reductions when having a dependent spouse, allowances for married couples and/or tax credits for sole earner couples, which perpetuate asymmetries with single parent families, being mostly women, and fail to recognise the diversity of family situations existing in the EU; whereas such tax advantages usually disincentive the female spouse to access the labour market and directly or indirectly provoke the reallocation of women’s time from paid to unpaid work;
Amendment 97 #
2018/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Deplores that the average tax rates (ATR) for secondary earners with two children reached 31% on average for the EU15 and 28% for all OECD countries in 20141a; __________________ 1a European Parliament Policy Department C (2017) - Gender equality and taxation in the European Union.
Amendment 109 #
2018/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on the Member States to eliminate tax-related disincentives to female employment and self-employment and to design refundable tax credits and other fiscal benefits or services for secondary earners and single parents based on individual income;
Amendment 125 #
2018/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Notes that differences in corporate wealth and labour market structures result in gender-differentiated effects of corporate taxes; and that the benefit women derive from corporate tax reductions and tax incentives is smaller compared to men, as women are considerably under-represented in the group of business owners or corporate shareholders, as well as among new venture and business creations1a; __________________ 1a European Parliament Policy Department C (2017) - Gender equality and taxation in the European Union.
Amendment 130 #
2018/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Deplores the persistence of gender gaps in women’s property ownership, particularly of major assetacross the EU in wealth in financial assets, property ownership, business assets, insurance entitlements, pensions savings and stock options14 ; notes that the reduction of capital gains and property taxes primarily benefits men, as they are more likely to control such resources15 ; __________________ 14 Action Aid. Making tax work for women’s rights. 15 Institute of Development Studies (2016) Redistributing Unpaid Care Work – Why Tax Matters for Women’s Rights. Policy Briefing. Issue 109.
Amendment 133 #
2018/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Deplores that overall, the contribution of wealth based taxes to overall tax revenues has remained rather limited, reaching 5.8 percent of overall tax revenues in the EU15 and 4.3 percent in the EU281a; __________________ 1a European Parliament Policy Department C (2017) - Gender equality and taxation in the European Union.
Amendment 134 #
2018/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 b (new)
Paragraph 14 b (new)
14b. Deplores that the share of taxes on capital has shown a declining trend since 2002 as a consequence, inter alia, of the general tendency of no longer applying the regular personal income tax schedule to capital incomes, but rather taxing them at relatively moderate flat rates observable in many Member States1a; __________________ 1a European Parliament Policy Department C (2017) - Gender equality and taxation in the European Union.
Amendment 136 #
2018/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Notes that the share of consumption taxes rose in the Union from 2009 to 2016; notes that VAT typically accounts for between two thirds and three quarters of consumption taxes in the Member States and that VAT has reached a share of about one fifth of overall tax revenues on average in the EU1a; __________________ 1a European Parliament Policy Department C (2017) - Gender equality and taxation in the European Union.;
Amendment 152 #
2018/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19a. Recalls as well the European Parliament position1a of PANA, TAX and TAX2 committees regarding the creation of a global body within the UN framework, well equipped and with sufficient additional resources to ensure that all countries can participate on an equal footing in the formulation and reform of global tax policies; Calls on such body to be provided with gender expertise and mandating it to review national, regional and global tax policy according to gender equality and human rights obligations; __________________ 1a Texts adopted, P8_TA(2017)0491
Amendment 156 #
2018/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21a. Calls on the Commission and Member States to perform spill-over analysis of their taxation policies to assess the impact of their tax policies on other countries, including the gender bias they could impose, especially on developing countries and on their ability to raise domestic revenues to finance women’s rights;
Amendment 181 #
2018/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)
Paragraph 25 a (new)
25a. Calls on the Commission to promote best practices on taxation policies that take gender impact into account and promote gender equality, particularly in terms of taxation of household income and VAT; Calls on the Commission to include a gender analysis in its annual Taxation Trends in the European Union report;
Amendment 188 #
2018/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 a (new)
Paragraph 27 a (new)
27a. Regrets that majority of Member States fail to collect or evaluate individualised income tax data and many Member States still collect the data on a households level only through joint tax provisions;
Amendment 154 #
2018/2046(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 68 a (new)
Paragraph 68 a (new)
68 a. Recalls the 2014 ECA analysis which estimated the costs of the geographic dispersion of the Parliament to be EUR 114 million per year; furthermore, notes the finding from its resolution of 20 November 2013 on the location of the seats of the European Union’s Institutions1a that 78 % of all missions by Parliament statutory staff arise as a direct result of the Parliament's geographic dispersion; emphasises that the report also estimates the environmental impact of the geographic dispersion to be between 11 000 to 19 000 tonnes of CO2 emissions; reiterates the negative public perception caused by this dispersion and calls therefore for a roadmap to a single seat and a reduction in the relevant budget lines; _________________ 1a OJ C 436, 24.11.2016, p. 2.
Amendment 38 #
2018/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 34 a (new)
Citation 34 a (new)
- having regard to the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights and the responsibility to Protect, Respect and Remedy,
Amendment 39 #
2018/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 34 b (new)
Citation 34 b (new)
- having regard to the UN Agenda 2030 and the Sustainable Development Goals,
Amendment 40 #
2018/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 34 c (new)
Citation 34 c (new)
- having regard to the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction and ‘Priority 3: Investing in disaster risk reduction for resilience’ including Article 30 (m) to ‘to promote, as appropriate, the integration of disaster risk reduction considerations and measures in financial and fiscal instruments,
Amendment 41 #
2018/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 34 d (new)
Citation 34 d (new)
- having regard to the UNISDR and CRED report entitled The Human Cost of Weather Related Disasters,
Amendment 80 #
2018/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. StressesNotes that, while supporting sustainable finance is urgently necessary, we should not overlook the fact that the financial sector as a whole and its core function of allocating capital to benefit society should be governed by the values of equity and sustainability; notes that green-washing of financial products can constitute a risk to market stability; emphasises in that respect the instrumental role of economic, fiscal and monetary policy in fostering sustainable finance by facilitating capital allocation to decarbonisedzed, disaster resilient and resource- efficient economic activities which are able to reduce the current need for future resources and thereby capable of meeting EU sustainability goals; insists that a substantial price for greenhouse gas emissions is a key component of a functioning and efficient environmental and social market economy;
Amendment 91 #
2018/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Amendment 93 #
2018/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2 b. Deplores that the EU is not on track to meet its already modest target for spending on climate-related projects; further regrets that the methodology used in order to track climate-related spending is both contradictory and inconsistent across programmes, allowing for projects with doubtful environmental and climate benefits to qualify as climate-related expenditure;
Amendment 94 #
2018/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 c (new)
Paragraph 2 c (new)
2 c. Underlines that the methodology used in order to track climate-related spending leads to inconsistency across programmes, allowing for projects with doubtful environmental and climate benefits to be qualified as climate-related expenditure (e.g. the greening component of CAP);
Amendment 95 #
2018/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Emphasises the massive systemic risks that stranded carbon assets represent to financial stability; stresses the need for the identification and mandatory reporting of these assets as essential to the orderly transition to climate-positive investments; recommends the extension of the consideration of stranded assets to include ecological systems fundamental to human life such as the nitrogen cycle and pollination; calls for the introduction of ‘carbon stress tests’ for banks and other financial intermediaries to determine the risks related to such stranded assets; calls on EBA to develop standards on how to assess carbon-related risks, disclose them and include them in the bank-internal risk assessment process; notes that the concept of ‘stranded assets’ is invaluable in connecting climate risks to financial incentives; recommends, in view of the multi-faceted nature of the ecological crisis, that this concept is extended to encompass other existential risks, such as, to our food and water supply.
Amendment 107 #
2018/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls on the Member States, in coordination with the Commission and the EIB, to evaluate their national and collective public investment needs to ensure that the EU is on track to meet its climate change goals within the next five years; as well as attaining the UN Sustainable Development Goals by 2030; welcomes the clarification provided by EUROSTAT on the treatment of energy performance contracts in national accounts as such clarified treatment may unlock considerable public capital flows towards a sector that currently accounts for three-quarters of the EU’s 2030 clean energy investment gap; asks the Commission to explore further a qualified treatment for public investments related to ESG goals so as to spread the cost of these projects over the lifecycle of related public investment;
Amendment 137 #
2018/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 – point 1
Paragraph 6 – point 1
1. a minimum standard aligned with the Paris Agreement and the do-no-harm principle in accordance with ESG risk analysis; of ESG risks and factors which builds on the UNEP Inquiry Definition of sustainability factors, is aligned with the Paris Agreement, the UN Sustainable Development Goals, Agenda 2030 and in line with international human rights, and international humanitarian, labour and environmental laws and the do-no-harm principle in accordance with ESG risk analysis, including at a minimum: (a) Environmental factors –climate change risks, bio-diversity ,waste, pollution, water security and deforestation, and remaining within planetary boundaries (b) Social factors – human rights (including Free, Prior and Informed Consent of local communities), customary rights, workers` rights, women’s and children´s rights, health and safety, and conflict situations (c) Governance factors –corporate governance, tax strategies, remuneration and measures to tackle corruption, tax avoidance and evasion and money laundering
Amendment 176 #
2018/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8 a. Asks the Commission to explore whether credit guidance could be provided to the banking sector with a view of ensuring that a gradually increasing share of the balance sheet size would be earmarked to ESG related sectors;
Amendment 178 #
2018/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 b (new)
Paragraph 8 b (new)
8 b. Stresses that, since finance is a means to an end, financial flows should become aligned with policy objectives, notably on sustainability; recommends that the Commission implements this commitment through a sustainability test of all financial legislative proposals to ensure that they integrate clear objectives to realign financial flows with EU sustainability policy objectives; underlines however that fostering sustainable finance may not undermine prudential regulation;
Amendment 180 #
2018/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 c (new)
Paragraph 8 c (new)
8 c. Calls on the European Commission to introduce an over-arching, mandatory due diligence framework based on the 2017 OECD Guidelines for Responsible Business Conduct for Institutional Investors, requiring investors to identify, prevent, mitigate and account for ESG factors and risks, with public disclosure through obligation of annual reporting;
Amendment 187 #
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 and the CRD-CRR;
Amendment 209 #
2018/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11 a. Highlights that sustainable finance requires a clarification of European companies’ directors’ duties concerning long-term sustainable value creation, ESG matters, and systemic risks, as part of the directors’ overarching duty to promote the success of the company; calls on the Commission to integrate these aspects of directors’ duties in the European corporate governance framework, stresses that aligning the legal duties of investors with those of company directors through a revision of SRD II and NFRD would also contribute to creating the correct ecosystem to achieve the goals of sustainable finance, in particular in addition to the appropriate standards of corporate reporting and due diligence, as well as the information necessary for investors in their own decision-making;
Amendment 215 #
2018/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Asks that stewardship form an integral part of the legal duties of investors to be reflected through disclosure of major holdings, engagement activities, the use of proxy advisers and the use of passive investment vehicles; recommends that passive funds, led by index-based investment, should be encouraged to disclose their stewardship activities and the extent to which the use of passive indexing and benchmarking allows for the proper identification of ESG risks in investee companies; considers that index providers should be asked to provide details of the exposure of widely used and referenced benchmarks to climate and sustainability parameters;
Amendment 229 #
2018/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Notes that green bonds represent only a tiny fraction of the investment market and one that is poorly regulated and where information is weak and subject to green-washing; notes in this regard the urgent need for a uniform standard for green bonds; insists that such green bonds should be verified and supervised by public authorities; and should include periodic reporting on the environmental impacts of the underlying assets; underlines that green bonds should also respect negative criteria and must not include any form of fossil fuel asset, nuclear power or investment in aviation infrastructure nor breach core social and human rights; suggests that the development of the standard for an EU green bond should take place in full transparency with a specific Commission working group subject to scrutiny by the European Parliament;
Amendment 242 #
2018/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14 a. Notes that SMEs are often forgotten in discussions concerning sustainable finance, despite their innovative nature; notes in this context the vast potential of digitalisation and green Fintech; recommends that the Commission considers mechanisms to enable SMEs to bundle projects in order to allow them access to the green bond market;
Amendment 250 #
2018/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Notes that existing credit-rating agencies do not integrate the influence of disruptive ESG trends in issuers’ future credit-worthiness; calls for clear EU standards and supervision regarding the integration of ESG factors in ratings for all credit-rating agencies operating in the EU to be further specified by ESMA; calls for the establishment of an accreditation process for a ‘Green Finance Mark’ by certifying agents supervised by the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA); requests, in this regard, the Commission to put forward a revision of the CRA Regulation;
Amendment 264 #
2018/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16 a. Emphasises that the identification, management and disclosure of environmental, social and governance risks are integral parts of consumer protection and financial stability and should thus fall under the mandate of the supervisory duties of the ESAs; asks the ESRB to actively pursue research on the interplay of ESG factors and systemic risk, beyond climate change;
Amendment 277 #
2018/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17 a. Acknowledges that there is a widespread deficit in sustainable-finance- related project development capacity in the EU; recommends therefore the establishment of an EU Observatory on Sustainable Finance to provide the institutional capacity to oversee the development of green and sustainable taxonomies and labels;
Amendment 278 #
2018/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 b (new)
Paragraph 17 b (new)
17 b. Demands that all future EU spending must be Paris-compatible with objectives relating to the decarbonisation of the economy being included in the legal instruments regulating the operation of European Structural and Investment Funds (including cohesion funds), the funds for external action and development cooperation and other instruments outside the Multiannual Financial Framework such as the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI);
Amendment 279 #
2018/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 c (new)
Paragraph 17 c (new)
17 c. Calls on the Commission to conduct a feasibility study into how supervisors and regulation might better reward mandates that include long term perspectives;
Amendment 280 #
2018/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 d (new)
Paragraph 17 d (new)
17 d. Calls on EIOPA to provide best practice and guidelines on how providers of occupational pension schemes and private pension products engage with beneficiaries pre-contractually and throughout the life of the investment; calls on EIOPA to provide guidelines on best practice, such as the UK Environmental Agency Fund, for engaging with beneficiaries and retail clients and ascertaining their financial and non-financial interests;
Amendment 283 #
2018/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Notes that the EIB has a mixed record on climate action; insists that the EIB should only agree to future lending that is compatible with a 1.5 °C climate limit; advises that the EIB is in a position to provide more risk capital for the green transition; is of the opinion that further measures should be undertaken with that perspective, including inter alia, in interaction with EU financial instruments in the next Multiannual Financial Framework;
Amendment 292 #
2018/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18 a. Recommends that the EIB work with small market participants and community cooperatives to undertake bundling of small-scale renewable energy projects to enable them to be eligible for EIB funding and as part of the CSPP programme;
Amendment 294 #
2018/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 b (new)
Paragraph 18 b (new)
18 b. Demands that the EIB ensures that at least a third of its board members have active experience in the field of sustainable finance;
Amendment 297 #
2018/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 c (new)
Paragraph 18 c (new)
18 c. Supports the recommendation made by the HLEG group to establish a ‘Sustainable Infrastructure Europe’ facility to expand the size and quality of the EU pipeline of sustainable assets; notes that the Commission should pay attention to possible gender biases inherent in infrastructure projects and should ensure not to neglect investments in social infrastructure;
Amendment 298 #
2018/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 d (new)
Paragraph 18 d (new)
18 d. Concurs with the HLEG group that it is of paramount importance to empower and connect Europe’s citizens with sustainable finance issues; underlines the need of improving access to information on sustainability performance and promoting financial literacy;
Amendment 300 #
2018/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 e (new)
Paragraph 18 e (new)
Amendment 1 #
2018/2005(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph –1 (new)
Paragraph –1 (new)
-1. Acknowledges that the industrialised world is a net importer of the biosphere of other regions, as its ecological footprint impacts upon their ecosystems, including land and water use; acknowledges that liberalised global trade contributes towards environmental degradation and the depletion of resources in less industrialised countries
Amendment 11 #
2018/2005(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Stresses that, in order to achieve our climate commitments and in the interest of policy coherence for development, it is vital that all trade agreements are developed and implemented in conformity with the Paris Agreement and the Agenda 2030 for Sustainable Development; calls for the Trade and Sustainable Development Chapters of FTAs between the EU and third countries to include the implementation of the Paris Agreement as a mandatory commitment, with sanctions for noncompliance;
Amendment 12 #
2018/2005(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Stresses the need for subsidiarity in trade, giving preference to short supply chains, which ensure greater security for consumers and farmers, and reduce farmers' exposure to volatility, whilst also reducing the carbon footprint and environmental impact of supply chains; stresses the need for fair agricultural supply chains that first and foremost protect citizens and environment over investors’ or multinationals’ interests
Amendment 29 #
2018/2005(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses that harnessing globalisation should involve both strengthening global discipline to prevent unfair competition and distortions of trade in agriculture, and avoiding undue exposure of sensitive EU agricultural sectors to competition from imports of products that are not subject to similar standards, costs and constraints as regards, for example, environmental protection, fundamental labour rights and animal welfare;
Amendment 39 #
2018/2005(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Stresses that trade in agricultural goods must ensure food security and healthy, balanced diets in EU and third countries whilst ensuring minimum use of energy and resources;
Amendment 42 #
2018/2005(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Calls for EU trade agreements to include strict rules prohibiting transfer mispricing, amongst other means of avoiding taxation liabilities;
Amendment 44 #
2018/2005(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Calls for common measures of product information and labelling, the introduction of a mandatory country-of- origin labelling scheme for meat;
Amendment 45 #
2018/2005(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 c (new)
Paragraph 2 c (new)
2c. Urges to incorporate the precautionary principle as laid down in Article 191 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU in all trade agreements under negotiations and future agreements, to ensure a higher level of protection through preventative decision- taking in the case of risk to human health or the environment without restrictions from trade partners or the WTO whenever required;
Amendment 61 #
2018/2005(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Recognises that an export orientation in agricultural goods often leads to intensive industrial farming methods that are environmentally damaging and jeopardise the livelihoods of small-scale and subsistence farmers and the wellbeing of rural communities;
Amendment 67 #
2018/2005(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Emphasizes our responsibility towards developing countries; calls on indicators that drive fair and sustainable trade for poor communities - not just trade for its own sake; reminds to integrate sustainable development goals into trade policy at all levels to avoid the risks of damage to livelihoods by giving real opportunities to developing countries and to ensure that development cooperation, which also aims to strengthen agricultural production in these countries, will not be undermined by trade agreements;
Amendment 84 #
2018/2005(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Stresses the need, therefore, to integrate considerations of trade subsidiarity in trade agreements and within trade policy as a whole, to give preference to sustainable short supply chains, both in the EU and in third countries, and local production for local consumption;
Amendment 99 #
2018/2005(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Stresses the importance of strong coordination between Member States for the screening of foreign direct investment (FDI) on the EU market; draws attention to the need to avoid the excessive concentration of farmland and forests in foreign (non-EU) hands; recalls, in this respect, its resolution of 27 April 2017 on the state of play of farmland concentration in the EU3 ;and notes that excessive concentration of farmland and forests, regardless of ownership, in the EU or in third countries, can endanger food sovereignty, food security and water security; stresses that trade agreements should also follow, where relevant, the FAO Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land, Fisheries and Forests _________________ 3 Texts adopted, P8_TA(2017)0197.
Amendment 105 #
2018/2005(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6b. Calls for legislation that requires and enables due diligence in the supply chain, to trace raw materials to their origin and to put the duty of vigilance with regard to human rights, environmental and social standards on companies at each step of the supply chain;
Amendment 117 #
2018/2005(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Welcomes the Commission’s initiative to create an advisory group on EU trade negotiations composed of representatives of stakeholders; insists on the need for the strong representation of EU farming organisations, small- and medium-scale farmers, subsistence farmers and indigenous peoples in such a group.
Amendment 8 #
2018/0413(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2 a (new)
Recital 2 a (new)
(2 a) VAT fraud is often linked with organised crime and a very small number of those organised networks can be responsible for billions of euro in cross- border VAT fraud, affecting not only revenue collection in Member States but also having a negative impact on the Union’s own resources. Therefore, Member States have a shared responsibility for the protection of the VAT revenue of all Member States.
Amendment 10 #
2018/0413(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) A central electronic information system ‘CESOP’ where Member States transmit payment information they store at national level, would achieve the objective of fighting e-commerce VAT fraud more effectively. This system should aggregate, in relation to individual payees, all VAT relevant information regarding payment transactions transmitted by Member States and should allow for a full overview of payments received by payees from payers located in the Member States. Furthermore, this information system should recognise multiple records from the same payment transactions, clean the information received from the Member States (e.g. remove duplicates, correct error in data, etc.) and permit Eurofisc liaison officials of Member States to cross-check payment data with the VAT information they dispose of and make enquiries for the purpose of an investigation into suspected VAT fraud or to detect VAT fraud. All Member States should participate in all Eurofisc working groups and appoint liaison officials accordingly.
Amendment 12 #
2018/0413(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11 a (new)
Recital 11 a (new)
(11 a) Given the low number of Member States publishing estimates of VAT losses due to intra-community fraud, having comparable data on intra-Community VAT fraud would contribute to better targeted cooperation between Member States. Therefore, the Commission, together with the Member States, should develop a common statistical approach to quantify and analyse VAT fraud.
Amendment 14 #
2018/0413(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) It is necessary and proportionate that payment service providers retain records of the information in relation to payment transactions for a twohree-years period to assist Member States fight e- commerce VAT fraud and detect fraudsters. This period constitute the minimum necessary for Member States to carry out controls effectively and investigate into suspected VAT fraud or detect VAT fraud, and it is proportionate considering the massive volume of the payment information and its sensitivity in terms of protection of personal data.
Amendment 15 #
2018/0413(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) Each Member States’ Eurofisc liaison officials should be able to access and analyse the information in relation to the payment transactions for the purpose of fighting VAT fraud. Duly accredited persons of the Commission should access the information only for the purpose of developing and maintaining the central electronic information system and to ensure the proper implementation of this regulation. Both groups of users should be bound by the confidentiality rules laid down in this Regulation. In addition, it should be possible for the Commission to conduct visits in Member States to evaluate how the administrative cooperation arrangements work.
Amendment 16 #
2018/0413(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 a (new)
Regulation (EU) No 904/2010
Chapter II – Section 2 – Article 12a (new)
Chapter II – Section 2 – Article 12a (new)
(1 a) in Section 2 of CHAPTER II, the following Article is added: "Article 12a All Member States shall implement a set of operational targets for reducing the percentage of late replies and improving the quality of requests for information and shall inform the Commission about those targets."
Amendment 18 #
2018/0413(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point d
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point d
Regulation (EU) No 904/2010
Article 24c – paragraph 2
Article 24c – paragraph 2
2. CESOP shall retain the information referred to in points (a) and (b) of paragraph 1 for a maximum period of twohree years from the expiry of the year when the information was transferred into the system.
Amendment 19 #
2018/0413(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 a (new)
Regulation (EU) No 904/2010
Chapter X – Article 36 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Chapter X – Article 36 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
(2 a) in Article 36(2), the introductory part is replaced by the following: "2. The liaison officials of the Member States participating in a particularthe relevant Eurofisc working field (hereinafter ‘participating Eurofisc liaison officials’) shall designate a coordinator (hereinafter ‘Eurofisc working field coordinator’), among the participating Eurofisc liaison officials, for a limited period of time. Eurofisc working field coordinators shall: " Or. en (https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2010/904/oj)
Amendment 20 #
2018/0413(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point d
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point d
Regulation (EU) No 904/2010
Article 24d
Article 24d
The Commission shall grant access to information stored in CESOP to Eurofisc liaison officials, who hold a user identifier for CESOP, where the information is required for the purpose of investigations into suspected VAT fraud or to detect VAT fraud. In addition, it should be possible for the Commission to conduct visits in Member States to evaluate how cooperation arrangements on cross-border VAT fraud between Member States work.
Amendment 21 #
2018/0413(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EU) No 904/2010
Article 37 – subparagraph 1a (new)
Article 37 – subparagraph 1a (new)
The annual report shall at a minimum indicate in detail in relation to each Member State the number of controls carried out andleast indicate in detail in relation to each Member State: - the number of controls carried out; - the number of officials authorised to be present in the offices of the administrative authorities of another Member State and the number of officials present during the administrative enquiries carried out in the territory of the requested Member State; - the number of simultaneous controls organised with one or several Member States and the number of participation of officials to pre-selection meetings for simultaneous controls; - the number of Joint Audit Teams each Member States has participated in; - the actions done in order to inform auditors about the instruments under this Regulation; - the number of qualified human resources to ensure presence in administrative offices, participation in administrative enquiries and simultaneous controls (as referred to in Articles 28 to 30); - the number of staff in the single central liaison office, other designated liaison departments and competent officials who can directly exchange information on the basis of this Regulation (as referred to in Article 4) and how information is being collected and exchanged between these bodies; and - the additional VAT assessed and collected as a result of the information processed pursuant to Article 24d.
Amendment 22 #
2018/0413(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new)
Regulation (EU) No 904/2010
Chapter XIII – Article 49a (new)
Chapter XIII – Article 49a (new)
(3 a) in CHAPTER XIII, the following Article is added: "Article 49a Member States and the Commission shall establish a common system of collecting statistics on intra-Community VAT fraud and shall publish national estimates of VAT losses resulting from that fraud, as well as estimates for the Union as a whole. The Commission shall adopt by means of implementing acts the practical arrangements for such statistical system. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 58(2)."
Amendment 23 #
2018/0413(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new)
Regulation (EU) No 904/2010
Chapter XIV – Article 50 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Chapter XIV – Article 50 – paragraph 1 a (new)
(3 a) in Article 50 of CHAPTER XIV, the following paragraph is inserted: "1a. When a Member State provides wider information to a third country than that provided for under Chapters II and III of this Regulation, that Member State may not refuse to provide that information to any other Member State requesting cooperation or having an interest to receive it."
Amendment 13 #
2018/0412(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) In accordance with Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council46 , it is important that the obligation on a payment service provider, to retain and provide information in relation to a cross-border payment transaction, should be proportionate and should only be what is necessary for Member States to fight e-commerce VAT fraud. Furthermore, the only information relating to the payer that should be retained is where the payer is located. With regard to information relating to the payee and the payment transaction itself, payment service providers should only be required to retain and transmit to tax authorities information which is necessary for tax authorities to detect possible fraudsters and to carry out VAT controls. Therefore, payment service providers should only be required to retain records on cross-border payment transactions which are likely to indicate economic activities. The introduction of a ceiling based either on the number of payments received by a payee over the course of a calendar quarter or on a minimum amount per payment would give a reliable indication that those payments were received as part of an economic activity, thereby excluding payments for non- commercial reasons. Where such a ceiling is reached, the accounting obligation of the payment service provider would be triggered. _________________ 46Regulation (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 L119, 04.05.2016, p.1).
Amendment 18 #
2018/0412(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) Due to the significant volume of information and its sensitivity in terms of the protection of personal data, it is necessary and proportionate that payment service providers retain records of the information in relation to cross-border payment transactions for a twohree-year period in order to assist Member States fight e- commerce VAT fraud and detect fraudsters. This period constitutes the minimum necessary for Member States to carry out controls effectively and to investigate suspected VAT fraud or to detect VAT fraud.
Amendment 22 #
2018/0412(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point -1 (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point -1 (new)
Directive 2006/112/EC
Title IV – Chapter 1 – Article 16
Title IV – Chapter 1 – Article 16
(-1) in Chapter 1 of Title IV, Article 16 is amended as follows: "Article 16 The application by a taxable person of goods forming part of his business assets for his private use or for that of his staff, or their disposal free of charge or, more generally, their application for purposes other than those of his business, shall be treated as a supply of goods for consideration, where the VAT on those goods or the component parts thereof was wholly or partly deductible. However, tThe application of goods for business use as samples or as gifts of small value shall not be treated as a supply of goods for consideration. gifts of small value to charity organisations shall also be treated as a supply of goods even if the VAT on these goods or the component parts thereof is not wholly or partly deductible. However, the application of goods for business use as samples shall not be treated as a supply of goods for consideration." Or. en (https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:32006L0112)
Amendment 23 #
2018/0412(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point -1 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point -1 a (new)
Directive 2006/112/EC
Title IX – Chapter 7 – Article 148 – points (e), (f), (g)
Title IX – Chapter 7 – Article 148 – points (e), (f), (g)
(-1 a) in Chapter 7 of Title IX, points (e), (f) and (g) of Article 148 are deleted.
Amendment 29 #
2018/0412(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b
(b) in respect of the transfer of funds referred to in point (a), where a payment service provider executes more than 25 payment transactions to the same payee in the course of a calendar quarter or executes transactions of a monetary value of minimum EUR 2500 in one payment transaction.
Amendment 34 #
2018/0412(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b
Directive 2006/112/EC
Article 243b – paragraph 3 – point a
Article 243b – paragraph 3 – point a
(a) be kept by the payment service provider in electronic format for a period of twohree years from the end of the year during which the payment transaction was executed;
Amendment 28 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Title 1
Title 1
Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL amending Regulation (EU) 2016/1011 on low carbon benchmarks and positive carbon impactclimate transition benchmarks (Text with EEA relevance)
Amendment 51 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) It is furthermore necessary to introduce a clear distinction between low- carbon and positive carbon impact benchmarks. While the underlying assets in aclimate transition benchmarks. The category of low- carbon benchmark should be selected with the aim of reducing carbon emissions of the index portfolio when compared to the parent index, a positive carbon impact index should only comprise components whose emissions savings exceed their carbon emissionsis focused on companies or segments of a specific market that are already compliant with the goals of the Paris Climate Agreement in the sense of being on a decarbonisation pathway that would keep global warming to 1.5°C by the end of this century. This benchmark overweights the economic activities that accelerate the decarbonisation of the market in question and underweights those that must decline for it to comply with the selected decarbonisation pathway.
Amendment 55 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) Each company whose assets are selected as underlying in a positive impact benchmark should save more carbon emissions than it produces, hence have a positive impact on the environment. The asset and portfolio managers who claim to pursue an investment strategy compatible with the Paris Climate Agreement should therefore use positive carbon impact benchmarksThe climate transition benchmark indicates that an index is on a trajectory to achieve compliance with the Paris 1.5°C warming limit. Each company whose assets are selected as underlying must have in place a plan to reduce its carbon emissions gradually in accordance with a decarbonisation pathway that is based on a climate scenario in which global warming remains limited to 1.5°C. These plans must be made public and be credible in the sense that they represent a genuine commitment to decarbonisation and in the sense of being sufficiently detailed and technically viable.
Amendment 61 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) A variety of benchmark administrators claim that their benchmarks pursue environmental, social and governance (‘ESG’) objectives. The users of those benchmarks do however not always have the necessary information on the extent to which the methodology of those benchmark administrators takes into account those ESG objectives. The existing information is also often scattered and does not allow for effective comparison for investment purposes across borders. To enable market players to make well-informed choices, benchmark administrators should be required to disclose how their methodology takes into account the ESG factors for each benchmark or family of benchmarks that is promoted as puakes ESG factorsu ing ESG objectivesto consideration. That information should also be disclosed in the benchmark statement. The administrators of benchmarks that do not promote or take into account the ESG objectives, should not be subject to this disclosure obligation.
Amendment 65 #
2018/0180(COD)
(16) For the same reasons, administrators of low-carbon and of positive carbon impactclimate transition benchmarks should equally publish their methodology used for their calculation. That information should describe how the underlying assets were selected and weighted and which assets were excluded and for what reason. The benchmark administrators should also specify how the low carbon benchmarks differ from the underlying parent index, notably in terms of the applicable weights, market capitalisation and financial performance of the underlying assets. To assess how the benchmark contributes to the environmental objectives, the benchmark administrator should disclose how the carbon footprint and carbon savings of the underlying assets were measured, their respective values, including the total carbon footprint of the benchmark, and the type and source of the data used. To enable asset managers to choose the most appropriate benchmark for their investment strategy, benchmark administrators should explain the rationale behind the parameters of their methodology and explain how the benchmark contributes to the environmental objectives, including its impact on climate-change mitigation. The published information should also include details on the frequency of reviews and the procedure followed.
Amendment 70 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
Amendment 74 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17 a (new)
Recital 17 a (new)
(17a) It is important that the key elements of the methods used to compile low carbon and climate transition benchmarks have a solid foundation in climate science. This will routinely be achieved by adhering to the Paris Climate Agreement, for example, by using a climate scenario and corresponding decarbonisation path that is aligned with the goals of the Paris Agreement.
Amendment 79 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) To ensure continued adherence to the selected climate-change mitigation objective, administrators of low-carbon and positive carbon impactclimate transition benchmarks should regularly review their methodologies and inform users of the applicable procedures for any material change. When introducing a material change, benchmark administrators should disclose the reasons for that change and explain how the change is consistent with the benchmarks’ initial objectives.
Amendment 81 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) In order to enhance transparency and ensure an adequate level of harmonization, 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 to specify further the minimum content of the ESG-related disclosure obligations that benchmark administrators that take into account the ESG objectives should be subject to, and to specify the minimum standards for harmonization of the methodology of low- carbon and positive carbon impact benchmarks, including the method for the calculation of carbon emissions and carbon savings associated with the underlying assets, taking into account the Product and Organisation Environmental Footprint methods as defined in points (a) and (b) of point 2 of Commission Recommendation 2013/179/EU31climate transition benchmarks. The Commission should not prescribe a specific method, but should ensure that the methods are robust and evidence based. It is of particular importance that the Commission carry out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level, and that those consultations be conducted in accordance with the principles laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Law-Making of 13 April 2016. In particular, to ensure equal participation in the preparation of delegated acts, the European Parliament and the Council receive all documents at the same time as Member States’ experts, and their experts systematically have access to meetings of Commission expert groups dealing with the preparation of delegated acts. _________________ 31 Commission Recommendation 2013/179/EU of 9 April 2013 on the use of common methods to measure and communicate the life cycle environmental performance of products and organisations (OJ L 124, 4.5.2013, p. 1).
Amendment 90 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Regulation (EU) 2016/1011
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 23 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 23 a (new)
(23a) ‘low-carbon benchmark’ means a benchmark wherein which the underlying assets, for the purposes of point 1(b)(ii) of this paragraph, ar are selected so that their activities are consistent with a 1.5°C Paris warming target, which is constructed in accordance with the standards laid down in the sdelecgated so that the resulting benchmark portfolio has less carbon emissions when compared to the assets that comprise a standard capital- weighted benchmark and which is constructed in accordance with the standards laid down in the delegated acts referred to in Article 19a(2)acts referred to in Article19a(2), and in which the underlying asset portfolio is not exposed to companies engaged in any of the following economic activities: – the exploration, extraction, distribution and processing of fossil fuels; – the construction and maintenance of power plants that burn fossil fuels; – the construction, operation and maintenance of aviation infrastructure;
Amendment 96 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Regulation (EU) 2016/1011
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 23 b (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 23 b (new)
(23b) ‘positive carbon impactclimate transition benchmark’ means a benchmark where the underlying assets, for the purposes of point 1(b)(ii) of this paragraph, are selected on the basis that their carbon emissions savings exceed thethat meets all of the following requirements: (i) the underlying assets selected for the benchmark are on a trajectory to become aligned with the Paris Agreement to limit global warming to 1.5°C; (ii) the asset issuers’ emissions reduction plans must include measurable targets and time-based targets that are robust and evidence-based; (iii) the companies responsible for the underlying assets have in place emissions reduction plans that are detailed and disaggregated down to the level of individual physical asset's carbon footprint and whichto enable a judgment to be made about it; (iv) the asset issuers must report annually on the progress made towards these targets; (v) the benchmark is constructed in accordance with the standards laid down in the delegated acts referred to in Article 19a(2).”;
Amendment 109 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a
Regulation (EU) 2016/1011
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point d (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point d (new)
(d) an explanation of how the key elements of the methodology laid down in point (a) reflect environmental, social or governance (‘ESG’) factors for each benchmark or family of benchmarks which pursue or take into account ESG objectives;;
Amendment 112 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a a (new)
Regulation (EU) 2016/1011
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
Amendment 115 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point b
Regulation (EU) 2016/1011
Article 13 – Paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 13 – Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 49 to specify further the minimum content of the explanation referred to in points (d) and (e) of paragraph 1 as well as the standard format to be used.;
Amendment 119 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EU) 2016/1011
Title III – Chapter 3 a (new) – title
Title III – Chapter 3 a (new) – title
Low-carbon and positive carbon impactclimate transition benchmarks
Amendment 123 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EU) 2016/1011
Title III – Chapter 3 a (new) – Article 19 a – title
Title III – Chapter 3 a (new) – Article 19 a – title
Low-carbon and positive carbon impactclimate transition benchmarks
Amendment 129 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EU) 2016/1011
Title III – Chapter 3 a (new) – Article 19 a – paragraph 1
Title III – Chapter 3 a (new) – Article 19 a – paragraph 1
(1) The requirements laid down in Annex III shall apply to the provision of, and contribution to, low-carbon or positive carbon impactclimate transition benchmarks in addition to, or as a substitute for, the requirements of Title II, III and IV.
Amendment 137 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EU) 2016/1011
Title III – Chapter 3 a (new) – Article 19 a – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Title III – Chapter 3 a (new) – Article 19 a – paragraph 2 – introductory part
(2) The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 49 to specify further the minimum standards for low- carbon and positive carbon impactclimate transition benchmarks, including:
Amendment 142 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EU) 2016/1011
Title III – Chapter 3 a (new) – Article 19 a – paragraph 2 – IP – point c
Title III – Chapter 3 a (new) – Article 19 a – paragraph 2 – IP – point c
(c) the method for the calculation of carbon emissionsgeneral methodological framework and decarbon isavings associated with the underlying assetstion pathway for the benchmark.;
Amendment 144 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EU) 2016/1011
Title III – Chapter 3 a (new) – Article 19 a – paragraph 2 – IP – point c a new
Title III – Chapter 3 a (new) – Article 19 a – paragraph 2 – IP – point c a new
(ca) the standard format for the disclosures required in Annex III."
Amendment 149 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
2a. For each requirement in paragraph 2, a benchmark statement shall contain an explanation of how environmental, social and governance factors are reflected forin each benchmark or family of benchmarks provided and published which pursue, including their degree of alignment with the goals orf take into account ESG objectiveshe Paris Climate Agreement.
Amendment 155 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) 2016/1011
Article 27 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Article 27 – paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 49 to specify further the information referred to in in paragraph 2a. as well as standardised formats for its presentation.
Amendment 159 #
2018/0180(COD)
4a. In Article 54, the following paragraph is inserted: “3a. Once a comprehensive and detailed framework for sustainable investment, of which the [Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the establishment of a framework to facilitate sustainable investment] is a first building block, has entered into force, the Commission shall publish without undue delay a report on the feasibility of including in Regulation (EU) 2016/1011 provisions for a 'sustainability benchmark' or 'ESG benchmark’ on the basis of the framework for sustainable investment. This report shall be sent to the European Parliament and to the Council. The Commission shall make accompanying proposals as appropriate.”;
Amendment 165 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – subheading 1
Annex I – subheading 1
Low-carbon and positive carbon impactclimate transition benchmarks
Amendment 170 #
2018/0180(COD)
Amendment 186 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – point 1 – point d
Annex I – point 1 – point d
(d) the criteria fmethodological framework and the methods of how the low carbon benchmark measures the carbon footprint and carbon savings associated with the underlying assets in the index portfoliodecarbonisation pathway selected for the benchmark as well as the metrics and thresholds used to select, weight and exclude the economic activities in accordance with the decarbonisation pathway and to assess the exposure of the underlying assets to such economic activities;
Amendment 191 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – point 1 – point e
Annex I – point 1 – point e
Amendment 198 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – point 1 – point f
Annex I – point 1 – point f
Amendment 204 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – point 1 – point g
Annex I – point 1 – point g
Amendment 215 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – point 1 – point h – introductory part
Annex I – point 1 – point h – introductory part
(h) the type and source of input data used for the selection of assets or companies eligible for the low carbon benchmark, including:;
Amendment 216 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – point 1 – point h – point i
Annex I – point 1 – point h – point i
Amendment 221 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – point 1 – point h – point ii
Annex I – point 1 – point h – point ii
Amendment 224 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – point 1 – point h – point iii
Annex I – point 1 – point h – point iii
Amendment 228 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – point 1 – point h – point iv
Annex I – point 1 – point h – point iv
Amendment 231 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – point 1 – point h – point v
Annex I – point 1 – point h – point v
Amendment 240 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – point 1 – point i
Annex I – point 1 – point i
(i) the total carbon-footprint exposure of the index portfolio and the estimated impacts on climate- change mitigation, as defined by the goals of the Paris Agreement, of the low carbon strategy pursued by the benchmark;
Amendment 244 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – point 1 – point k
Annex I – point 1 – point k
Amendment 250 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – subheading 3
Annex I – subheading 3
Amendment 254 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – point 2
Annex I – point 2
2. The administrator of a positive carbon impact benchmark, iIn addition to the obligations applicable to the administrator of a low carbon benchmark, shall disclose the positive carbon impact of each underlying asset included in the benchmark and shall specify the formula or calculation that is used to determine wheadministrators of climate transition benchmarks shall disclose, for each asset in the benchmark, the measurable and time-based targets as well as details about the asset issuers' decarbonisation plans and their annual progress reports. Administrators shall further disclose their the emission savings exceed the investment asset's or company's carbon footprint ('positive carbon impact ratio').methodological frameworks and decarbonisation pathways selected for the benchmark as well as the metrics and thresholds used to select, weight and exclude the economic activities in accordance with the decarbonisation pathway and to assess the exposure of the underlying assets to such economic activities
Amendment 259 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – point 3
Annex I – point 3
Amendment 266 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – point 4
Annex I – point 4
4. Administrators of low-carbon and positive carbon impactclimate transition benchmarks shall regularly examineview their methodologies at least annually to ensure that they reliably reflect the relevant low-carbon or positive carbclimate transition objectives and shall have a process in place for taking the views of all relevant users into account.”.
Amendment 51 #
2018/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) A common objective of Directive 2009/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council32 , Directive 2009/138/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council33 , Directive 2011/61/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council34 , Directive 2014/65/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council35 , Directive (EU) 2016/97 of the European Parliament and of the Council36 , Directive (EU) 2016/2341 of the European Parliament and of the Council37 , Regulation (EU) No 345/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council38 and Regulation (EU) No 346/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council39 is to facilitate the taking- up and pursuit of the activities of undertakings for collective investment in transferable securities (UCITS), alternative investment fund managers (AIFMs), insurance undertakings, investment firms, insurance intermediaries, institutions for occupational retirement provision (IORPs), managers of qualifying venture capital funds (EuVECA managers), and managers of qualifying social entrepreneurship funds (EuSEF managers). Those Directives and Regulations ensure more uniform protection of end-investors and make it easier for them to benefit from a wide range of financial products and services, and at the same time provide for rules that enable investors to make informed investment decisions. While those objectives have been largely achieved, disclosures to end-investors on the integration of sustainability risks and sustainable investment targets in investment decision-making by UCITS management companies, AIFMs, insurance undertakings, investment firms which provide portfolio management, IORPs, pension providers, EuVECA managers, credit institutions and EuSEF managers (financial market participants) and disclosures to end- investors on the integration of sustainability risks in advisory processes by insurance intermediaries which provide insurance advice with regard to insurance- based investment products (IBIPs) and investment firms which provide investment advice (financial advisors) are insufficiently developed because such disclosures are not yet subject to harmonised requirements. _________________ 32 Directive 2009/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 July 2009 on the coordination of laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to undertakings for collective investment in transferable securities (UCITS) (OJ L 302, 17.11.2009, p. 32). 33 Directive 2009/138/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2009 on the taking-up and pursuit of the business of Insurance and Reinsurance (Solvency II) (OJ L 335, 17.12.2009, p. 1). 34 Directive 2011/61/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2011 on Alternative Investment Fund Managers (OJ L 174, 1.7.2011, p. 1). 35 Directive 2014/65/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 May 2014 on markets in financial instruments and amending Directive 2002/92/EC and Directive 2011/61/EU (OJ L 173, 12.6.2014, p. 349). 36 Directive (EU) 2016/97 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 January 2016 on insurance distribution (OJ L 26, 2.2.2016, p. 19). 37 Directive (EU) 2016/2341 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 December 2016 on the activities and supervision of institutions for occupational retirement provision (IORPs) (OJ L 354, 23.12.2016, p. 37). 38 Regulation (EU) No 345/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 April 2013 on European venture capital funds (OJ L 115, 25.4.2013, p. 1). 39 Regulation (EU) No 346/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 April 2013 on European social entrepreneurship funds (OJ L 115, 25.4.2013, p. 18).
Amendment 64 #
2018/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) Remuneration policies of financial market participants and financial advisors should be consistent withThe variable remuneration component in an employee’s overall remuneration package is intended to create incentives for positive behaviour in their daily work. Aligning the culture of the financial sector with the Unions’ commitments under the Paris Agreement to combat climate change and the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals requires changing these integration of sustainability risks and, where relevant, scentive structures to incorporate sustainable investing and the avoidance of sustainability risks as goals. The aim can no longer be better-than-average performance in purely financial terms, but musta inable investment targets and should be designed to contribute to long-term sustainable growthclude the above-mentioned goals and commitments. Therefore this Regulation requires that financial service providers set a sustainable investment target of at least 50 per cent when establishing performance criteria for variable remuneration. Pre-contractual disclosures should therefore include information on how the remuneration policies of those entities are consistent with the integration of sustainability risks and are in line, where relevant, withwhat the sustainable investment targets of the financial products and services are that the financial market participants make available or financial advisors advise on.
Amendment 66 #
2018/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5 a (new)
Recital 5 a (new)
(5a) The definition of sustainability risks shall comprise not only the impact of the non-mitigation of environmental, social and governance risks on the performance of a financial product, but importantly the adverse non-financial impact that the non-mitigation of these risks has on the broader society. The definition of such risks is required to ensure a minimum level of consistency in regulatory outcomes, but is also meant as an evolving and dynamic tool able to integrate emerging risks.
Amendment 87 #
2018/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a – point iv a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a – point iv a (new)
(iva) a credit institution.
Amendment 89 #
2018/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
(da) ‘credit institution’ means a credit institution as defined in Article 4(1)(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 with the exception of small and non-complex institutions defined under Article 4(1), point 144a thereof;
Amendment 90 #
2018/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) ‘investment firm’ means an investment firm as defined in Article 4(1)(1) of Directive 2014/65/EU with the exception of small and non- interconnected investment firms defined under Article 12 of Regulation [PO : Please insert reference to Regulation on the prudential requirements of investment firms];
Amendment 94 #
2018/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point n a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point n a (new)
(na) “relevant competent authorities” means the competent or the designated authorities for the supervision of financial market participants referred to under point a of this Article;
Amendment 101 #
2018/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point o – point i
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point o – point i
(i) investments in an economic activity that contributes substantially to an environmental objective, including an environmentally sustainable investment as defined in Article 2 of [PO: Please insert reference to Regulation on the establishment of a framework to facilitate sustainable investment] and does not harm the objectives of investments under points (ii) and (iii);
Amendment 104 #
2018/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point o – point ii
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point o – point ii
(ii) investments in an economic activity that contributes substantially to a social objective, and in particular an investment that contributes to tackling inequality, an investment fostering social cohesion, social integration and labour relations, or an investment in human capital or economically or socially disadvantaged communities and does not harm the objectives of investments under points (i) and (iii);
Amendment 107 #
2018/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point o – point iii
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point o – point iii
(iii) investments in companies that do not harm the objectives of investment under points (i) and (ii) and contribute substantially to following good governance practices, and in particular companies with sound management structures, employee relations, remuneration of relevant staff and tax compliance;
Amendment 109 #
2018/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point o – point iii – indent 1 (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point o – point iii – indent 1 (new)
Amendment 111 #
2018/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point s a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point s a (new)
Amendment 116 #
2018/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point s b (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point s b (new)
(sb) ‘due diligence’ is the continuous process through which an investor or investment services provider identifies, prevents, mitigates and communicates about their actual and potential sustainability risks, prior to making an investment and until sale or maturity of the investment in accordance with the OECD's work on "Responsible business conduct for institutional investors: Key considerations for due diligence under the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises" and the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights.
Amendment 119 #
2018/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – title
Article 3 – title
Amendment 120 #
2018/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1
1. Financial market participants shall publish written policies ohave in place written and sufficiently detailed due diligence policies and report them to the relevant competent authorities on an annual basis. As a minimum, these concern the integration of sustainability risks in the investment decision-making procesir governance structures, investment strategies, risk management procedures, the exercise of their shareholder voting rights and engagement with companies. They shall publish these policies on their websites in written form.
Amendment 131 #
2018/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2
Article 3 – paragraph 2
2. Insurance intermediaries which provide insurance advice with regard to IBIPs and investment firms which provide investment advice shall publish written policies ohave in place written and sufficiently detailed due diligence policies and report them to relevant competent authorities on an annual basis. As a minimum, these concern the integration of sustainability risks in their investment advice or insurance advice on their websites. activities, their governance structures, investment strategies, risk management procedures and engagement with companies. They shall publish these policies on their websites in written form.
Amendment 137 #
2018/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. The information to be disclosed pursuant to paragraphs 1 and 2 shall be published in a clear way and in a prominent area of the website to be understandable to different stakeholders, including the general public, and to ensure accessibility and comprehension by a non-specialised audience.
Amendment 138 #
2018/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. The Commission shall adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 9a to specify: (a) binding standards for the due diligence policies that financial market participants and insurance intermediaries must implement to ensure that adverse sustainability risks are integrated in the activities referred to paragraphs 1 to 2 of this Article; (b) the details of the presentation and content of the information to be disclosed pursuant to paragraphs 1 to 2a.
Amendment 146 #
2018/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the due diligence procedures and conditions applied for integrating sustainability risks in investment decisions;
Amendment 148 #
2018/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
(aa) how much, in percentage terms, of a financial product made available is invested in economic activities that are defined as sustainable unsustainable under Regulation [PO: Please insert reference to Regulation on the establishment of a framework to facilitate sustainable investment];
Amendment 152 #
2018/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the extent to which sustainability risks are expected to have a relevant impact on the returnstemming from the economic activities of the financial products made available;
Amendment 159 #
2018/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) how the remuneration policies of financial market participants are consistent with the integration of sustainability risks and are in line, where relevant, with the sustainable investment target of the financial productthe requirements in Article 4(a).
Amendment 167 #
2018/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) the due diligence procedures and conditions applied for integrating sustainability risks in investment advice or insurance advice;
Amendment 168 #
2018/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
(aa) the percentage to which the financial products advised on are invested in economic activities defined as sustainable/ unsustainable under Regulation [PO: Please insert reference to Regulation on the establishment of a framework to facilitate sustainable investment];
Amendment 170 #
2018/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) the extent to which sustainability risks are expected to have a relevant impact on the returnstemming from the economic activities of the financial products advised on;
Amendment 174 #
2018/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) how the remuneration policies of investment firms which provide investment advice and insurance intermediaries which provide insurance advice with regard to IBIPs are consistent with the integration of sustainability risks and are in line, where relevant, with the sustainable investments target of the financial product advised onthe requirements in Article 4(a).
Amendment 179 #
2018/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. The European Banking Authority (EBA), European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority (EIOPA)and the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) shall, through the Joint Committee of the European Supervisory Authorities (‘Joint Committee’) develop draft regulatory technical standards further specifying the alignment of the provisions referred to under paragraph 3 with the requirements of paragraph 1 and 2, relating to the details of the presentation and content of the information to be disclosed pursuant to this Article. EBA, EIOPA and ESMA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by [PO: Please insert date 12 months after the date of entry into force]. Power is delegated to the Commission to adopt the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010, of Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010 and of Regulation(EU) No 1095/2010.
Amendment 180 #
2018/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 a (new)
Article 4 a (new)
Article 4a Integration of Sustainability in Remuneration Policies When establishing and applying the total remuneration policies, inclusive of salaries and discretionary pension benefits, for categories of staff including senior management, risk takers, staff engaged in control functions and any employee receiving total remuneration that takes them into the same remuneration bracket as senior management and risk takers, whose professional activities have a material impact on their risk profile, financial market participants shall set a sustainable investment target of at least 50 per cent for the variable remuneration component. The targets that determine the remaining part of variable remuneration shall include the avoidance of sustainability risks as defined in Article 2.
Amendment 189 #
2018/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
(aa) an explanation as to how the indicators listed in Article 2(1)(sa) are considered in the methodology of the index
Amendment 197 #
2018/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Where a financial product has as its target the reduction inis explicitly intended to be in alignment with the Paris Agreement on climate change or aims to reduce carbon emissions, the information to be disclosed pursuant to Article 4(1) shall include the targeted degree of alignment with the Paris Agreement or low carbon emission exposure.
Amendment 201 #
2018/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 5 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
By way of derogation from paragraph 2, where no [EU low carbon benchmark] or [positive carbon impact benchmark] in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2016/1011 is available, the information referred to in Article 4 shall include a detailed explanation of how the continued effort of reaching the target of reducing carbon emissions and/or attaining the goals of the Paris Agreement is ensured.
Amendment 203 #
2018/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1
EBA, EIOPA and ESMA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by [PO: Please insert date 182 months after the date of entry into force].
Amendment 210 #
2018/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
The information to be disclosed pursuant to the first subparagraph shall be published in a clear way and in a prominent area of the websiteclear, succinct and understandable for retail investors and the general public. It shall be published in a clear way and in a prominent area of the website. The website shall also provide more detailed information for professional investors and other experts. Where relevant, the information for retail investors shall include hyperlinks to the detailed information for professional investors.
Amendment 212 #
2018/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
EBA, EIOPA and ESMA shall, through the Joint Committee, develop draft regulatory technical standards further specifying the details of the content and presentation and content of information referred to in point (a) and (b) of of information referred to in paragraph 1, specifying the alignment of the provisions referred to under paragraph 2 with the requirements of paragraph 1 relating to the details of the content and presentation of information referred to in this paragraph. EBA, EIOPA and ESMA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by [PO: Please insert date 12 months after the date of entry into force]. The Commission shall adopt delegated acts in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No1093/2010, of Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010 and of Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010 concerning the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph 1.
Amendment 225 #
2018/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
EBA, EIOPA and ESMA shall, through the Joint Committee, develop draft regulatory technical standards further specifying the details of the content and presentation of information referred to in paragraph 1, specifying the alignment of the provisions referred to under paragraph 2 with the requirements of paragraph 1 relating to the details of the content and presentation of information referred to in this paragraph.
Amendment 227 #
2018/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
EBA, EIOPA and ESMA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by [PO: Please insert date 182 months after the date of entry into force].
Amendment 229 #
2018/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 1
1. Financial market participants shall ensure thatreview any information published in accordance with Article 3 or Article 6 at least annually and ensure that this information is kept up-to-date. Where a financial market participant amends such information, a clear explanation of that change shall be published on the same website.
Amendment 234 #
2018/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 a (new)
Article 9 a (new)
Article 9a Exercise of the delegation 1. The Commission shall adopt delegated acts subject to the conditions laid down in this Article. 2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article3 shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. 3. The delegation of power referred to in paragraph 2 may be revoked at any time by the European Parliament or 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. 4. As soon as it adopts a delegated act, the Commission shall notify it simultaneously to the European Parliament and to the Council. 5. A delegated act adopted pursuant to Articles 2 (..), 3(2b) shall enter into force only if no objection has been expressed either by the European Parliament or the Council within a period of two months of notification of that act to the European Parliament and the Council or if, before the expiry of that period, the European Parliament and the Council have both informed the Commission that they will not object. That period shall be extended by two months at the initiative of the European Parliament or of the Council.
Amendment 238 #
2018/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1
Article 11 – paragraph 1
By [PO: Please insert date 6024 months after the date of entry into force], the Commission shall conduct an evaluation of the application of this Regulation in particular as regards social and governance factors and indicators, their integration in investment decisions and pre-contractual disclosures. It shall submit the evaluation report to the European Parliament and the Council. The Commission shall, if appropriate, accompany that review with a legislative proposal establishing uniform criteria for determining socially sustainable economic activities and good governance practices, leading to the establishment of a unified EU classification system.
Amendment 332 #
2018/0178(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
(d a) Irrespective of the technical screening criteria referred to in point (d), the following economic activities shall not be considered environmentally sustainable: (i) the exploration, extraction, production, distribution, storage and processing of fossil fuels; (ii) the generation and distribution of nuclear power, including the construction of new nuclear power stations, the decommissioning of nuclear power stations as well as the exploration and extraction of fissile materials for the generation of nuclear power; (iii) the production of weapons of war of any kind and all other firearms; (iv) the cultivation, processing and sale of tobacco; (v) agricultural activities that are intensive and highly dependent on the use of chemicals, including intensive animal farming; (vi) the construction, operation and maintenance of aviation infrastructure;
Amendment 337 #
2018/0178(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 a (new)
Article 3 a (new)
Article 3 a Criteria for economic activities with a negative environmental impact For the purposes of establishing the degree of environmental sustainability of an investment, an economic activity shall be considered to be an economic activity with a negative environmental impact if it significantly harms any of the environmental objectives set out in Article 5, in accordance with Article 12. Irrespective of the technical screening criteria referred to in Article 12 paragraph 1 a (new), the following economic activities shall be considered economic activities with a significant negative environmental impact: (i) the exploration, extraction, production, distribution, storage and processing of fossil fuels; (ii) the generation and distribution of nuclear power, including the construction of new nuclear power stations as well as the exploration and extraction of fissile materials for the generation of nuclear power; (iii) the production of weapons of war of any kind and all other firearms; (iv) the cultivation, processing and sale of tobacco; (v) agricultural activities that are intensive and highly dependent on the use of chemicals, including intensive animal farming; (vi) the construction, operation and maintenance of aviation infrastructure;
Amendment 23 #
2018/0164(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) When the Council adopted in 1967 the common system of value added tax (VAT) by means of Council Directives 62/227/EEC24 and 67/228/EEC25 , the commitment was made to establish a definitive VAT system for the taxation of trade between Member States operating in a similar way as it would within a single Member State. Since the political and technical conditions were not ripe for such a system, when the fiscal frontiers between Member States were abolished by the end of 1992 transitional VAT arrangements were adopted. Council Directive 2006/112/EC26 , which is currently in force, provides that these transitional rules have to be replaced by definitive arrangements based in principle on the taxation in the Member State of origin of the supply of goods or services. However, these rules have now been in place for several decades, resulting in a complex transitional VAT system prone to intra- EU cross-border VAT fraud. These transitional arrangements suffer from numerous shortcomings, which result in the VAT system being neither fully efficient nor compatible with the requirements of a true single market. _________________ 24 First Council Directive 67/227/EEC of 11 April 1967 on the harmonisation of legislation of Member States concerning turnover taxes (OJ 71, 14.4.1967, p. 1301). 25 Second Council Directive 67/228/EEC of 11 April 1967 on the harmonisation of legislation of Member States concerning turnover taxes — Structure and procedures for application of the common system of value added tax (OJ 71, 14.4.1967, p. 1303). 26 Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (OJ L 347, 11.12.2006, p. 1).
Amendment 26 #
2018/0164(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) The overall rule for supplies of goods, including intra-Union supplies of goods, and for supplies of services should be that the supplier is liable for the payment of the VAT. These new principles will enable the Member States to better fight VAT fraud, especially Missing Trader Intra-Community (MTIC), estimated to amount to at least €50 billion a year.
Amendment 27 #
2018/0164(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 14 a (new)
Recital 14 a (new)
(14 a) Strict criteria, applied in a harmonised way by all Member States, need to be put in place to determine which enterprises can benefit from the status of the certified taxable person, and common rules and provisions resulting in fines and penalties for those who do not comply with them should be established.
Amendment 28 #
2018/0164(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 14 b (new)
Recital 14 b (new)
(14 b) The Commission shall be responsible to present further guidelines and verify the proper application by Member States of these harmonised criteria across the Union.
Amendment 35 #
2018/0164(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 a (new)
Directive 2006/112/EC
Article 8
Article 8
(4 a) Article 8 is replaced by the following: "Article 8 If the Commission considers that the provisions laid down in Articles 6 and 7 are no longer justified, particularly in terms of fair competition or own resources, it shall present appropriate proposals to the Council. European Parliament and to the Council." Or. en (https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX:32006L0112)
Amendment 36 #
2018/0164(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Directive 2006/112/EC
Article 13a – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3
Article 13a – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3
Where the applicant is a taxable person who has been granted the status of an authorised economic operator for customs purposes, the criteria in paragraph 2 shall be deemed to have been met for the purpose of this Directive.
Amendment 44 #
2018/0164(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Directive 2006/112/EC
Article 13a – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Article 13a – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
A taxable person who applies for the status of a certified taxable person shall supply all the information required by the tax authorities in order to enable them to take a decision. Tax authorities should be subject to harmonised criteria across Member States regarding the supply of information.
Amendment 48 #
2018/0164(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Directive 2006/112/EC
Article 13a – paragraph 5
Article 13a – paragraph 5
5. Where the application is refused, the grounds for refusal shall be notified by the tax authorities to the applicant together with the decision. Member States shall ensure that the applicant is granted a right of appeal against any decision to refuse an application. Shall the refusal of certified taxable person be carried after the appeal no application thereafter should be considered in that or any other Member State for a period of five years.
Amendment 63 #
2018/0164(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 56 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 56 a (new)
Directive 2006/112/EC
Article 145 – paragraph 1
Article 145 – paragraph 1
(56 a) in Article 145, paragraph 1 is replaced by the following: "1. The Commission shall, where appropriate, as soon as possible, present to the European Parliament and to the Council proposals designed to delimit the scope of the exemptions provided for in Articles 143 and 144 and to lay down the detailed rules for their implementation. " Or. en (https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX:32006L0112)
Amendment 64 #
2018/0164(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 59 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 59 a (new)
Directive 2006/112/EC
Article 150 – paragraph 1
Article 150 – paragraph 1
(59 a) in Article 150, paragraph 1 is replaced by the following: "1. The Commission shall, where appropriate, as soon as possible, present to the European Parliament and to the Council proposals designed to delimit the scope of the exemptions provided for in Article 148 and to lay down the detailed rules for their implementation. " Or. en (https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX:32006L0112)
Amendment 65 #
2018/0164(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 68 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 68 a (new)
Directive 2006/112/EC
Article 166
Article 166
(68 a) Article 166 is replaced by the following: "Article 166 The Commission shall, where appropriate, as soon as possible, present to the European Parliament and to the Council proposals concerning common arrangements for applying VAT to the transactions referred to in Sections 1 and 2. " Or. en (https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX:32006L0112)
Amendment 66 #
2018/0164(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 123 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 123 a (new)
Directive 2006/112/EC
Article 293 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 293 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
(123 a)In Article 293, paragraph 1, the introductory part is replaced by the following: "Every four years starting from the adoption of this Directive, the Commission shall present to the European Parliament and to the Council, on the basis of information obtained from the Member States, a report on the application of this Chapter, together, where appropriate and taking into account the need to ensure the long-term convergence of national regulations, with proposals on the following subjects: "" Or. en (https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX:32006L0112)
Amendment 67 #
2018/0164(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 166 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 166 a (new)
Directive 2006/112/EC
Article 395 – paragraph 3
Article 395 – paragraph 3
(166 a)In Article 395, paragraph 3 is replaced by the following: "3. Within three months of giving the notification referred to in the second subparagraph of paragraph 2, the Commission shall present to the European Parliament and to the Council either an appropriate proposal or, should it object to the derogation requested, a communication setting out its objections. " Or. en (https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX:32006L0112)
Amendment 68 #
2018/0164(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 166 b (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 166 b (new)
Directive 2006/112/EC
Article 396 – paragraph 3
Article 396 – paragraph 3
(166 b)In Article 396, paragraph 3 is replaced by the following "3. Within three months of giving the notification referred to in the second subparagraph of paragraph 2, the Commission shall present to the European Parliament and to the Council either an appropriate proposal or, should it object to the derogation requested, a communication setting out its objections. " Or. en (https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX:32006L0112)
Amendment 69 #
2018/0164(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 169 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 169 a (new)
Directive 2006/112/EC
Article 404 a (new)
Article 404 a (new)
(169 a)The following new Article 404a is inserted after Article 404: "Article 404a Within four years from the adoption of Council Directive (EU) .../...* +, the Commission shall present to the European Parliament and to the Council, on the basis of information obtained from the Member States, a report on the implementation and application of the new provisions of this Directive, where appropriate [and taking into account the need to ensure the long-term convergence of national regulations], with proposals." (* Council Directive (EU) .../... of ... amending ... (OJ ...). + OJ: Please insert in the text the number of the Directive contained in document PE-CONS ... (2018/0164(CNS)) and insert the number, date, title and OJ reference of that Directive in the footnote.)
Amendment 71 #
2018/0164(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 169 b (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 169 b (new)
Directive 2006/112/EC
Article 404 b (new)
Article 404 b (new)
(169 b)The following new Article 404b is inserted after Article 404a: "Article 404b Within two years from the adoption of Council Directive (EU) .../...* +, the Commission shall present to the European Parliament and to the Council a report on the effectiveness of the exchange of the relevant information between Member States Tax Administrations, given the importance of the mutual trust for the definitive VAT regime to succeed." (* Council Directive (EU) .../... of ... amending ... (OJ ...). + OJ: Please insert in the text the number of the Directive contained in document PE-CONS ... (2018/0164(CNS)) and insert the number, date, title and OJ reference of that Directive in the footnote.)
Amendment 14 #
2018/0158(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) However, given the time limits imposed on this process by the negotiations on the United Kingdom’s withdrawal from the Union, it is possible that agreements may not be concluded with all WTO Members concerned in relation to all of the tariff rate quotas on the date Union's WTO schedule of concessions and commitments on trade in goods cease to apply to the United Kingdom. In view of the need to ensure legal certainty and the continuous smooth operation of imports under the tariff rate quotas to the Union and the United Kingdom it is necessary for the Union to be able to proceed unilaterally to the apportionment of the tariff rate quotas. The methodology used should be in line with the requirements of Article XXVIII of the GATT 1994. Conformity with this Article is necessary to provide as much legal certainty as possible, in the event that a dispute settlement case is brought to the WTO against any part of this agreement. Further, given the challenges within the currently incomplete Appellate Body of the WTO, delays in dispute settlement cases can be expected to continue.
Amendment 22 #
2018/0158(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) This Regulation should apply from the moment that Union's WTO schedule ceases to apply to the United Kingdom given that from that moment both the Union and the United Kingdom need to know what their WTO obligations are. At the present stage of the withdrawal negotiations between the Union and the United Kingdom it is not possible to determine the exact date when this will happen. Further, this Regulation must also apply in the event that the United Kingdom withdraws from the Union without a withdrawal agreement having been reached. It should therefore be provided that this Regulation shall apply either from the date provided for in a withdrawal agreement between the Union and the United Kingdom under Article 50 of the Treaty on the European Union or from 30 March 2019, that is two years after the date of the United Kingdom's notification of its intention to withdraw from the Union in accordance with Article 50 of the Treaty on the European Union
Amendment 23 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Citation 1
Citation 1
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Articles 16, 19, 33, 43, 50, 53(1), 62, 77, 78, 79, 83(1), 91, 100, 103, 109, 114, 153, 157, 168, 169, 192, 207 and 325(4) thereof and to the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community, and in particular Article 31 thereof,
Amendment 24 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) Persons who work for an organisation or are in contact with it in the context of their work-related activities are often the first to know about threats or harm to the public interest which arise in this context. The purpose of this Directive is to create a climate of trust that enables whistleblowers to report observed or suspected breaches of law, wrongdoing and threats to the public interest. By ‘blowing the whistle’ they play a key role in exposing and preventing breaches of the law and in safeguarding the welfare of society. However, potential whistleblowers are often discouraged from reporting their concerns or suspicions for fear of retaliation.
Amendment 30 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) In certain policy areas, bBreaches of Union law may cause serious harm to the public interest, in the sense of creating significant risks for the welfare of society. Where weaknesses of enforcement have been identified in those areas, and whistleblowers are in a privileged position to disclose breaches, it is necessary to enhance enforcement by ensuring effective protection of whistleblowers from retaliation and introducingto ensure that there are effective reporting channels.
Amendment 34 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) Accordingly, common minimum standards ensuring effective whistleblower protection should apply in those acts and policy areas where i) there is a need to strengthen enforcement; ii) under-reporting by whistleblowers is a key factor affecting enforcement, and iii) breaches of Union law cause serious harm toundermine the public interest.
Amendment 40 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) Evidence-gathering, preventing, detecting and addressing environmental crimes and unlawful conduct or omissions as well as potential breaches against the protection of the environment remain a challenge and need to be reinforced as acknowledged in the Commission Communication "EU actions to improve environmental compliance and governance" of 18 January 201840 . Whilst whistleblower protection rules exist at present only in one sectorial instrument on environmental protection41 , the introduction of such protection appearis necessary to ensure effective enforcement of the Union environmental acquis, whose breaches can cause serious harm to the public interest with possible spill-over impacts across national borders. This is also relevant in cases where unsafe products can cause environmental harm. _________________ 40 COM(2018) 10 final. 41 Directive 2013/30/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 12 June 2013, on safety of offshore oil and gas operations (OJ L 178, p. 66).
Amendment 45 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) In the same vein, whistleblowers’ reports can be key to detecting and preventing, reducing or eliminating risks to public health and to consumer protection resulting from breaches of Union rules which might otherwise remain hidden. In particular, consumer protection is also strongly linked to cases where unsafe products can cause considerable harm to consumers. Whistleblower protection should therefore be introduced in relation to relevant Union rules adopted pursuant to Articles 114, 168 and 169 TFEU.
Amendment 47 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) The protection of privacy and personal data is another area where whistleblowers are in a privileged position to disclose breaches of Union law which can seriously harm the public interest. Similar considerations apply for breaches of the Directive on the security of network and information systems45 , which introduces notification of incidents (including those that do not compromise personal data) and security requirements for entities providing essential services across many sectors (e.g. energy, health, transport, banking, etc.) and providers of key digital services (e.g. cloud computing services). Whistleblowers' reporting in this area is particularly valuable to prevent security incidents that would affect key economic and social activities and widely used digital services. It helps ensuring the continuity of services which are essential for the functioning of the internal market and the wellbeing of society. _________________ 45 Directive (EU) 2016/1148 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 July 2016 concerning measures for a high common level of security of network and information systems across the Union.
Amendment 52 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) Each time a new Union act for which whistleblower protection is relevant and can contribute to more effective enforcement is adopted, consideration should be given to whether to amendit should be added to the Annex to the present Directive in order to place it under its scope.
Amendment 54 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) This Directive should be without prejudiceis a complement to the protection afforded to employees when reporting on breaches of Union employment law. In particular, in the area of occupational safety and health, Article 11 of Framework Directive 89/391/EEC already requires Member States to ensure that workers or workers' representatives shall not be placed at a disadvantage because of their requests or proposals to employers to take appropriate measures to mitigate hazards for workers and/or to remove sources of danger. Workers and their representatives are entitled to raise issues with the competent national authorities if they consider that the measures taken and the means employed by the employer are inadequate for the purposes of ensuring safety and health.
Amendment 55 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) This Directive should be without prejudice to the protection of national security and other classified information which Union law or the laws, regulations or administrative provisions in force in the Member State concerned require, for security reasons, to be protected from unauthorised access. In particular, Moreover, the provision of this Directive should not affectbe read together with the obligations arising from Commission Decision (EU, Euratom) 2015/444 of 13 March 2015 on the security rules for protecting EU classified information or Council Decision of 23 September 2013 on the security rules for protecting EU classified information.
Amendment 57 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) Persons who report information, particularly about threats or harm to the public interest obtained in the context of their work- related activities, make use of their right to freedom of expression. The right to freedom of expression, enshrined in Article 11 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘the Charter’) and in Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), encompasses freedom of information as well as media freedom and pluralism.
Amendment 60 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 24
Recital 24
(24) Persons need specific legal protection where they acquireconcerning the information they report through their work-related activities and theacquire and where their decision to refpore run thet it results in a risk of work-related or other retaliation (for instance, for breaching the duty of confidentiality or loyaltyEU legislation on trade secrets). The underlying reason for providing them with protection is their position of economic vulnerability vis-à-vis the person on whom they de facto depend for work. When there is no such work-related power imbalance (for instance in the case of ordinary complainants or citizen bystanders) there is no need for protection against retaliationare reporting or on whom they de facto depend for work.
Amendment 61 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 25
Recital 25
(25) Effective enforcement of Union law requires that protection is granted to the broadest possible range of categories of persons, who, irrespective of whether they are EU citizens or third-country nationals, by virtue of work-related activities (irrespective of the nature of these activities,whether they are paid or not), have privilegedhave access to information about breaches that would be in the public’s interest to report and who may suffer retaliation if they report them. Member States should ensure that the need for protection is determined by reference to all the relevant circumstances and not merely by reference to the nature of the relationship, so as to cover the whole range of persons connected in a broad sense to the organisation where the breach has occurredall persons connected to the report.
Amendment 66 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 27
Recital 27
(27) Protection should also extend to further categories of natural or legal persons, who, whilst not being 'workers' within the meaning of Article 45 TFEU, can play a key role in exposing breaches of the law and may find themselves in a position of economic vulnerability in the context of their work-related activitiesvis-à-vis the legal or natural person reported on. For instance, in areas such as product safety, suppliers are much closer to the source of possible unfair and illicit manufacturing, import or distribution practices of unsafe products; in the implementation of Union funds, consultants providing their services are in a privileged position to draw attention to breaches they witness. Such categories of persons, including self- employed persons providing services, freelance, contractors, sub-contractors and suppliers, are typically subject to retaliation in the form of early termination or cancellation of contract of services, licence or permit, loss of business, loss of income, coercion, intimidation or harassment, blacklisting/business boycotting or damage to their reputation. Shareholders and persons in managerial bodies, may also suffer retaliation, for instance in financial terms or in the form of intimidation or harassment, blacklisting or damage to their reputation. Protection should also be granted to candidates for employment or for providing services to an organisation who acquired the information on breaches of law during the recruitment process or other pre-contractual negotiation stage, and may suffer retaliation for instance in the form of negative employment references or blacklisting/business boycotting.
Amendment 67 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 28
Recital 28
(28) Effective whistleblower protection implies protecting also further categories of persons who, whilst not relying on their work-related activities economically, may nevertheless suffer retaliation for exposing breaches. Retaliation against volunteers and unpaid trainees may take the form of no longer making use of their services, or of giving a negative reference for future employment or otherwise damaging their reputation. Retaliation against investigators or reporters could take the form of strategic litigation suits, for example regarding libel or defamation.
Amendment 70 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 29
Recital 29
(29) Effective detection and prevention of serious harm to the public interest requires that the information reported which qualifies for protection covers not only unlawful activities but also abuse of law, namely acts or omissions which do not appear to be unlawful in formal terms but defeat the object or the purpose of the law or otherwise present a real or potential threat to the public interest.
Amendment 71 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 30
Recital 30
(30) Effective prevention of breaches of Union law requires that protection is also granted to persons who provide information about potential breaches, which have not yet materialised, but are likely to be committed. For the same reasons, protection is warranted also for persons who do not provide positive evidence but raise reasonable concerns or suspicions. At the same time, protection should not apply to the reporting of information which is already in the public domain or of unsubstantiated rumours and hearsay.
Amendment 72 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 30 a (new)
Recital 30 a (new)
(30 a) Protection should be given to individuals working at institutions within the Union, but also to individuals working in European entities located outside Union territory. It should also apply to officials as well as other employees and interns working at the institutions, agencies and bodies of the Union.
Amendment 77 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 42
Recital 42
(42) Provided the anonymity or confidentiality of the identity of the reporting person is ensured, it is up to each individual private and public legal entity to define the kind of reporting channels to set up, such as in person, by post, by physical complaint box(es), by telephone hotline or through an online platform (intranet or internet). However, reporting channels should not be limited to those amongst the tools, such as in-person reporting and complaint box(es), which do not guarantee anonymity nor confidentiality of the identity of the reporting person.
Amendment 78 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 43
Recital 43
(43) Third parties may also be authorised to receive reports on behalf of private and public entities, provided they offer appropriate guarantees of respect for independence, confidentiality, data protection and secrec, secrecy and the possibility for anonymity. These can be external reporting platform providers, external counsel or auditors or trade union representatives.
Amendment 79 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 44
Recital 44
(44) Internal reporting procedures should enable private legal entities to receive and investigate reports in full confidentiality reportsand with respect of anonymity, if appropriate, by the employees of the entity and of its subsidiaries or affiliates (the group), but also, to any extent possible, by any of the group’s agents and suppliers and by any person who acquires information through his/her work-related activities with the entity and the group.
Amendment 80 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 47
Recital 47
(47) Persons who are considering reporting breaches of Union law should be able to make an informed decision on whether, how and when to report. Private and public entities having in place internal reporting procedures shall provide information on these procedures as well as on procedures to report externally to relevant competent authorities. They should also provide information on rights guaranteed to whistleblowers, particularly their right to disclosure guaranteed by this Directive, and their right to turn to civil society organisations involved in whistleblower protection to this end, in particular those who provide strategic and legal advice to whistleblowers. Such information must be easily understandable and easily accessible, including, to any extent possible, also to other persons, beyond employees, who come in contact with the entity through their work-related activities, such as service-providers, distributors, suppliers and business partners. For instance, such information may be posted at a visible location accessible to all these persons and to the web of the entity and may also be included in courses and trainings on ethics and integrity.
Amendment 81 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 48
Recital 48
(48) Effective detection and prevention of breaches of Union law requires ensuring that potential whistleblowers can easily and in full confidentiality and anonymity bring the information they possess to the attention of the relevant competent authorities which are able to investigate and to remedy the problem, where possible.
Amendment 82 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 48 a (new)
Recital 48 a (new)
(48 a) In all cases, the reporting person should be informed of the investigation's progress and should be able to access the draft report so as to be able to comment on it and correct it if necessary, albeit with no obligation to do so. The reporting person should also be informed of the investigation's outcome.
Amendment 87 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 58
Recital 58
(58) Protection of personal data of the reporting and concerned person, as well as of the report itself, is crucial in order to avoid unfair treatment or reputational damages due to disclosure of personal data, in particular data revealing the identity of a person concerned. Hence, in line with the requirements of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data (General Data Protection Regulation, hereinafter also referred to as 'GDPR'), competent authorities should establish adequate data protection procedures specifically geared to the protection of the reporting person, the concerned person and any third person referred to in the report that should include a secure system within the competent authority with restricted access rights for authorised staff only.
Amendment 88 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 59
Recital 59
(59) The regular review of the procedures of competent authorities and the exchange of good practices between them and competent civil society organisations should guarantee that those procedures are adequate and thus serving their purpose.
Amendment 89 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 61
Recital 61
(61) The requirement of a tiered use of reporting channels, as a general rule, is necessary to ensure that the information gets to the persons who can contribute to the early and effective resolution of risks to the public interest as well as to prevent unjustified reputational damage from public disclosure. At the same time, some exceptions to its application are necessary, allowing the reporting person to choose the most appropriate channel depending on the individual circumstances of the case. Moreover, iIt is necessary to protect public disclosures taking into account democratic principles such as transparency and accountability, and fundamental rights such as freedom of expression and media freedom, whilst balancing the interest of employers to manage their organisations and to protect their interests with the interest of the public to be protected from harm, in line with the criteria developed in the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights57 . _________________ 57 One of the criteria for determining whether retaliation against whistleblowers making public disclosures interferes with freedom of expression in a way which is not necessary in a democratic society, is whether the persons who made the disclosure had at their disposal alternative channels for making the disclosure; see, for instance, Guja v. Moldova [GC], no 14277/04, ECHR 2008.
Amendment 91 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 62
Recital 62
Amendment 93 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 63
Recital 63
Amendment 94 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 65
Recital 65
(65) Reporting persons should be protected against any form of retaliation, whether direct or indirect, taken by their employer or customer/recipient of services and by persons working for or acting on behalf of the latter, including co-workers and managers in the same organisation or in other organisations with which the reporting person is in contact in the context of his/her work-related activities, where retaliation is recommended or tolerated by the concerned person. Protection should be provided against retaliatory measures taken vis-à-vis the reporting person him/herself but also those that may be taken vis-à-vis the legal entity he/she represents, such as denial of provision of services, blacklisting or business boycotting. Protection against retaliation should also be granted to natural or legal persons closely linked to the reporting person, irrespective of the nature of the activities, and whether they are paid or not. Indirect retaliation also includes actions taken against relatives of the reporting person who are also in a work-related connection with the latter’s employer or customer/recipient of services and workers’ representatives who have provided support to the reporting person.
Amendment 96 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 67
Recital 67
(67) Potential whistleblowers who are not sure about how to report or whether they will be protected in the end may be discouraged from reporting. Member States should ensure that relevant information is provided in a user-friendly way and is easily accessible to the general public and support the work of civil society organisations providing this information. Individual, impartial and confidential advice, free of charge, should be available on, for example, whether the information in question is covered by the applicable rules on whistleblower protection, which reporting channel may best be used and which alternative procedures are available in case the information is not covered by the applicable rules (‘signposting’). Access to such advice can help ensure that reports are made through the appropriate channels, in a responsible manner and that breaches and wrongdoings are detected in a timely manner or even prevented.
Amendment 97 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 74
Recital 74
(74) Action taken against reporting persons outside the work-related context, through proceedings, for instance, related to defamation, breach of copyright, trade secrets, confidentiality and personal data protection, can also pose a serious deterrent to whistleblowing. The protection of whistleblowers provided for in this Directive shall prevail over Directive (EU) 2016/943 of the European Parliament and of the Council58 exempts reporting persons from the civil redress measures, procedures and remedies it provides for that, in case the alleged acquisition, use or disclosure of the trade secret was carried out for revealingcan reasonably be assumed to serve as proof of actual misconduct, wrongdoing or illegal activity, provided that the respondent acted for the purpose of protecting the general public interest. Also in other proceedings, reporting persons should be able to rely on having made a report or disclosure in accordance with this Directive as a defence. In such cases, the person initiating the proceedings should carry the burden to prove any intent on the part of the reporting person to violate the law. _________________ 58 Directive (EU) 2016/943 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2016 on the protection of undisclosed know-how and business information (trade secrets) against their unlawful acquisition, use and disclosure (OJ L 157, 15.6.2016, p. 1).
Amendment 98 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 75
Recital 75
(75) A significant cost for reporting persons contesting retaliation measures taken against them in legal proceedings can be the relevant legal fees. Although they could recover these fees at the end of the proceedings, they might not be able to cover them up front, especially if they are unemployed and blacklisted. Assistance for criminal legal proceedings, particularly in accordance with the provisions of Directive (EU) 2016/1919 of the European Parliament and of the Council59 and more generally support to those who are in serious financial need might be key, in certain cases,is key for the effective enforcement of their rights to protection. _________________ 59 Directive (EU) 2016/1919 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 October 2016 on legal aid for suspects and accused persons in criminal proceedings and for requested persons in European arrest warrant proceedings (OJ L 297 4.11.2016, p. 1).
Amendment 99 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 77
Recital 77
(77) Any person who suffers prejudice, whether directly or indirectly, as a consequence of the reporting or disclosure of inaccurate or misleading information should retain the protection and the remedies available to him or her under the rules of general law. Where sufficient evidence has been produced demonstrating that such inaccurate or misleading report or disclosure was made deliberately and knowingly, the concerned persons should be entitled to compensation in accordance with national law.
Amendment 100 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 78
Recital 78
(78) Penalties are necessary to ensure the effectiveness of the rules on whistleblower protection. Penalties against those who take retaliatory or other adverse actions against reporting persons can discourage further such actions. Penalties against persons who make a report or disclosure demonstrated to be knowingly false are necessary to deter further malicious reporting and preserve the credibility of the system. The proportionality of such penalties should ensure that they do not have a dissuasive effect on potential whistleblowers.
Amendment 101 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 80
Recital 80
(80) This Directive introduces minimum standards and Member States should have the power and be encouraged to introduce or maintain more favourable provisions to the reporting person, provided that such provisions do not interfere with the measures for the protection of concerned persons.
Amendment 102 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 84
Recital 84
(84) The objective of this Directive, namely to strengthen enforcement in certain policy areas and acts where breaches of Union law can cause serious harm to the public interest through effective whistleblower protection, cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States acting alone or in an uncoordinated manner, but can rather be better achieved by Union action providing minimum standards of harmonisation on whistleblower protection. Moreover, only Union action can provide coherence and align the existing Union rules on whistleblower protection. Therefore, 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 this objective.
Amendment 104 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. With a view to enhancing the enforcement of Union law and policies in specific areas, this Directive lays down common minimum standards for the protection of persons reporting on the following unlawful activities or, abuse of law or threats to the public interest, including:
Amendment 105 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a – introductory part
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a – introductory part
a) breaches falling within the scope of the Union acts set out in the Annex (Part I and Part II) as regards, including but not limited to the following areas:
Amendment 107 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a – point ii
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a – point ii
(ii) financial services, prevention of money laundering and terrorist financing, corruption and organised crime;
Amendment 109 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a – point v
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a – point v
(v) protection of the environment, sustainable development, waste management, sea, air and noise pollution, protection and management of water and soils, protecting the natural world and biodiversity as well as combating climate change and wildlife crime;
Amendment 110 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a – point viii
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a – point viii
(viii) public health or public safety;
Amendment 111 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a – point x a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a – point x a (new)
(x a) employment and working conditions;
Amendment 112 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a – point x b (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a – point x b (new)
(x b) tax fraud, tax evasion and tax avoidance;
Amendment 113 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a – point x c (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a – point x c (new)
(x c) violations of human rights or of the rights enshrined in the European Charter of Fundamental Rights;
Amendment 114 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a – point x d (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a – point x d (new)
(x d) company law;
Amendment 115 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a – point x e (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a – point x e (new)
(x e) asylum and migration law;
Amendment 116 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b
b) Competition law, especially breaches of Articles 101, 102, 106, 107 and 108 TFEU and breaches falling within the scope of Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 and Council Regulation (EU) No 2015/1589;
Amendment 117 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point d
d) breaches relating to the internal market, as referred to in Article 26(2) TFEU, particularly as regards acts which breach the rules of corporate tax or arrangements whose purpose is to obtain a tax advantage that defeats the object or purpose of the applicable corporate tax law.
Amendment 118 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 2
Article 1 – paragraph 2
2. Where specific rules on the reporting of breaches are provided for in sector-specific Union acts listed in Part 2 of the Annex, those rules shall apply. The provisions of this Directive shall be applicable for all matters relating to the protection of reporting persons not regulated in those sector-specific Union acts. This paragraph shall apply only in cases where the protection foreseen in sector-specific acts is higher than the one guaranteed by this directive.
Amendment 119 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. This Directive shall apply to reporting persons workingand facilitators in the private or public sector who acquired information on breaches in a work-related context including, at least, the following:
Amendment 121 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point d
d) any persons working under the supervision and direction of contractors, subcontractors, service providers and suppliers.
Amendment 122 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 2
Article 2 – paragraph 2
2. This Directive shall also apply to reporting persons whose work-based relationship is yet to begin in cases where information concerning a breach has been acquired during the recruitment process or other pre-contractual negotiation and to work-based relationships that have terminated.
Amendment 123 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Without prejudice to Articles 22a, 22b and 22c of Regulation No 31 (EEC), 11 (EAEC), this Directive shall also apply to the officials and the other servants of the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community who report information on any of the breaches referred to in Article 1.
Amendment 124 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 1
(1) ‘breaches’ means actual or potential unlawful activities, omissions or abuse of law relating to the Union acts and, notably in areas falling within the scope referred to in Article 1 and in the Annex;
Amendment 125 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3
(3) ‘abuse of law’ means acts or omissions falling within the scope of Union law which do not appear to be unlawful in formal terms but defeat the object or the purpose pursued by the applicable rules or represent a danger or a potential danger to the public interest;
Amendment 126 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 4
(4) ‘information on breaches’ means evidenceinformation about actual breaches as well as reasonable suspicions about potential breaches which have not yet materialised;
Amendment 127 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 5
(5) ‘report’ means the provision of information relating to a breach which has occurred or is likely to occur in the organisation at which the reporting person works or has worked orand/or in the event of a serious, imminent threat or where there ins another organisation with which he or she is or was in contact through his or her work risk of irreversible damage to the environment and/or public health;
Amendment 128 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 8
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 8
(8) ‘disclosure’ means making information on breaches acquired within the work-related context available to the public domain;
Amendment 129 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 9
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 9
(9) ‘reporting person’ means a natural or legal person who reports or discloses information on breaches acquired in the context of his or her work-related activiti, or who contributes, assists or aids to reveal or make public information on breaches;
Amendment 130 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 12
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 12
(12) ‘retaliation’ means any threatened or actual act or omission prompted by the internal or, external reporting which occurs in a work-related context andor disclosure and which causes or may cause unjustified detriment to the reporting person, suspected reporting person or their family members, relatives and facilitators;
Amendment 131 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 13
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 13
(13) ‘follow-up’ means any action taken by the recipient of the report, made internally or externally, to assess the accuracy of the allegations made in the report and, where relevant, to address the breach reported, including actions such as internal enquiry, investigation, prosecution, action for recovery of funds and closure as well as any other appropriate remedial or mitigation action;
Amendment 132 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 14
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 14
(14) ‘competent authority’ means any nationallegally responsible Union or Member State authority entitled to receive reports in accordance with Chapter III and designated to carry out the duties provided for in this Directive, in particular as regards the follow up of reports.
Amendment 134 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2
Article 4 – paragraph 2
Amendment 135 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 3 – point b – paragraph 1
Article 4 – paragraph 3 – point b – paragraph 1
private legal entities with an annual business or group turnover or annual balance sheet
Amendment 137 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 6 – point d a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 6 – point d a (new)
d a) European Union institutions, agencies and bodies;
Amendment 138 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
a) channels for receiving the reports which are designed, set up and operated in a manner that ensures an acknowledgement of the receipt of a report, that ensures the confidentiality or anonymity of the identity of the reporting person and prevents access to non- authorised staff members;
Amendment 139 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c
c) diligent follow up to the report by the designated person or department and appropriate and timely action if needed;
Amendment 141 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d
d) a reasonable timeframe, not exceeding three month30 days following the report, to provide feedback to the reporting person about the follow-up to the report;
Amendment 142 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
d a) the opportunity for the reporting person, with no obligation to do so, to look over, examine and comment on the final report at the end of the investigation;
Amendment 143 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) written reports in electronic or paper format and/or oral report through telephone lines, whether recorded or unrecorded; in case the phone conversation is recorded, the prior consent of the reporting person is necessary;
Amendment 144 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b
(b) physical meetings with the person or department designated to receive reports. accompanied, if the reporting person requests it, by a union representative, by a representative of civil society or his/her legal representative;
Amendment 145 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Reporting channels, including digital mechanisms, and institutional arrangements shall provide for safe, secure, confidential and anonymous disclosures.
Amendment 147 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 3
Article 5 – paragraph 3
3. The person or department referred to in point (b) of paragraph 1 may be the same person who is competent for receiving the reports. Additional persons may be designated as “trusted persons” from whom reporting persons and those considering reporting may seek confidential advice including trade union representatives.
Amendment 149 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point a
a) establish independent and autonomous external reporting channels, which are both secure and ensure confidentiality, for receiving and handling information provided by the reporting person and allow for anonymous reporting;
Amendment 150 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b
b) acknowledge receipt of the report , give feedback to the reporting person about the follow-up of the report within a reasonable timeframe not exceeding three months or six months in duly justified casewo months;
Amendment 151 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
b a) gives the reporting person the opportunity, without compelling him/her, to look over, examine and comment on the draft report over the course of the investigation, and the final report before it is published at the end of the investigation;
Amendment 156 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 4
Article 6 – paragraph 4
4. Member States shall ensure that any authority which has received a report but does not have the competence to address the breach reported transmits it to the competent authority and that the reporting person is informed. Member States shall ensure that competent authorities receiving reports they do not have competence to address have clear procedures for handling all disclosed information securely with due regard to confidentiality or anonymity.
Amendment 160 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
c a) they guarantee free and independent advice and legal support for reporting persons and intermediaries.
Amendment 161 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point c
c) physical meeting with dedicated staff members of the competent authority accompanied, if the reporting person requests it, by a union representative, by a representative of civil society or his/her legal representative.
Amendment 162 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 4
Article 7 – paragraph 4
4. Member States and EU bodies shall establish procedures to ensure that, where a report being initially addressed to a person who has not been designated as responsible handler for reports that person is refrained from disclosing any information that might identify the reporting or the concerned person.
Amendment 164 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that competent authorities have an adequate number of competent staff members dedicated to handling reports. Dedicated staff members shall receive specific training for the purposes of handling reports.
Amendment 168 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point b
b) a reasonable timeframe, not exceeding three months or six months in duly justified casewo months, for giving feed-back to the reporting person about the follow-up of the report and the type and content of this feed-back;
Amendment 169 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
c a) giving the reporting person the opportunity, without compelling him/her, to look over, examine and comment on the draft report over the course of the investigation, and the final report before it is published at the end of the investigation.
Amendment 171 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point g a (new)
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point g a (new)
g a) contact information of civil society organisations where legal advice can be obtained free of charge.
Amendment 174 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
1. A reporting person shall qualify for protection under this Directive provided he or she has reasonable grounds to believe that the information reported was true at the time of reporting and that this information falls within the scope of this Directive regardless of the reporting channel chosen.
Amendment 176 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. A person who anonymously disclosed information that falls within the scope of this Directive and whose identity was revealed shall also qualify for protection under this Directive.
Amendment 177 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2
Article 13 – paragraph 2
Amendment 178 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 4
Article 13 – paragraph 4
Amendment 180 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – point g
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – point g
g) coercion, intimidation, harassment or ostracism at the workplace, discrimination or ostracism;
Amendment 181 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – point n
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – point n
n) cancellation of a licence or permit.;
Amendment 182 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – point n a (new)
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – point n a (new)
n a) loss of benefits or status;
Amendment 183 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – point n b (new)
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – point n b (new)
n b) retaliatory investigations;
Amendment 184 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – point n c (new)
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – point n c (new)
n c) cancellation of duties;
Amendment 185 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – point n d (new)
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – point n d (new)
n d) suspension of revocation of security clearance;
Amendment 186 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – point n e (new)
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – point n e (new)
n e) obstruction or cancellation of retirement benefits;
Amendment 187 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – point n f (new)
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – point n f (new)
n f) initiation of retaliatory lawsuits or prosecutions.
Amendment 193 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 a (new)
Article 16 a (new)
Article 16 a Rights of Persons Implicated Member States shall ensure that any findings or reports resulting from an assessment or an investigation of, or prompted by one or more protected disclosure(s) does not unjustly prejudice any individual, whether directly or indirectly. The right to a fair hearing or trial shall also be fully respected.
Amendment 195 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point d
d) breach the duty of maintaining the confidentiality or the anonymity of the identity of reporting persons.
Amendment 196 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
d a) repeat the infringement reported by the reporting person once the case is closed.
Amendment 197 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 2
Article 17 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall provide for effective, proportionate and dissuasive penalties applicable to persons making malicious or abusive reports or disclosures, including measures for compensating persons who have suffered damage from malicious or abusive reports or disclosures by retaining the protection and applying the rules of general law.
Amendment 199 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 a (new)
Article 17 a (new)
Article 17 a No Waiver of Rights and Remedies The rights and remedies provided for under this Directive may not be waived or limited by any agreement, policy, form or condition of employment, including by any pre-dispute arbitration agreement. Any attempt to waive or limit these rights and remedies shall be considered void and unenforceable.
Amendment 201 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 20 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 20 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. When transposing this directive, Member States may consider the establishment of an independent whistleblower protection authority.
Amendment 205 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 22 a (new)
Article 22 a (new)
Article 22 a Updating the Annexes Whenever a new EU legal act falls into the material scope laid down in Article 1 (1) (a) or Article 1 (2), the Commission shall update the Annexes accordingly via a delegated act.
Amendment 87 #
2018/0088(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28
Recital 28
(28) Accordingly and with respect to the procedures governing requests for authorisation procedures provided in Union food law, experience gained so far has shown that certain information items are generally considered sensitive and should remain confidential across the different sectoral authorisation procedures. It is appropriate to lay down in Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 a horizontal exhaustive list of information items whose disclosure may be considered to significantly harm the commercial interests concerned and should not therefore be disclosed to the public, (“general horizontal list of confidential items”). Only in very limited and exceptional circumstances relating to foreseeable health effects and urgent needs to protect human health, animal health or the environment, such information should be disclosich could be kept confidential on the grounds that their disclosure would significantly undermine the protection of commercial interests (“general horizontal list of confidential items”). To request confidentiality, the company in question must prove, with justification, that the proactive disclosure of the information item would significantly undermine its commercial interests. However, where disclosure of the information is of overriding public interest, confidentiality cannot be granted.
Amendment 112 #
2018/0088(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point b
Regulation (EC) No 178/2002
Article 25 – paragraph 1 a – point b
Article 25 – paragraph 1 a – point b
(b) onetwo members appointed by the European Parliament, with the right to vote.
Amendment 118 #
2018/0088(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point b
Regulation (EC) No 178/2002
Article 25 – paragraph 1a – point c
Article 25 – paragraph 1a – point c
(c) fourthree members with the right to vote representing civil society and food chain interests namely, one from consumers organisations, one from environmental non-governmental organisations, and one from farmers organisations and one from industry organisations. Those members shall be appointed by the Council in consultation with the European Parliament on the basis of a list drawn up by the Commission which includes more names than there are posts to be filled. The list drawn up by the Commission shall be forwarded to the European Parliament, together with the relevant background documents. As quickly as possible and within three months of notification, the European Parliament may submit its views for consideration to the Council, which shall then appoint those members.
Amendment 132 #
2018/0088(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EC) No 178/2002
Article 32 a
Article 32 a
At the request of a potential applicant for a food law authorisation, the staff of the Authority shall provide written advisce on the relevant provisions and the required content of the application for authorisation. The advice provided by the staff of the Authority shall be without prejudice and non-committal as to the subsequent assessment of applications for authorisation by the Scientific Panels.
Amendment 133 #
2018/0088(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EC) No 178/2002
Article 32 a – subparagraph 1a (new)
Article 32 a – subparagraph 1a (new)
All correspondence between potential applicants for a food law authorisation and the staff of the Authority shall be publicly available on the EFSA website immediately, and before the publication of the relevant EFSA decision, and shall contribute to the development of a Frequently Asked Questions document, in order to develop more comprehensive guidelines for applicants and reduce the need for individual correspondence
Amendment 146 #
2018/0088(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EC) No 178/2002
Article 32 e
Article 32 e
Without prejudice to the obligation of applicants for authorisations under food law to demonstrate the safety of a subject matter submitted to a system of authorisation, the Commission and the Parliament, in exceptional circumstances, may request the Authority to commission scientific studies with the objective of verifying evidence used in its risk assessment process. The studies commissioned may have a wider scope than the evidence subject to verification. Verification studies shall be funded via the contributions of applicants to a common fund, the modalities of which shall be determined via delegated act;
Amendment 155 #
2018/0088(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point a
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point a
Regulation (EC) No 178/2002
Article 38 – paragraph 1 – introductory sentence
Article 38 – paragraph 1 – introductory sentence
The Authority shall carry out its activities with a high level of transparency, proactively disseminating the information it possesses. It shall in particular make public without delay:
Amendment 162 #
2018/0088(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point b
Regulation (EC) No 178/2002
Article 38 – paragraph 1a
Article 38 – paragraph 1a
Amendment 167 #
2018/0088(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Regulation (EC) No 178/2002
Article 39 – paragraph 2 – introductory sentence
Article 39 – paragraph 2 – introductory sentence
2. The Authority may only accept to provide confidential treatment in relation to the following information, the disclosure of which may be deemed, upon verifiable justification, to significantly harm the interests concernedprovided that the request for confidential treatment demonstrates, with adequate and verifiable justification, that the disclosure would significantly, specifically and actually harm the commercial interests of the applicant:
Amendment 170 #
2018/0088(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Regulation (EC) No 178/2002
Article 39 – paragraph 2 – point 1
Article 39 – paragraph 2 – point 1
(1) the method and other technical and industrial specifications relating to that method, used to manufacture or produce the subject matter of the request for a scientific output, including a scientific opinion, provided that the applicant demonstrates that such method does not entail emissions in the environment and has no harmful impacts on health and environment;
Amendment 175 #
2018/0088(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Regulation (EC) No 178/2002
Article 39 – paragraph 2 – point 4
Article 39 – paragraph 2 – point 4
(4) quantitative composition of the subject matter of the request for a scientific output, including a scientific opinion, except when relevant to understanding the potential effects on health and environment.
Amendment 178 #
2018/0088(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Regulation (EC) No 178/2002
Article 39 – paragraph 4 – point a
Article 39 – paragraph 4 – point a
(a) Where urgent action is essentialrequired to protect public health, animal health or the environment, such as in emergency situations, the Authority may disclose the information referred to paragraphs 2 and 3; and,
Amendment 179 #
2018/0088(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Regulation (EC) No 178/2002
Article 39 – paragraph 4 – point b
Article 39 – paragraph 4 – point b
(b) information which forms part of conclusions of scientific outputs, including scientific opinions, delivered by the Authority and which relate to foreseeable healthpotential human or animal health effects or environmental effects.
Amendment 195 #
2018/0088(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Regulation (EC) No 178/2002
Article 39 e – paragraph 2
Article 39 e – paragraph 2
2. Notwithstanding paragraph 1, disclosure of names and addresses of natural persons involved in testing on vertebrate animals or in obtaining toxicological information shall be deemed to significantly harm the privacy and the integrity of those natural persons and shall not be made publicly available, unless there is an overriding public interest.
Amendment 196 #
2018/0088(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 – introductory part
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 – introductory part
Regulation (EC) No 178/2002
Article 41 – paragraph 1
Article 41 – paragraph 1
(9) in Article 41, the following sentence is addparagraph 1 is replaced atby the end of paragraph 1following:
Amendment 197 #
2018/0088(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9
Regulation (EC) No 178/2002
Article 41
Article 41
Amendment 199 #
2018/0088(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Directive No 2001/18/EC
Article 25 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 25 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. In no case may the following information when submitted according to Articles 6, 7, 8, 13, 17, 20 or 23 be kept confidential: - general description of the GMO or GMOs, name and address of the notifier, purpose of the release, location of release and intended uses; - methods and plans for monitoring of the GMO or GMOs and for emergency response; - environmental risk assessment.
Amendment 200 #
2018/0088(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Directive No 2001/18/EC
Article 25 – paragraph 2
Article 25 – paragraph 2
Amendment 206 #
2018/0088(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 10 – introductory part
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 10 – introductory part
Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003
Article 30
Article 30
(10) Article 30 is replaced by the following: Confidentiality 1. In accordance with the conditions and the procedures laid down in Article 39 to 39f of Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 and this article, (a) the applicant may request certain information submitted under this Regulation to be kept confidential, accompanied by verifiable justification; and, (b) the Authority shall assess the confidentiality request submitted by the applicant. 2. Without prejudice to paragraph 3, the Commission shall determine, after consultation with the applicant, which information should be kept confidential and shall inform the applicant of its decision. 3. Information relating to the following shall not be considered confidential:(a) name and composition of the GMO, food or feed referred to in Articles 3(1) and 15(1) and, where appropriate, indication of the substrate and the micro- organism;(b) general description of the GMO and the name and address of the authorisation-holder;(c) physico-chemical and biological characteristics of the GMO, food or feed referred to in Articles 3(1) and 15(1);(d) effects of the GMO, food or feed referred to in Articles 3(1) and 15(1) on human and animal health and on the environment;(e) effects of the GMO, food or feed referred to in Articles 3(1) and 15(1) on the characteristics of animal products and its nutritional properties;(f) methods for detection, including sampling and identification of the transformation event and, where applicable, for the detection and identification of the transformation event in the food or feed referred to in Articles 3(1) and 15(1);(g) information on waste treatment and emergency response. 4. Notwithstanding paragraph 2, the Authority shall on request supply the Commission and Member States with all information in its possession. 5. The use of the detection methods and the reproduction of the reference materials, provided under Article 5(3) and 17(3) for the purpose of applying this Regulation to the GMOs, food or feed to which an application refers, shall not be restricted by the exercise of intellectual property rights or otherwise. 6. The Commission, the Authority and the Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure appropriate confidentiality of the information received by them under this Regulation except for information which must be made public if circumstances so require in order to protect human health, animal health or the environment. 7. If an applicant withdraws or has withdrawn an application, the Authority, the Commission and the Member States shall respect the confidentiality of commercial and industrial information, including research and development information, as well as information as to the confidentiality of which the Commission and the applicant disagree.
Amendment 208 #
2018/0088(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – introductory part
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – introductory part
Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003
Article 18
Article 18
(2) Article 18 is replaced by the following: Article 18 Transparency and confidentiality 1. The Authority shall make public the application for authorisation, relevant supporting information and any supplementary information supplied by the applicant, as well as its scientific opinions, in accordance with Article 38, Articles 39 to39f and Article 40 of Regulation (EC) No 178/2002, which shall apply mutatis mutandis. 2. In accordance with the conditions and the procedures laid down in Articles 39 to 39f of Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 and this Article, the applicant may request certain information submitted under this Regulation to be kept confidential, accompanied by verifiable justification; and, the Authority shall assess the confidentiality request submitted by the applicant. 3. The following information shall not be considered confidential: (a) name and composition of the feed additive and, where appropriate, indication of the production strain; (b) physico-chemical and biological characteristics of the feed additive; (c) the conclusions of the study results on effects of the feed additive on human and animal health and on the environment; (d) the conclusions of the study results on effects of the feed additive on the characteristics of animal products and its nutritional properties; (e) methods for detection and identification of the feed additive and, where applicable, monitoring requirements and a summary of the results of the monitoring. 4. The Authority shall apply the principles of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents when handling applications for access to documents held by the Authority. 5. The Member States, the Commission and the Authority shall keep confidential all the information identified as confidential under paragraph 2 except where it is appropriate for such information to be made public in order to protect human health, animal health or the environment. Member States shall handle applications for access to documents received under this Regulation in accordance with Article 5 of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001.
Amendment 210 #
2018/0088(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003
Article 18 – paragraph 3
Article 18 – paragraph 3
Amendment 218 #
2018/0088(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EC) No 1935/2004
Article 20 – paragraph 2
Article 20 – paragraph 2
Amendment 219 #
2018/0088(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EC) No 1935/2004
Article 20 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 20 – paragraph 2 – point a
Amendment 220 #
2018/0088(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EC) No 1935/2004
Article 20 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 20 – paragraph 2 – point b
Amendment 137 #
2018/0048(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Title 1
Title 1
Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL on European CrowdfPlatform Funding Service Providers (ECSP) for Business (Text with EEA relevance)
Amendment 138 #
2018/0048(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) CrowdfuPeer-to-peer lending and ing isvestment provided through the mediation of online platforms are increasingly an established forms of alternative finance for small and medium enterprises (SMEs), at an early stage of company growth, typically relying on small investments. CrowdThus, online platforms for crowd-sourced lending- and equity- based funding represents a new types of intermediation where a crowdfunding service provider interacts with its clients through a digital platform without taking on own risk in order to match prospective investors with businesses that seek funding, irrespective of whether that funding leads to a loan agreement, to an equity stake or to another transferable security based stake. It is therefore appropriate to include in tThe scope of this Regulation therefore includes both lending-based crowdfunding and investment-equity- based crowdfunding, since they are comparable business funding alternatives. for business. It does not, however, include crowdfunding campaigns that are based exclusively on donations and non-financial rewards.
Amendment 162 #
2018/0048(COD)
(15a) For the same reason, crowdfunding service providers that use Initial Coin Offerings (ICOs) on their platform should be excluded from this Regulation. To achieve efficient regulation on this emerging technology, the Commission could in future propose comprehensive EU-level legislation based on a thorough impact assessment.
Amendment 184 #
2018/0048(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the operation and organisation of lending- and equity-based crowdfunding service providers;
Amendment 185 #
2018/0048(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the authorisation and supervision of lending- and equity-based crowdfunding service providers;
Amendment 186 #
2018/0048(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) transparency and marketing communications in relation to the provision of lending- and equity-based crowdfunding services in the Union.
Amendment 187 #
2018/0048(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1
1. This Regulation shall apply to legal persons who choose to seek authorisation in accordance with Article 10 and to crowdfunding service providers authorised in accordance with that Article, in relation to the provision of crowdfunding services. These legal persons shall have an effective and stable establishment in a Member State of the Union in order to be eligible to apply for authorisation.
Amendment 188 #
2018/0048(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point c
Amendment 197 #
2018/0048(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
(aa) Crowdfunding service providers that use Initial Coin Offerings (ICOs) on their platforms;
Amendment 202 #
2018/0048(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a – point i
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a – point i
(i) the facilitation of granting of loans, also called lending-based crowdfunding;
Amendment 207 #
2018/0048(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a – point ii
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a – point ii
(ii) the placing without firm commitment, as referred to in point 7 of Section A of Annex I to Directive 2014/65/EU, of transferable securities issued by project owners and the reception and transmission of client orders, as referred to in point 1 of Section A to Annex I to Directive 2014/65, with regard to those transferable securities, also called equity-based crowdfunding;
Amendment 212 #
2018/0048(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) ‘crowdfunding service provider’ means a legal person who provides lending- and equity-based crowdfunding services and has been authorised for that purpose by the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) in accordance with Article 11 of this Regulation;
Amendment 220 #
2018/0048(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1
Article 4 – paragraph 1
1. Crowdfunding services shall only be provided by legal persons that have an effective and stable establishment in a Member State of the Union and that have been authorised as crowdfunding service providers in accordance with Article 11 of0 of this Regulation. Accordingly, legal persons established in a third country cannot apply for authorisation as crowdfunding service providers in accordance with this Regulation.
Amendment 244 #
2018/0048(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1
Article 10 – paragraph 1
1. A legal person that intends to provide crowdfunding services shall apply to ESMA for authorisation as a crowd funding service provider. ESMA shall inform the National Competent Authority when it receives an application for authorisation. The National Competent Authority may submit objections to ESMA regarding the applicant.
Amendment 249 #
2018/0048(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 10 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. All crowdfunding service providers shall have initial capital of EUR 50 000.
Amendment 282 #
2018/0048(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 a (new)
Article 14 a (new)
Article 14a Due diligence requirements 1. Crowdfunding service providers shall carry out a minimum level of due diligence on the projects owners of crowdfunding projects that seek to be funded through their crowdfunding platform. 2. The minimum due diligence referred to in paragraph 1 shall include all of the following: (a) Proof that the project owner is a person of good repute and possesses appropriate knowledge and experience to seek investment on a crowdfunding platform; (b) Proof that the project owner does not have a criminal record in respect of convictions or penalties of national rules in force in the fields of commercial law, insolvency law, financial services legislation, anti-money laundering legislation, fraud or professional liability. 3. Crowdfunding service providers shall disclose the due diligence checks that have been performed on any crowdfunding project.
Amendment 284 #
2018/0048(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 b (new)
Article 14 b (new)
Article 14b Default rate disclosure 1. Crowdfunding service providers shall disclose on a quarterly basis the default rate of the crowdfunding projects registered on the crowdfunding platform over the last 36 months or since the start of its operation, if the platform is less than three years old. 2. The default rate of the crowdfunding projects registered on the crowdfunding platform shall be published in a prominent place on the website of the crowdfunding platform. 3. The European Commission shall adopt a delegated act in accordance with Article 37 to specify the methodology for calculating the default rate of the projects offered on the crowdfunding platform.
Amendment 293 #
2018/0048(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 4
Article 15 – paragraph 4
4. Where prospective investors do not provide the information required pursuant to paragraph 1, or where crowdfunding service providers consider, on the basis of the information received under paragraph 1 that the prospective investors have insufficient knowledge, crowdfunding service providers shall inform those prospective investors that the services offered on their platforms may bare inappropriate for them and give them a risk warning. That information or risk warning shall not prevent prospective investorsprevent them from investing in crowdfunding projects.
Amendment 296 #
2018/0048(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
Article 15 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 306 #
2018/0048(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 16 – paragraph 2 – point c
You may not be able to sell the investment instruments when you wish. If you are able to sell, you may be subject to losses.
Amendment 15 #
2018/0006(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) Council Directive 2006/112/EC21 allows Member States to continue to apply their special schemes to small enterprises in accordance with common provisions and with a view to closer harmonisation. However, those provisions are outdated and do not fulfil their objective of reduceing the compliance burden of small enterprises as they were designed for a common system of value added tax (VAT) based on taxation in the Member State of origin. _________________ 21 OJ L 347, 11.12.2006, p. 1.
Amendment 16 #
2018/0006(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) In its VAT action plan22 , the Commission announced a comprehensive simplification package for small enterprises aimed at reducing their administrative burden and helping to create a fiscal environment to facilitate their growth and the development of cross- border trade. This would entail, as well as to increase VAT compliance. Small enterprises in the Union are particularly active in certain sectors which operate across borders, such as construction, communications, food service and retail trade, and can constitute an important source of employment. To achieve those objectives, a review of the special scheme for small enterprises as outlined in the Communication on the follow-up to the action plan on VAT23 is necessary. The review of the special scheme for small enterprises constitutes therefore an important element of the reform package set out in the VAT action plan. _________________ 22 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council and the European Economic and Social Committee on an action plan on VAT — Towards a single EU VAT area — Time to decide (COM(2016) 148 final of 7.4.2016). 23 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council and the European Economic and Social Committee on the follow-up to the Action Plan on VAT — Towards a single EU VAT area — Time to act (COM(2017) 566 final of 4.10.2017).
Amendment 17 #
2018/0006(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) The review of this special scheme is closely linked to the Commission’s proposal setting out the principles for a definitive VAT system for cross-border business-to-business trade between Member States on the basis of the taxation of cross-border supplies of goods in the Member State of destination24 . The VAT system’s shift towards destination-based taxation has identified that a number of the current rules are not suited for a destination-based tax system. The main difficulties of enhanced cross-border trade for small enterprises arise because of the complex and diverse rules relating to VAT across the Union, as well as the fact that the national SME exemption only benefits small enterprises in the Member State in which those small enterprises are established. _________________ 24 Proposal for a Council Directive amending Directive 2006/112/EC on the common system of value added tax as regards certain harmonisation and simplification rules within the current value added tax system and introducing the definitive system for the taxation of trade between Member States (COM(2017) 569 final of 4.10.2017).
Amendment 18 #
2018/0006(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) In order to address the issue of the disproportionate compliance burden faced by small enterprises, simplification measures should be available not only to enterprises that are exempt under the current rules, but also to those considered small in economic terms. The availability of such measures is particularly relevant as a majority of small businesses, whether exempted or not, are de facto obliged to use the services of advisors or external consultants who help them comply with their VAT obligations, which adds a financial burden to small enterprises. For the purposes of the simplification of the VAT rules, enterprises would be considered ‘small’ if their turnover qualifies them as micro enterprises under the general definition provided for in Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC25 . _________________ 25 Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC of 6 May 2003 concerning the definition of micro, small and medium- sized enterprises (OJ L 124, 20.5.2003, p. 36).
Amendment 22 #
2018/0006(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) Member States should be left to set their national threshold for the exemption at the level that suits their economic and political conditions best, subject to the upper threshold provided for under this Directive. In this regard, it should be clarified that where Member States apply different thresholds, this would need to be based on objective criteria. In order to facilitate cross-border business, the list of national thresholds for exemption should be easily accessible to all SMEs willing to operate in several Member States.
Amendment 26 #
2018/0006(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) Furthermore, in order to ensure compliance with conditions for exemption granted by a Member State to enterprises not established there, it is necessary to require prior notification of their intention to use the exemption. Such notification should be made by the small enterprise to the Member State where it is established. That Member Statethrough an online portal to be set up by the Commission. The Member State of establishment should thereafter, based on the information declared on the turnover of that enterprise, provide that information to thinform the other Member States concerned. Small enterprises can at any time notify their Member States concerned of registration of their willingness to revert back to the general VAT system.
Amendment 29 #
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, as a minimum, to simplify VAT registration and record keeping and to prolong tax periods so as to provide for less frequent filing of VAT returns.
Amendment 32 #
2018/0006(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 a (new)
Directive 2006/112/EC
Article 251 a (new)
Article 251 a (new)
(4 a) The following Article is inserted: ‘Article 251a Member States may allow exempt small enterprises to file only simplified VAT returns including the following information: chargeable VAT, deductible VAT, net VAT amount (payable or receivable), total value of input transactions and total value of output transactions;’
Amendment 38 #
2018/0006(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12
Directive 2006/112/EC
Article 284 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Article 284 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 42 #
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 that year, provided that its Member State annual turnover during that year does not exceed the threshold set out in Article 284(1) by more than 5033%.;
Amendment 43 #
2018/0006(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 17
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 17
(17) Articles 291 toand 2942 are deleted;
Amendment 44 #
2018/0006(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 17 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 17 a (new)
Directive 2006/112/EC
Article 293
Article 293
(17 a) Article 293 is replaced by the following: “Every four years starting from the adoption of this Directive, the Commission shall present to the European Parliament and the Council, on the basis of information obtained from the Member States, a report on the application of this Chapter, together, where appropriate and taking into account the need to ensure the long-term convergence of national regulations, with proposals on the following subjects:(1 (i) improvements to the special scheme for small enterprises;(2 (ii) the adaptation of national systems as regards exemptions and graduated tax relief;(3) the adaptation of the ceilings provided for in Section 2. the possibility to harmonise exemption thresholds across the Union; (iii) the adaptation of the ceilings provided for in Section 2.” Or. en (https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:02006L0112- 20160601&qid=1528271574699&from=EN)
Amendment 45 #
2018/0006(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 17 b (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 17 b (new)
(17b) Article 294 is deleted;
Amendment 49 #
2018/0006(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18
Directive 2006/112/EC
Article 294e – paragraph 1
Article 294e – paragraph 1
Member States may release exempt small enterprises from the obligation to submit a VAT return laid down in Article 250 or may require exempt small enterprises to submit a simplified VAT return as laid down in Article 251a.
Amendment 57 #
2018/0006(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Member States shall adopt and publish, by 30 June 2022 at the latest1 December 2020, the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive. They shall communicate to the Commission the text of those provisions without delay.
Amendment 61 #
2018/0006(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
They shall apply those provisions from 1 Julanuary 20221.
Amendment 14 #
2018/0005(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) Rules on rates of value added tax (VAT) as currently set out in Council Directive 2006/112/EC27 aim to preserve the functioning of the internal market and avoid distortions of competition. The rules were designed over two decades ago based on the origin principle and are no longer fit for purpose. In its VAT Action Plan28 and in the follow-up to this29, the Commission announced its intention to adjust those rules for a definitive VAT system for cross-border business-to- business (B2B) trade in goods between Member States that would be based on the taxation in the Member State of destination. _________________ 27 OJ L 347, 11.12.2006, p. 1. 28 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council and the European Economic and Social Committee on an action plan on VAT – Towards a single EU VAT area – Time to decide (COM(2016) 148 final of 7 April 2016) 29 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council and the European Economic and Social Committee on the follow-up to the Action Plan on VAT – Towards a single EU VAT area – Time to act (COM(2017) 566 final of 4 October 2017)
Amendment 16 #
2018/0005(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) Under a definitive system where the supply of goods and services would be taxed in the Member State of destination, suppliers derive no significantless benefit from being established in a lower-rate Member State. Greater diversity in VAT rates wshould not, under such a system, disrupt the functioning of the single market nor create distortions of competition. In those circumstances, it would be appropriate to grant morea certain flexibility to Member States in the setting of rates.
Amendment 18 #
2018/0005(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) The removal of restrictions in parallell with the entry into force of the definitive arrangements for the taxation of trade between Member States should allow Member States to continue to apply reduced VAT rates that are currently granted asreplacing derogations granted under Chapter 4 of Title VIII of Directive 2006/112/EC and Annex X to Directive 2006/112/EC and which would otherwise expire with the entry into force of those arrangements.
Amendment 20 #
2018/0005(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) In a definitive VAT system all Member States should be treated equally and should therefore have the same restrictions in applying reduced VAT rates, which should remain an exception to the standard rate. Such equal treatment without restricting Member States current flexibility in setting VAT can be achieved by enabling all of them to apply a super- reduced rate for which the minimum requirement does not apply, as well as an exemption with the right to deduct input VAT, in addition to a maximum of two reduced rates of a minimum ofrespectively 10 % and 5 %.
Amendment 26 #
2018/0005(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) Distortions of competition could arise where the mechanism used for taxation would not be based on the destination principle. That is notably so with travel facilities supplied as a single service under the margin scheme for travel agents and goods supplied under the special arrangements for second-hand goods, works of art, collectors’ items and antiques but also in certain cases involving goods or services, such as financial services, that are exempted without right of deduction but for which a right of taxation may be granted. In order to mitigate any such distortions, a list of supplies of goods and services subject to the standard VAT rate ('negative list') should be established based on the statistical classification of products by activity. The list should be reviewed every five yeaby means of an implementing act as often as necessary, based on evidence provided by the Commission. Any change to that list should be widely communicated across the Union to inform taxpayers.
Amendment 27 #
2018/0005(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5 a (new)
Recital 5 a (new)
(5a) In addition, in order to meet international commitments related to social and environmental sectors, such as the Paris Agreement on climate, the Commission should establish – by means of a delegated act – a list of supplies of goods and services that shall be subject to reduced rates or to an exemption with the right to deduct input VAT (“positive list”). That list should be reviewed at least once a year to include newly commercialised goods, such as electric bikes for example, which meet the Union’s commitment to social and environmental standards.
Amendment 29 #
2018/0005(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) To avoid unnecessary complexity and subsequent rise in business costs, in particular for intra-Community trade, goods and services that can be used only as intermediate input to an economic activity should not be eligible for reduced rates in a definitive VAT system. Such rates should be applied only for the ultimate benefit of final consumers and the setting of such rates should ensure equal treatment of similar goods or services supplied by different taxable persons. They should therefore be applied to pursue, in a consistent manner, an objective of general interest.
Amendment 32 #
2018/0005(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 6 a (new)
Recital 6 a (new)
Amendment 34 #
2018/0005(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) For the public finances of Member States to remain sound and in order to prevent excessive macroeconomic imbalances, an appropriate level of revenue should be ensured. Given that VAT is an important source of revenue, it is therefore vital, as a safeguard for national budgets and the Union budget, to set a minimum for the weighted average rate to be respected at any time by the Member States.
Amendment 38 #
2018/0005(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive 2006/112/EC
Article 98 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 98 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Member States may apply a maximum of two reduced rates of 10 % and 5 %respectively.
Amendment 40 #
2018/0005(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive 2006/112/EC
Article 98 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 98 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 42 #
2018/0005(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive 2006/112/EC
Article 98 – paragraph 2
Article 98 – paragraph 2
2. By way of derogation from paragraph 1, Member States may in addition to the two reduced rates apply a super-reduced rate lower than the minimum of 5% and an exemption with deductibility of the VAT paid at the preceding stage.
Amendment 44 #
2018/0005(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive 2006/112/EC
Article 98 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 98 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Reduced rates, super-reduced rates and exemptions applied pursuant to paragraphs 1 and 2 shall only benefit the final consumer and shall be applied to pursue, in a consistent manner, an objective of general interest. Priority shall be given to goods or services which have positive social and / or environmental effects, in order to meet the Union’s international commitments in these sectors.
Amendment 49 #
2018/0005(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive 2006/112/EC
Article 98 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 98 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Reduced rates, super-reduced rates and exemptions shall apply to supplies of goods or services in the categories set out in the revised Annex III.
Amendment 52 #
2018/0005(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive 2006/112/EC
Article 98 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 98 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
The reduced rates, super-reduced rates and exemptions referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 shall not be applied to goods or services in the categories set out in Annex IIIa.;
Amendment 54 #
2018/0005(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Directive 2006/112/EC
Article 99a – paragraph 1
Article 99a – paragraph 1
While setting the rates referred to in Articles 97 and 98, Member States shall ensure that the weighted average rate, calculated in accordance with Article 4 of Council Regulation (EEC, Euratom) No 1553/89 (*), exceeds 125 % at any given time.
Amendment 57 #
2018/0005(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Directive 2006/112/EC
Article 100 – paragraph –1 (new)
Article 100 – paragraph –1 (new)
-1. The Commission is empowered to amend the scope of Annex IIIa by means of an implementing act, when necessary and provided there is evidence related to distortion of competition justifying the update of the list of supplies of goods and services.
Amendment 60 #
2018/0005(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Directive 2006/112/EC
Article 100 – paragraph 1
Article 100 – paragraph 1
2. By 31 December 20261 and every fivthree years thereafter, the Commission shall submit to the European Parliament and the Council a report on the scope of Annex IIIa, accompanied by any proposals to amend that Annex, where necessary.';
Amendment 61 #
2018/0005(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 Directive 2006/112/EC
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 Directive 2006/112/EC
The following Article is inserted: 'Article 100a The Commission, in cooperation with Member States, shall establish a Union VAT Web Information Portal for enterprises. That Portal should provide accurate information about the implementation of the VAT system in the different Member States, including which goods or services benefit from reduced rates, super-reduced rates or exemptions.';
Amendment 65 #
2018/0005(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12
Directive 2006/112/EC
Annex III
Annex III
(12) Annex III iswill be amended by means of a delegated; act by the date corresponding to the date of entry into force of the Directive, to have a list of supplies of goods and services to which reduced rates, super-reduced rates or exemptions shall be applied, in accordance with the Union’s international commitments on social and environmental matters. That list shall be reviewed at least once a year;
Amendment 1 #
2017/2284(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Expresses its dissatisfaction with the overall degreeshocking lack of progress shown by the Member States in implementing Directive 2009/128/EC; uNotes that the Commission's 2017 progress report 1a identifies significant gaps in the National Action Plans of Member States, suggesting a lower commitment to protecting the environment and farmers in some countries that might imply unfair competition and undermine the single market; Urges the Commission to promote the harmonisation of risk indicators at EU level and to oblige the Member States to provide more comprehensive information in their National Action Plans, which must be coherent and include measurable and achievable goals and targets, and to collect more reliable data on the health and environmental impacts of exposure to pesticides; Reserves the right to refer non-compliant member states to the Competition Commissioner. _________________ 1a https://ec.europa.eu/food/sites/food/files/p lant/docs/pesticides_sup_report- overview_en.pdf
Amendment 11 #
2017/2284(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Notes that the implementation report on the Directive presented in October 2017 was due from the Commission on 26 November 2014 1a and that it will take significant efforts to recover from this time lost, especially regarding shortcomings in the NAPs; Deplores the low priority accorded to the control of pesticide use that this 3-year delay implies. _________________ 1a https://ec.europa.eu/food/sites/food/files/p lant/docs/pesticides_sup_report- overview_en.pdf
Amendment 12 #
2017/2284(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Amendment 16 #
2017/2284(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Notes that, while Member States generally have systems to gather information on pesticide acute poisoning, the accuracy of this data and its use is questioned; highlights that systems for gathering such information on chronic poisoning are not widely implemented;
Amendment 18 #
2017/2284(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. NoteRegrets that many Member States have changed their initial targets, focusing more on reducing the risks that pesticide use entails, rather than on actual reductions in the quantities used; regrets the fact that in many Member States there is no real commitment to integrated pest management (IPM) and thus developing a more environmentally-sustainable agriculture with lower costs for farmers; Notes that despite the differences in dose- effect relationships, it is still possible to classify reductions of pesticide quantities per product into meaningful categories.
Amendment 28 #
2017/2284(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Regrets that Integrated Pest Management (IPM) remains underused by Member States despite the fact that the number of EU-approved low risk/non- chemical pesticide substances has doubled since 2009; notes that IPM is a cornerstone of Directive 2009/128/EC, but compliance with the principles of IPM at individual grower level is not being systematically checked by Member States; highlights, furthermore, that Member States have not yet set clear criteria in order to ensure that the general principles of IPM are implemented by all professional users;
Amendment 30 #
2017/2284(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Calls therefore for the collection of data on pesticide use as foreseen in Reg. 1185/2009 on pesticide use statistics, including the use of simple indicators and giving more attention to EU-wide monitoring tools.
Amendment 34 #
2017/2284(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Notes in this context the importance of transparency on pesticide use statistics, as it has effects on the public and public goods, which are broader than mere commercial interests.
Amendment 35 #
2017/2284(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 c (new)
Paragraph 2 c (new)
2c. Notes that increased use and dependency on pesticides comes at a high input cost to farmers; Notes also the organic farmers who suffer economic losses from their neighbours' pesticide use, whereby drift from pesticide spraying and movement of persistent active substances in the environment contaminate organic produce and soils; Notes that consequently, organic farmers are forced to sell that produce as conventional, losing out on their price premium, or worse become decertified, due to actions that are not their own.
Amendment 36 #
2017/2284(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 d (new)
Paragraph 2 d (new)
2d. Notes the unintentional effects of pesticides on soil and non-target species, in particular the recent scientific study illustrating the "insect Armageddon" whereby 75% winged insects have become regionally extinct in Germany 2a, even in nature reserves where no agricultural pesticides have been used; Notes further that studies also show common bird species are declining across Europe 2b, which could be attributed to the decline in insect populations; recognises the importance of NAPs and IPM in significantly reducing pesticide usage to avoid ecological collapse; _________________ 2a More than 75% decline over 27 years in total flying insect biomass in protected areas; Hallmann et al, 2017. http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id =10.1371/journal.pone.0185809 2b https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10. 1111/ele.12387
Amendment 42 #
2017/2284(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Recalls that pesticides are important tools for the agricultural sector, not least for reducing losses caused by pests, and therefore help stabilise farmers’ incomes so that they can produce safely and at affordable pricesincreasing resistance to pesticides has created a steady increase in their use in the agricultural sector, leading to increased dependency; highlights the fact that although EFSA’s latest report on pesticide residues in food showed that 97.2 % of samples throughout Europe were within the legal limits of EU legislation, which bears witness to a very rigorous and safe food production system;residues in fruits and vegetables tested increased again to 30.1% and the fruits and vegetables tested found to be without detectable pesticide residues decreased by 50.7%.
Amendment 46 #
2017/2284(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Notes that resistance to pesticide active substances is a biological inevitability in fast-reproducing pests and diseases and is a growing problem; Stresses therefore the IPM approach that chemical pesticides should be used selectively and in a targeted manner, as a last rather than a first resort after exhausting all possible physical or biological alternatives; Calls therefore for the Commission and Member States to advocate a similar approach used to tackle antibiotic resistance, and limit regular, systematic, blanket /metaphylactic treatments.
Amendment 51 #
2017/2284(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Notes that a farmer's "toolbox" is a set of agronomic practices based on physical methods as well as chemical substances and alternatives to those, such as organisms or their extracts (biological control). Notes that this broader definition of a toolkit is the basis of IPM, which can cut pesticide use by between 50-30%, and can be as simple as shallow ploughing at key times, crop rotation, allowing proliferation of beneficial species that are predators of pest species, and avoiding monocultures;
Amendment 53 #
2017/2284(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 c (new)
Paragraph 3 c (new)
3c. Notes that within the IPM toolkit, biological control involves boosting or introducing beneficial species that predate upon and so regulate pest populations, keeping them in check; Emphasises, therefore, the importance of using chemical pesticides as a last resort in IPM following other physical and biological methods and always applied in a selective and targeted manner, otherwise these beneficial pest control agents risk being wiped out, leaving the crops more susceptible to future attacks.
Amendment 54 #
2017/2284(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Welcomes the fact that European waters are becoming cleaner and calls for greater investment in practices thatCalls for greater investment in practices that prevent pesticides from reaching surface and deep water; Notes that of 4000 EU sites studied, 42% suffer from chronic toxicity due to failures in risk assessment of pesticides and their management, clearly showing that agrochemicals are a large-scale environmental problem across the EU with significant ecotoxicological impacts on freshwater ecosystems 1a; Highlights the cost-effectiveness of preventing pesticides from reaching surface and deep water;entering freshwater systems as opposed to costly removal technologies. _________________ 1a Malaj et al, 2014. Organic chemicals jeopardize the health of freshwater ecosystems on the continental scale. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/249 79762
Amendment 63 #
2017/2284(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Highlights the need to focuusefulness onf precision and digital agriculture, so as to in preventing the drift and dispersion of pesticides in areasnon-target areas and targeting those substances better where they are not needed; uUnderlines the need for research into new low-risk substances andusing existing research results and funding further research on biological low-risk pest control products, as well as into the equipment and technology that could render them more efficient andhelp scale up their use, in order to reduce the potential exposure of farmers, operators and the general public to damaging chemicals.
Amendment 77 #
2017/2284(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Notes that although precision/digital agriculture can be used to better target pesticide use where it is genuinely needed, in principle reducing the volumes used, it can in some cases simply shift the type of input dependency at a time when many farmers want to become more autonomous and cut input costs.
Amendment 80 #
2017/2284(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Notes further that the best pesticide volume reductions are likely to arise from systemic changes that reduce susceptibility to pest attack, favour structural and biological diversity over monocultures and continuous cropping, and reduce pest resistance to active ingredients; Highlights therefore the need to focus on, fund and mainstream agroecological methods which make the whole farming system more resilient to pests.
Amendment 83 #
2017/2284(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 c (new)
Paragraph 5 c (new)
5c. Urges the Commission to make the 8 general principles of IPM legal requirements; Calls for the integration of IPM into the revision of the CAP with proven reductions in pesticide dependency being an indicator of success.
Amendment 84 #
2017/2284(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 d (new)
Paragraph 5 d (new)
5d. Highlights the importance of farm advisory services (FAS) to help farmers reduce pesticide use and to successfully and affordably incorporate IPM as standard practice, resorting only to chemical pesticides if necessary after using physical and biological alternatives; Underlines the need for knowledge sharing and skill acquisition regarding alternatives to chemical pesticides and IPM, including finding the optimum crop rotation for farmers' market and climatic situations; Notes further that this was already foreseen in the horizontal regulation of the CAP, notably also FAS and EIP innovation partnerships, both financed by the CAP within Rural Development;
Amendment 85 #
2017/2284(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 e (new)
Paragraph 5 e (new)
5e. Highlights the pilot project supported by the agriculture and the budget committees on the IPM toolkit for farmers, allowing them to be aware of and chose from the various alternative and combined pest control options available to them, in order to best suit their needs and mainstream IPM, cutting chemical use.
Amendment 78 #
2017/2274(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital J
Recital J
J. whereas the situation in Tibet has deteriorated over the past few years, with the Chinese Government curtailing a wide- range of human rights under the pretext of security and stability, and engaging in relentless attacks against Tibetan identity and culture; whereas the Chinese government has created in Tibet an environment in which there are no limits to state authority, a climate of fear is pervasive, and every aspect of public and private life is tightly controlled and regulated; whereas in Tibet, any acts of non-violent dissent or criticism of state policies with regard to ethnic or religious minorities can be considered as ‘splittist’ and therefore criminalized; whereas access to the Tibet Autonomous Region today is more restricted than ever for foreigners, including EU citizens, particularly for journalists, diplomats and other independent observers, and even more difficult for EU citizens of a Tibetan background;
Amendment 224 #
2017/2274(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Urges China to review its policies in Tibet, which far from creating stability are only heightening tensions, as highlighted by the over 150 self- immolations in Tibet since 2009; calls on China to review and amend laws, regulations and measures passed in recent years that severely limit the exercise of civil and political rights of Tibetans, including their freedom of expression and their religious freedom; urges the Chinese leadership to pursue development and environmental policies that respects the economic, social and cultural rights of Tibetans and are inclusive of local populations, in line with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals; calls for the resumption of a constructive dialogue between the Chinese Government and the representatives of the Dalai Lama; urges China to give EU diplomats, journalists and citizens unfettered access to Tibet in reciprocity to the free and open access to the entire territories of the EU Member States that Chinese travellers enjoy; urges the EU Institutions to take the issue of access to Tibet into serious consideration in the discussions on the EU- China visa facilitation agreement;
Amendment 1 #
2017/2128(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the fact that an implementation report for Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 is being undertaken with the aim of ensuring a high level of protection of both human and animal health as well as the environment, while safeguarding the competitiveness of the EU’s agriculture sector by providing access to a broad range of active substances and Plant Protection Products (PPP) for all farmers and producers, irrespective of the Members States they are operating in; recalls recital (8) of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 which clearly highlights that particular attention should be paid to the protection of vulnerable groups of the population, including pregnant women, infants and children, that the precautionary principle should be applied and that this Regulation should ensure that industry demonstrates that substances or products produced or placed on the market do not have any harmful effect on human or animal health or any unacceptable effects on the environment;
Amendment 8 #
2017/2128(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the fact that an implementation report for Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 is being undertaken with the aim of ensuring a high level of protection of both human and animal health as well as the environment, while safeguarding the competitiveness of the EU’s agriculture sector by providing access to a broad range of active substances and Plant Protection Products (PPP) for all farmers and producers, irrespective of the Members States they are operating inaiming as much as possible for a level playing field for farmers from different EU member states in terms of access to genuinely safe active substances and Plant Protection Products (PPP);
Amendment 13 #
2017/2128(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Notes the failure of the regulatory framework to consider inevitable non- target impacts, notably on bees and other pollinators and other insects beneficial to farming like predators of pests; Notes the recent scientific study illustrating the "insect Armageddon"1a , whereby 75% winged insects have become regionally extinct across Germany, even in nature reserves where no pesticides were used for agriculture. _________________ 1aMore than 75 percent decline over 27 years in total flying insect biomass in protected areas, Hallmann et al, 2017. http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id =10.1371/journal.pone.0185809
Amendment 21 #
2017/2128(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1 b. Calls for the implementation by the MS of the 2013 EFSA guidelines 1c on assessing risk of PPPs to bees, developed collaboratively between the Commission and the MS, which has regrettably not been implemented so far; _________________ 1c https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal /pub/3295
Amendment 24 #
2017/2128(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1 c. Notes that the cumulative effects of pesticides on non-target species, and also synergistic effects as pesticides are increasingly applied in cocktails of different products, which can alter the expected impacts on organisms exposed to them;
Amendment 25 #
2017/2128(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 d (new)
Paragraph 1 d (new)
1 d. Notes the duty of care of the Commission, in balancing the public and environmental health with economic interests of chemical producers to ensure only genuinely safe active substances are approved;
Amendment 26 #
2017/2128(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 e (new)
Paragraph 1 e (new)
1 e. Notes that the final approval of the product by the MS is often granted conditionally upon certain mitigation criteria being fulfilled, for example in restricting use under certain conditions; Regrets that these are so poorly controlled, if at all, by the MS authorities;
Amendment 27 #
2017/2128(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 f (new)
Paragraph 1 f (new)
1 f. Notes that because both active substance and product authorisations are often granted conditional upon fulfilment of certain criteria of use which are then not checked, this means that even if mitigation measures intending to limit environmental damage were disregarded, inappropriate and illegal use has been rewarded with CAP payments. This should not continue, and respect of mitigation measures should form part of the baseline of sustainability in the CAP;
Amendment 28 #
2017/2128(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 g (new)
Paragraph 1 g (new)
1 g. Notes the health costs associated with pesticide use, which are often hidden, and the struggle of farmers and agricultural workers as well as those working in storage and transport of grain who are poisoned by pesticides; Notes further that these hidden costs and personal struggles are too often conveniently forgotten by the representatives of farming communities;
Amendment 29 #
2017/2128(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 h (new)
Paragraph 1 h (new)
1 h. Calls for neonicotinoids and other systemic insecticides that are damaging to non-target species especially bees to be comprehensively banned, in order to ensure pollination and other biodiversity- driven ecosystem services useful for farmers, also including predators keeping pest populations in check;
Amendment 30 #
2017/2128(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 i (new)
Paragraph 1 i (new)
1 i. Notes a weed is defined simply as a plant in the wrong place, and notes they are also wildflowers that feed bees and pollinators and also support natural predators of pests and other beneficial species useful to farming; Notes further only 20% of weed species are actually capable of damaging crops and then, only when in sufficiently high concentrations to affect the yield; 80% of them are so weak in competition with the crops that they do not affect yield substantially 1d. _________________ 1dAndreasen, C. et al., 1996: Decline of the flora in the Danish Arable field. J. Appl. Ecol. 33, p. 619-626. Studies on wild plant species from 1970 to 1990 on approx. 200 wild plant species
Amendment 31 #
2017/2128(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Points out that this regulation is part of the wider EU Plant Protection Products (PPP) regime, which also includes the Sustainable Use Directive (SUD) and the regulation setting Maximum Residue Levels (MRL), and that all three parts must be considered together in order to identify whether they are fit for purpose, including with a view to reducing the total volume of PPPs used, notably through the MS and the Commission ensuring implementation of Integrated Pest Management (IPM) , which can be as simple as crop rotation, and for IPM to be integrated into the CAP as foreseen already in the SUD and the current CAP regulations since 2013;
Amendment 36 #
2017/2128(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Notes that a farmer's "toolbox" is based on methods, agronomic practices as well as chemical substances and alternatives to those, such as biological control.Notes that this broader definition of toolkit is the basis of IPM, which can cut pesticide use by between 50-30%, and can be as simple as crop rotation or avoiding monocultures; Notes the "many little hammers" approach of these alternative tools, as opposed to blanket metaphylaxis by broad spectrum chemical pesticides that can disable other tools in the toolbox;
Amendment 50 #
2017/2128(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2 b. Notes that for some tools of the "toolkit" like biological controls using natural predators of pests or their parasites or parasitoids to work, it is important that untargeted broad spectrum pesticides should be avoided until being used as a last resort:
Amendment 53 #
2017/2128(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 c (new)
Paragraph 2 c (new)
2 c. Notes the need to for careful use of pesticides and only when all other alternative methods have failed, due to growth of resistance of pests to overused pesticides: Notes resistance is a biological inevitability when dealing with fast- reproducing pests and diseases; Emphasises the use of IPM as a way to prevent resistance and the need to avoid blanket or metaphylactic treatment often when no single pests is even detected, which also knocks out other beneficial species, which would otherwise be regulating pest populations, leaving crops susceptible to future attacks;
Amendment 55 #
2017/2128(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 d (new)
Paragraph 2 d (new)
2 d. Underlines the need for knowledge sharing and skill acquisition for alternatives to chemical pesticides and IPM, including finding the optimum crop rotation for farmers' market and climatic situations; Notes further that this is already foreseen in the horizontal regulation of the CAP, notably also Farm Advisory Services financed within Rural Development;
Amendment 56 #
2017/2128(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 e (new)
Paragraph 2 e (new)
2 e. Notes the increasing use of broad spectrum pesticides as desiccants and crop ripeners and underlines the principle of not applying pesticide on the final products as this will inevitably raise residue levels in food and feed sometimes to unacceptable levels, given the proximity of this usage to human food chain; Calls therefore for severely limiting this use, with a view to re-writing the authorisations and phasing out this use of pesticides;
Amendment 57 #
2017/2128(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 f (new)
Paragraph 2 f (new)
2 f. Stresses the importance of using IPM as the basis for approving less damaging active substances, when candidates for substitution of the most dangerous pesticides are being considered; this means when MS are considering to authorise an alternative chemical (to substitute a more dangerous one), if the same effect to protect against past damage can be ensured by agronomic practices or alternatives, neither pesticide should be approved;
Amendment 64 #
2017/2128(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses the importance of a science-basedobjective, peer-reviewed evidence derived from an open and independent, holistic and multidisciplinary scientific approach in authorising any active substance, in line with the EU’s risk analysis principleof hazards and the precautionary principle as established in the General Food Law (Regulation (EC) No 178/2002);
Amendment 69 #
2017/2128(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Notes that Ecology is also a scientific discipline that deals with the interaction between all living organisms including the impacts of chemicals on non-target species. Notes that Toxicology is also a scientific discipline, with the sub- discipline of Ecotoxicology. Welcomes therefore a holistic, science-based approach based on publically funded and published, peer-reviewed science, and especially welcomes moving on from outdated 1950's arguments that undermine scientific approaches that are not chemistry;
Amendment 74 #
2017/2128(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3 b. Notes that in science it is harder to find a causal relationship than for this relationship to remain hidden, and that determining those causal relationships and impacts requires objective investigation in the right places, in replicable datasets and for long enough time periods - this is rarely the case, which limits the useful of the weight of evidence approach, especially when those conducting experiments and field trials, e.g. via private science, have a vested interest not to find anything;
Amendment 76 #
2017/2128(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 c (new)
Paragraph 3 c (new)
3 c. Notes that the weight of evidence approach is not used in the same way for the approval of pharmaceuticals, where risk managers avoid using any studies that are repeated, are not peer reviewed, are not published, are duplicated, have conflicts of interest or are otherwise compromised;
Amendment 78 #
2017/2128(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Expresses its concern about systematic delays in the authorisation processes and the increasing use of derogations as laid down in Article 53 of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009, while underlining the necessity for Member States to comply with the legal deadlines to ensure predictability for applicants and facilitate the market introduction of innovative PPPs that are in line with more stringent requirements; recalls recital (10) of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 which clearly highlights that substances should only be included in plant protection products where it has been demonstrated that they present a clear benefit for plant production and they are not expected to have any harmful effect on human or animal health or any unacceptable effects on the environment;
Amendment 81 #
2017/2128(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Expresses its concern about systematic delays in the authorisation processes and the increasing use of unjustified and inappropriate derogations as laid down in Article 53 of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009, and the associated working document 1b , while underlining the necessity for Member States to comply with the legal deadlines to ensure predictability for applicants and facilitate the market introduction of innovative PPPs that are in line with more stringent requirements; _________________ 1bsee annex 1 of the Working Document on Emergency Situations According to Art.53 of Reg.1107/2009 of DG SANTE of the Commission
Amendment 84 #
2017/2128(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Expresses dissatisfaction regarding derogations to prohibitions of use, and notes the rules are being abused; notes the current regulation and comitology arrangement allows a member state to simply announce its will to derogate and it is deemed to pass; Notes that often there is no justification for derogations, e.g. those that have been systematically granted to the partial neonicotinoid bans. Underlines that the Commission has a duty as Guardian of the Treaties to check the derogations are really justified and there are no alternatives, such as crop rotation or combinations of alternatives, that negate the need to use those substances or limit the extent of an expected pest outbreak. If no alternative preventive measures are taken, the derogations should not be granted;
Amendment 92 #
2017/2128(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Points out that the zonal evaluation of PPP applications, which allows applicants to propose one zonal Rapporteur Member State (zRMS) to carry out the assessment, should lead to the concerned Member States (cMS) taking a decision within the maximum time limit of 120 days after the zRMS has issued the registration report; recalls recital (16) of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 which clearly highlights the possibility of amending or withdrawing the approval of an active substance in cases where the criteria for approval are no longer satisfied, or where compliance with Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy is compromised, should be provided for under certain conditions;
Amendment 96 #
2017/2128(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Notes that Reg.1107/2009 gives the possibility of amending or withdrawing the approval of an active substance in cases where the criteria for approval are no longer satisfied, or where its use breaches or compromises compliance with the Water Framework Directive 2000/60/EC 1e ; Notes in this regard that the first systematic testing of rivers was mandated the WFD - as an example in the UK these were conducted in 2016, and results showed that half of the 16 rivers tested in England had either chronic or acute levels of neonicotinoid contamination, and they were found in 17 of the 23 rivers tested across Britain; _________________ 1eDirective 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy
Amendment 112 #
2017/2128(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Notes the excellent quality and sufficient provisioning of organic products, the vast majority of which are produced with out resorting to any chemical pesticides, but use a wide range of effective agronomic and physical methods and biological controls;
Amendment 114 #
2017/2128(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6 b. Notes the unintentional effects of pesticides on soil and non-target species and also organic farmers who suffer economic losses from their neighbours' pesticide use, whereby drift from pesticide spraying and movement of persistent active substances in the environment contaminate organic produce and soils; notes that organic farmers are often forced to sell that produce as conventional, losing out on their price premium, or worse become decertified, due to actions that are not their own;
Amendment 133 #
2017/2128(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Stresses the contribution that the authorisation of low-risk PPPsnatural PPPs based on natural products can makes to a sustainable EU farming sector, and despecially efficient when introduced/used in combination with good agronomic practices; Draws attention to the importance of contributing to a better functioning agricultural ecosystem and a sustainable farming sector, while p; Pointings out that the lack of availabilityoveruse of PPPs could jeopardise the diversification of agriculture and cause harmful organismpests and diseases to become resistant to PPPs.
Amendment 151 #
2017/2128(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8 a. Points out that this low risk PPP category is useful for natural products that carry less risk and therefore should not have to jump through the same legislative hoops to ensure public and environmental safety;
Amendment 158 #
2017/2128(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 b (new)
Paragraph 8 b (new)
8 b. Underlines that the low risk PPP category should not be used as a loophole for avoiding other justifiably more complex authorisation processes for GMOs and mainstream chemical pesticides.
Amendment 161 #
2017/2128(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 c (new)
Paragraph 8 c (new)
8 c. Notes that some member states have a tax on pesticide production and usage to cover costs currently eternalised to public health and environmental budgets and so carried by the ordinary citizens and the public purse ; Invites therefore MS and the Commission to look seriously to mainstreaming this tax approach to enforce the Polluter Pays Principle.
Amendment 167 #
2017/2128(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 d (new)
Paragraph 8 d (new)
8 d. Notes that although Precision agriculture can be used to better target pesticide use where it is genuinely needed and cut overall usage, it can in some cases simply shift the type of input dependencies, while many farmers want to become more autonomous and cut input costs.
Amendment 169 #
2017/2128(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 e (new)
Paragraph 8 e (new)
8 e. Calls for the same approach we currently have for antimicrobial resistance to be applied also to pesticide resistance.
Amendment 85 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Gives a positive assessment of the monetary policy pursued by the ECB in the period 2012-2016 in terms of its contribution to economic recovery by preventing deflation, preserving favourable financing conditionsAcknowledges the ECB’s contribution in the period 2012-2016 to economic recovery by preventing deflation, improving financing conditions, particularly in the periphery, and maintaining financial stability and the proper functioning of the payment systems;
Amendment 88 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Points out that under normal circumstances monetary policy is, in principle, supposed to involve unbiased and unsystematic distributional effects in the short to medium term while fostering price stability in the longer term;notes however that under the current non- conventional policy regime, distributional consequences may clearly arise in the short-term while the long-term effects of such unconventional policies areas yet unknown and subject to controversy within the academic and policy making spheres;
Amendment 93 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2 b. Warns that prolonged non- conventional monetary policy actions may have significant distributional effects between the wealthy and poor, young and old, and also between regions with different financial structures;urges and suggests the ECB to monitor comprehensively in its next annual report the side effects of its monetary policy measures and its impact on inequality;
Amendment 95 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 c (new)
Paragraph 2 c (new)
2 c. Emphasizes that the ECB started a new series of four targeted longer-term refinancing operations (TLTRO II) in June 2016;points out that the incentive structure of the programme has changed in comparison with the original TLTRO as several banks have been able to borrow at negative rates even if they do not increase their net lending to the real economy;
Amendment 96 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 d (new)
Paragraph 2 d (new)
2 d. Is concerned by the fact that by offering liquidity at negative rates, but eliminating the requirements for banks to return the funds when they do not achieve their lending benchmark, the ECB has therefore weakened the link between the provision of central bank liquidity and lending to the real economy that was at the centre of the TLTRO concept;
Amendment 97 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 e (new)
Paragraph 2 e (new)
2 e. Is concerned that Euro-area banks didn’t use the advantageous environment created by the ECB to strengthen their capital bases but, according to the Bank for International Settlements, to pay substantial dividends sometimes exceeding the level of retained earnings;
Amendment 98 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 f (new)
Paragraph 2 f (new)
2 f. Points out that, while the effects on the real economy have been limited, banks have been able to access funding at virtually no or very low cost which has directly subsidised their balance sheets;deplores the fact that the size of this subsidy, despite representing a clear fiscal spill-over effect of monetary policy, is not monitored and published and that it is free from strict conditionality in terms of whether or how it is invested;insists that any extraordinary measures of this kind should be accompanied by measures to mitigate distortions to markets and the economy;
Amendment 99 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 g (new)
Paragraph 2 g (new)
2 g. Underlines that a prolonged period of ultra-low (negative) interest rates creates potential risks for the insurance and pension sector, in particular for defined benefits schemes as recently highlighted by an EIOPA stress test;
Amendment 100 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 h (new)
Paragraph 2 h (new)
2 h. Remains concerned by the still significant levels of non-marketable assets and asset-backed securities put forward as collateral to the eurosystem in the framework of its refinancing operations;reiterates its request to the ECB to provide information on which central banks have accepted such securities as well as to disclose valuation methods regarding such assets;underlines that such disclosure would be beneficial for the purpose of parliamentary scrutiny of supervisory tasks conferred to the ECB;
Amendment 101 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 i (new)
Paragraph 2 i (new)
2 i. Notes with concern that TARGET 2 imbalances are rising in the euro area again despite a narrowing in trade imbalances indicating continued capital outflows from the euro area periphery;
Amendment 116 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Is concerned that the ECB will likely not reach its inflation target for at least six consecutive years and will remain below the medium-term target level of 2 % until at least 2020 despite pursuing a very accommodative monetary policy, which indicates that the economy is noturo area economy in aggregate is still operating atwell below full capacity;
Amendment 124 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Acknowledges that without the ECB’s policy package, inflation would be almomight be at least 0.5 % lower on average than the rate currently projected for the years 2016- 2019;
Amendment 132 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Agrees with the ECBacknowledgement of the ECB’s President in the Jackson Hole meeting of 2016 that in order to reach the inflation target in a context of very low interest rates, supportive fiscal policies and socially balanced productivity- enhancing reforms are required;
Amendment 154 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. BelievesIs of the opinion that ongoing discussion on tapering in a context of a strong euro might be premature and that additional policy measures should be considerednot be excluded, if appropriate, in order to move closer and more rapidly towards the inflation objective, including an increase in monthly purchases, the inclusion of equity purchases in the APP and the extension of the TLTRO programme to householdclimate change related projects through zero-coupon perpetual or very long term loans;
Amendment 156 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. Urges the ECB together with other relevant Union bodies and in the light of the requirement under TFEU 127.1 to consider the possibility of using its APP strategically, by encouraging in coordination with the EIB the development of safe and simple marketable asset classes, suitable for the Program, that are linked to the achievement of key EU targets particularly the transition to a sustainable and fair economy and to consider drawing up a range of green and social projects for which credit created through quantitative easing could be used as direct financing;
Amendment 161 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7 b. Asks the ECB to prepare in the framework of its next annual report research on the pro and the cons and the legal feasibility of different options regarding the channelling of newly created money towards sustainable investment while respecting the provisions of the Treaty;
Amendment 163 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 c (new)
Paragraph 7 c (new)
7 c. Underlines that the need to cement confidence in what a debt or claim denominated in the domestic currency will be worth at some point in future is a prerequisite for efficient economic planning;points out that the result of nominal prices deviating from they where expected to be leads to unintended redistribution effects and the frustrated expectations on which prior economic decisions were based;hence points out that the way in which ECB defines in full discretion its target as an operational translation of its price stability mandate should take explicit account of the need to avoid or reduce to the maximum extent possible distributional effects;
Amendment 172 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Asks the ECB to consider complementing its price stability objective with nominal GDP growth targetingUnderlines that article 127 of the TFEU leaves a wide margin of discretion to the ECB to adopt an operational translation of its price stability mandate; asks the ECB to thoroughly explore the pro and cons of reviewing, in consistency with the Treaties, such operational translation of its price stability mandate as a ‘close but below to 2%’ target and assess, in particular, whether a price level or nominal GDP growth targeting might better achieve such price stability objective;
Amendment 177 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8 a. Calls in that respect for a revision of the ECB treaty mandate with a view to strengthening its democratic accountability and its strict separation with the EMU Single Supervisory Mechanism;underlines that the fundamental principle of 'no taxation or provision of public subsidies without representation' should be enshrined in such mandate and therefore that a permanent scrutiny mechanism should be established so as to ensure a strict separation between fiscal and monetary policy;hence preventing and correcting the provision of implicit subsidies by the monetary authority and ensuring that in the medium term the monetary policy does not entail distributive effects;
Amendment 179 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 b (new)
Paragraph 8 b (new)
8 b. Calls, in the framework of a revision of the ECB Treaty based mandate, to reflect on the possibility to add explicitly to article 127 TFEU the objective of ensuring financial stability;
Amendment 187 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Recalls that, in accordance with Article 3 of its Statute, the ECB must support ‘the general economic policies of the Union’, including, as stated in Article 3 of the TEU, ‘the sustainable development of Europe based on balanced economic growth’; and ‘a high level of protection and improvement of the quality of the environment’;believes the ECB’s duty in that respect is even greater after the ratification of the Paris agreement on climate change which commits all EU institutions;
Amendment 198 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Highlights that according to the IMF’s April 2017 World Economic Outlook, the Eeurozone area output gap was - 1.2 % of the potential GDP in 2016, a gap which willis expected to remain negative until 2019; underlines that in the persistence of a negative output gap and a strong euro there is room for preserving an accommodative monetary policy;
Amendment 200 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11 a. Underlines that frontloaded fiscal consolidation in the euro area as a whole during a period of large output gap has not only had a severe impact on aggregate demand but has generated long lasting negative hysteresis effects, which have undermined the effectiveness of the monetary transmission mechanism despite the unprecedented policy measures implemented by the ECB;
Amendment 212 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Underlines the positive effect of the ECB monetary policy on growth, employment and the financing costs of several euro area Member States, non- financial companies and households;
Amendment 281 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Stresses that excessive current account surpluses in some Member States must be corrected through appropriate fiscaleconomic policies;
Amendment 334 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Acknowledges that the current policy of low interest rates has a positive effect on the level of non performing loans (NPLs); calls for a European strategy involving inter alia a secondary market for NPLs in order to alleviate the burden of NPLs in some Member States; notes that the banks recently bailed-out in Italy showed high NPL ratios and is concerned that one of these banks, although supervised by the ECB’s supervisory arm (SSM), have not been required to increase its persistent low NPL coverage ratio beforehand;
Amendment 360 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Calls the ECB’s attention to the need for the sufficiently wide coverage and methodological pertinence and robustness of recent stress tests vis-à-vis the resolution or liquidation of certain banks;
Amendment 362 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)
Paragraph 23 a (new)
23 a. Stresses that the ECB's supervisory role (SSM), its responsibility for systemic stability (ESRB) and its monetary policy function should not be confused and should not generate any conflict of interest in the execution of its principal functions;further stresses the importance of exploring future institutional independence of these three functions with a democratically accountable mechanism for resolving conflicts between them;points out that one source of such potential conflict of interest arises with the fact that recent stress tests, to which the SSM as the supervisory arm of the ECB participates, fail to integrate adverse scenarios of persistently low interest and inflation rates:scenarios which in practice challenge the future effectiveness of monetary policy measures;
Amendment 364 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 b (new)
Paragraph 23 b (new)
23 b. Notes that only a small number of SSM member states have activated or planned to activate general systemic risk buffers and a counter-cyclical capital buffer in 2017;notes that the ECB has so far not fully exercised its macroeconomic supervisory powers by fostering the adoption of macro-prudential supervisory instruments by national authorities;
Amendment 368 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 c (new)
Paragraph 23 c (new)
23 c. Asks the Commission to come forward with proposals to improve macroprudential oversight and the policy tools available for mitigating the risks in shadow banks in light of the warning delivered by the ECB that the steady expansion over the last decade to 22 trillion EUR in assets of non-bank credit intermediation;underlines that further initiatives are needed to monitor and assess vulnerabilities in the growing shadow banking sector;
Amendment 370 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 d (new)
Paragraph 23 d (new)
23 d. Supports the ECB's assessment that the current CRR/CRD IV package lacks certain measures which could also effectively address specific types of systemic risk - such as (i) various asset- side measures including the application of limits to loan-to-value, loan-to income or debt service-to-income ratios, and (ii) the introduction of various exposure limits falling outside the current definition of large exposures;
Amendment 372 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 e (new)
Paragraph 23 e (new)
23 e. Acknowledges that the ECB, as the competent authority for prudential supervision of significant institutions, has harmonised the exercise of the options and discretion which are granted to the supervisor in the CRD-CRR package, in accordance with its legal mandate;notes that other sources of regulatory divergence which are not within ECB’s remit remain, representing an obstacle to truly single supervision and potentially giving rise to systemic risks;supports the ECB’s view that the legislative review of the CRD-CRR package that is currently under way provides a good opportunity for the EU legislator to take steps towards further harmonisation;
Amendment 373 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 f (new)
Paragraph 23 f (new)
23 f. Urges the Commission to examine the need for legislative proposals in this regard;notes that some of these measures could already be integrated in the context of the ongoing legislative work around the risk reduction package;
Amendment 374 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 g (new)
Paragraph 23 g (new)
23 g. Underlines the still urgent need for deep structural reform of the euro area banking system as institutions remain 'too-big and interconnected to fail' and still enjoy unjustifiable public subsidies whilst representing a fundamental threat to the stability and efficient allocation of capital in the EU and international economies;emphasizes that an institution that is 'too-bigto fail' must be considered 'too dangerous to exist' and should therefore be downsized, simplified into manageable entities with defined economic functions to the service of the real economy;
Amendment 378 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Calls on the ECB to go one step further by ensuring full transparency on volumes and eligibility criteria in respect of the potential participation of SMEdisclosing the volumes of the purchases made under CSPP after a reasonable delay; emphasizes that in any case full transparency should be provided when the programme ends;
Amendment 392 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Encourages the ECB to take steps to align its CSPP purchases with the EU’s commitment to tackling climate change based on specific criteria that would facilitate future oriented and long-term investments and would take explicit account of the need to reduce the overall exposure of the economy to stranded carbon assets;
Amendment 397 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)
Paragraph 26 a (new)
26 a. Calls for a recomposition of the ECB’s portfolio of securities held under the CSPP in order to reduce its holding of bonds linked with fossil fuel industries, and increase its holdings of bonds linked with sustainable investments, for example in the framework of a mutually non coercive coordination between the ECB and the European Fund for Strategic Investment (EFSI) and the European Investment Bank (EIB);
Amendment 447 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
Paragraph 31
31. Agrees with the ECB on the importance of physical money as the only legal tender, and reminds all Eurozone countries that euro coins and banknotes must not be rejected in transactions;
Amendment 454 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
32. Takes note of the ongoing discussion about a ‘central bank digital currency’ or ‘digital base money’ made available to a wide range of counterparties including households; encourages the Commission and the ECB to look into the potential of such schemes; asks the ECB to provide an impact assessment on the best way to design a euro area DBM in its next annual report on the issue, taking particular account of the Swedish Central Bank project-plan for an e-krona;
Amendment 501 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
Paragraph 35
35. Believes that ECB profits from seigniorage revenue shouldwhich might be considered an EU budgetary resource, since they are directly linked to a fully developed, sui generis European policy;
Amendment 509 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36
Paragraph 36
36. Considers that the ECB’s growing number of responsibilities and tasks necessitaterequires greater ECB transparency and accountability towards the Parliament; stands ready to this effect to improve the setup of the monetary dialogue with the ECB president, if appropriate by means of an interinstitutional arrangement after assessing other examples such as those of the UK Parliament and the US Congress; recalls its request to the ECB to add a chapter or an annex in its annual report providing a paragraph-by-paragraph feedback to the Parliament's annual report on the European Central Bank Annual Report;
Amendment 532 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37 a (new)
Paragraph 37 a (new)
37 a. Underlines that the current ELA legal framework has often been justified on grounds that the provision of emergency liquidity assistance needed to remain within the remit of National Central Banks as the supervision of these banks used to be circumscribed within the Member States' competent authorities perimeter;is of the opinion that as banking supervision, of at least significant institutions, has been Europeanised such development points towards the need to reform and update the ELA legal framework and to adapt it to the new institutional setting;welcomes in that respect recent remarks from President Draghi hinting that such reforms would be required and are to be discussed;suggests the ECB to develop further policy options for such reform in its next annual report;
Amendment 535 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37 b (new)
Paragraph 37 b (new)
37 b. Points out, that as indicated by the ECB’s role in relation to liquidity provision to Greece in June 2015 and the leaked discussions of the ECB Council of Governors on the solvency of Cypriot banks, the concept of' 'insolvency' underpinning the provision of central bank liquidity to institutions in the Euro area lacks a sufficient level of clarity and legal certainty as the ECB has in the previous years alternatively referred to a static concept (whether a bank complies with minimum capital requirements at acertain point in time) or to a dynamic concept of solvency based on forward looking scenarios of stress tests for justifying the continuation or the limitation of ELA provision;underlines that such a lack of clarity needs to be addressed so as to guarantee legal certainty and foster financial stability;looks forward for further explanations from the ECB as to whether the recently revised ELA legal framework is expected to impact on the ECB understanding of the solvency concept;
Amendment 548 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38 a (new)
Paragraph 38 a (new)
38 a. Notes that the ECB is required by the SSM Regulation to conduct a public consultation only before adopting a regulation;acknowledges that the ECB has conducted public consultations inviting feedback also when adopting specific non-binding policy stances but encourages the ECB to conduct public consultations and disclose the results thereof in all fields of quasi-legislative measures;
Amendment 555 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38 b (new)
Paragraph 38 b (new)
38 b. Asks the ECB to overhaul its whistleblowing framework, adopting a clearly identifiable and public whistleblowing policy, which sets out in detail how reports will be investigated and includes the option to report anonymously;
Amendment 557 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38 c (new)
Paragraph 38 c (new)
38 c. Is of the opinion that a future interinstitutional arrangement aiming at ensuring an enhanced and more effective accountability of the ECB in a context in which it has largely expanded its missions since the beginning of the global financial crisis should at least contain the following elements: ·publication requirements on declarations of interests for Governing Council members; ·ensure that there are independent members in the Audit Committee as well as in the Ethics committee; ·adopt a new whistleblowing policy; ·set clear guidelines and transparency requirements and as appropriate limits on meetings with stakeholders; ·provide for specific requirements as regards the positions taken by the institution in the framework of financial assistance programmes as well as in multilateral fora such as the Basel committee;
Amendment 559 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38 d (new)
Paragraph 38 d (new)
38 d. Notes with concern the participation of ECB Board and Council of governors Members in instances and informal fora involving secretive discussions with the participation of prominent senior representatives of the private sector such as the 'group of thirty' where discussions are not in the public domain;is of the opinion that rules related to such involvement as well as regarding revolving door practices for all public institutions including the ECB should be significantly strengthened as potential conflicts of interest undermine the necessary trust, transparency and accountability of these institutions;
Amendment 561 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38 e (new)
Paragraph 38 e (new)
38 e. Believes that the on-going crisis has highlighted the need to diversify the theoretical background underlying the policy framework within central banks;requests the ECB to develop in its next annual report on what has been the impact of the crisis as regards the evolution of its theoretical framework;
Amendment 82 #
2017/2117(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital M
Recital M
M. whereas the protection afforded to certain animal species under the Habitats Directive has l, as well as destruction of and deterioration of habitats, encroachment of hunting ranges by development, logging, and farming, rural depopulation and reduction in abundance and quality of their natural prey species have all contributed to increased attacks on herds of sheep and goats by wolves, bears and lynxes, thus worsening the precarious situation in which some farms find themselves;
Amendment 94 #
2017/2117(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital M a (new)
Recital M a (new)
Ma. whereas local authorities have the responsibility to minimise conflict for resources and mediate between different interest groups; whereas authorities and land managers in general including farmers, foresters and hunters have a responsibility to sustainably manage the landscape level population dynamics of species in the territories;
Amendment 341 #
2017/2117(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Invites the Commission and Member States to consider rural developmentas well as local and regional authorities to consider measures to protect herds from attack from predators and look into reviewing the Habitats Directive, with the aim of controlling the spread of predators in certain grazing areas;
Amendment 363 #
2017/2117(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Notes that compensation for predator kills doesn’t always cover externalised costs, but points out the success of other schemes that pay farmers an all-inclusive sum to work in territories where predators are present;
Amendment 377 #
2017/2117(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 b (new)
Paragraph 14 b (new)
14b. Notes the partial success of schemes to re-introduce strains of sheepdogs in helping warn off predators, and calls for more measures and exchange of ideas to find appropriate solutions;
Amendment 29 #
2017/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas during this period the bee population rose by 47.8% but EU funding increased by just 12%, so that the available EU funding is not sufficient to maintain the bee populationnumber of domesticated honey bee hives accounted for rose due to the accession of new Member States and the procedure for honey bee colony declaration, which takes into account the period of the year when beekeepers have the most bees or colonies;
Amendment 33 #
2017/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas EU funding increased by just 12%, with the consequence that the available EU funding is not sufficient to maintain the bee population, and further is unable to meet the needs of certain Member States suffering high mortality rates in terms of colony renewal;
Amendment 36 #
2017/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D b (new)
Recital D b (new)
Db. Whereas the statistical increase in honey bee populations in the EU since the end of the 1990s should not disguise the fact that professionals in the sector are facing a loss of honey productivity in their hives and that they must increase their colony stock in order to produce equivalent quantities of honey;
Amendment 40 #
2017/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D c (new)
Recital D c (new)
Dc. Whereas this situation should not conceal one of the major concerns of the beekeeping industry, namely that livestock mortality has, in some countries, reached levels greater than 50%;
Amendment 53 #
2017/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas somemultiple stress factors cause bee mortality and decline, including, in order of importance, environmental degradation, the intensive agricultural model (which provides less nectar outside of crop flowering seasons), the impact of plant protection products and other biocides, climate change in particular wet and cold summers, and the serious consequences of invasive alien species such as Varroa destructor, the small hive beetle Aethina tumida, the Asian hornet Vespa vellutina and American foulbrood are causing; Whereas there is currently widespread destruction in the European bee population and caus, entailing serious economic harm to beekeepers;
Amendment 75 #
2017/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
Recital I
I. whereas beekeepers, agricultural producers and, environmentalists also expect there to be a clear scientific consensus on all substances and other factors which are a danger to bees’ healthnd citizens expect the EU to draw conclusions from the existing scientific consensus on the role of certain chemicals which are a danger to bees’ health, such as neonicotinoids and other systemic insecticides;
Amendment 82 #
2017/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I a (new)
Recital I a (new)
Amendment 92 #
2017/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital J
Recital J
Amendment 93 #
2017/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital J
Recital J
J. whereas theoften-cited statistics indicate progress ion the EU’s beekeeping sector, with an increase in the number of bee colonies and honey produc are open to misinterpretation, as annual observations over the past 15 years and an ongoing rise in the number of beekeepersf winter losses and disorders continue to be high;
Amendment 97 #
2017/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K
Recital K
Amendment 98 #
2017/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K
Recital K
K. whereas this statistical increase results in part from the steady rise in Member State numbers and in part from the particular situation of the sector, sincefact that each Member State furnishes data for the period with the highest number of bee colonies in a given year;
Amendment 119 #
2017/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital O
Recital O
Amendment 169 #
2017/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital AF
Recital AF
AF. whereas other beekeeping products such as pollen, propolis, beeswax and royal jelly alsore not adequately defined and regulated at European level, which facilitates fraud and growing adulteration; whereas these products are increasingly used as high quality foods, contribute significantly to people’s wellbeing and play an important role in the healthcare and cosmetics industries;
Amendment 183 #
2017/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital AF a (new)
Recital AF a (new)
AFa. Whereas the rules in the current organic regulation concerning beekeeping are contradictory and applied differently by the Member States, hindering the development of this production model;
Amendment 228 #
2017/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls on the Commission to include a new direct support schemestrictly maintain the resources for the actions currently implemented under the Honey CMO and to consider whether to allocate additional resources for a new direct funding for beekeepers based on colony numbers in its proposals for the common agricultural policy post-2020;
Amendment 291 #
2017/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Understands that some invasive alien species such as the Varroa destructor, the small hive beetle (Aethina tumida), the Asian hornet and American foulbrood are causing sRecognises the impact of environmental degradation on bee health, linked in particular to the presence of chemicals dangerious harm to beekeepers and widespread destruction among beeto pollinators;
Amendment 297 #
2017/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Understands that some invasive alien species such as the Varroa destructor, the small hive beetle (Aethina tumida), the Asian hornet and American foulbrood are also causing serious economic harm to beekeepers and widespread destruction among bees; considers however that these should be seen in context, as other factors pose a greater risk;
Amendment 301 #
2017/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Recognises that a bee's resistance is considerably weakened by cumulative chemical exposure, leaving them unable to deal with stressors such as wet years, a lack of nectar, diseases or parasites, based on independent peer-reviewed scientific evidence
Amendment 304 #
2017/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 b (new)
Paragraph 10 b (new)
10b. Notes that a healthy bee is better placed to withstand parasitism, disease and predation; Notes further that parasitism is never the primary cause of death, as parasites have an interest in keeping a host alive;
Amendment 305 #
2017/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 c (new)
Paragraph 10 c (new)
10c. Calls on the Commission and Member States to draw conclusions from the scientific consensus now established on the role of neonicotinoids and other systemic insecticides in bee health, and calls on the Commission to take appropriate measures accordingly;
Amendment 308 #
2017/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 d (new)
Paragraph 10 d (new)
10d. Calls on the EU to formally adopt the guidelines for assessing the impact of plant protection products on bees, which alone can determine the level of 'acceptable risk' required by Regulation 1107/2009.
Amendment 327 #
2017/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Calls on the Member States and the regions to use all means possible to protect local and regional bee varieties from the undesirable spread of naturalised or invasive alien varieties in the EU; notes the possibilities provided for under the Regulation 1143/2014 on Invasive Alien Species, as well as potentially under the recently adopted Animal and Plant Health regulations (Reg.s 429/2016 and 2031/2016 respectively)
Amendment 361 #
2017/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Calls on the Member States to support the implementation of agri- environmental measures that support the establishment of bee colonies;
Amendment 362 #
2017/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 b (new)
Paragraph 14 b (new)
14b. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to support the planting of plant varieties on the basis of their proven nectariferous and polliniferous capacities during their flowering period, and of the length of their flowering period, and not on the basis of historical or theoretical interest for pollinating insects;
Amendment 377 #
2017/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 c (new)
Paragraph 14 c (new)
14c. Calls on seed breeders to promote quality plant breeding schemes, including melliferous or polliniferous capacity in the selection criteria; Calls for selection criteria to include preference for a maximum biological diversity of locally- adapted and locally-sourced species and varieties;
Amendment 383 #
2017/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 d (new)
Paragraph 14 d (new)
14d. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to use bees as indicators of environmental quality and as an instrument for assessing the effectiveness of the implementation of the CAP objectives, specifically via residue analysis and botanical diversity of pollen sampled in beehives and other beekeeping matrices/ products;
Amendment 388 #
2017/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 e (new)
Paragraph 14 e (new)
14e. Urges the Commission to progress in implementing the pilot projects on bees and other pollinators as indicators of environmental and habitat health, as these might prove useful for development of future policy;
Amendment 391 #
2017/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 f (new)
Paragraph 14 f (new)
14f. Notes that the simplest way to improve bee health and reduce mortality is to cut exposure to products that increase bee mortality, whilst other factors impacting bees, like climate change, food availability, the dominant intensive agricultural model, parasites and predators, are much more difficult, time-consuming and complex to resolve
Amendment 406 #
2017/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Suggests making honey packaging plants which also process imported honey subject to EU food safety monitoring; this might be achieved by amending Regulation (EC) No 853/2004; specifies, however, that the relevant provisions of food hygiene Reg. 853/2004 apply only to establishments which pack honey that is not directly produced by them; it is important that EU beekeepers packing their own honey should not be faced with further heavy burdens;
Amendment 413 #
2017/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Expects honey always to be identifiable from the moment it leaves the hive and to be classifiable according to its plant origin, irrespective of whether it is a domestic or an imported product;
Amendment 417 #
2017/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Since monofloral honeys are difficult to determine in the Member States, proposes adding aProposes that the ‘Honey Directive’ (2001/110/EC) be integrated with the definition and main distinctive characteristics of all beekeeping products, including pollen, royal jelly, and beeswax, and with a general description of their characteristics to the ‘Honey Directive’ (2001/110/EC)hat make it possible to distinguish and define a monofloral honey, since monofloral honeys are difficult to determine;
Amendment 464 #
2017/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31 a (new)
Paragraph 31 a (new)
31 a. Calls on the Commission and Member States to update and harmonise the organic legislation for beekeeping, so that beekeepers across Europe can have access to the organic market under the same rules.
Amendment 29 #
2017/2071(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Believes that instead of playing a partly anti-cyclical role, the key priority for the EIB should be to focus on areas where markets fail due to their persistent very short term focus and inability to correctly price long term externalities;
Amendment 43 #
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 as stable and sustainable economic growth is a key precondition for fiscal stability ;
Amendment 51 #
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 in order for the bank to continue to be able to perform its role; Believes that, while the UK, in terms of investment, should be treated as any other member state prior to its formal departure from the Union, the EIB is right to condition investment on assurances that investment eligibility criteria, notably on environmental standards, will be met for the full duration of such investments
Amendment 59 #
2017/2071(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Welcomes the EIB’s commitment to support the Union's commitments under the Paris Agreement; believes that the review of the EIB’s Energy policy foreseen for 2018 should result in an ambitious action plan to align its investments with the 1.5 degrees target that would significantly reduce risks and the impacts of climate change through the phasing-out of fossil fuel projects and the prioritisation of projects increasing the energy available through renewables and energy efficiency;
Amendment 60 #
2017/2071(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Points out that the EIB has had very mixed results on climate action, even though it just met its 25% target overall; is concerned that in 16 EU Member States, EIB support for climate action did not reach even the level of 20% and that climate action investment in 2016 was predominantly located in the EU’s stronger economies with 70 per cent of EFSI support for renewable energy was concentrated in just one country – Belgium – while 80 per cent of energy efficiency investment through the EFSI was allocated to France, Finland and Germany;
Amendment 61 #
2017/2071(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 c (new)
Paragraph 5 c (new)
5c. Calls on the EIB to work with small market participants and community cooperatives to undertake bundling of small scale renewable energy projects to enable them to be eligible for EIB funding;
Amendment 85 #
2017/2071(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Notes a wide variety of experiences with EFSI projects; calls for the exchange of best practices between the EIB and the Member States in order to increase the effectiveness of the Juncker plan by focusing less on achieving an arbitrary level of leverage and more on making a difference to EU citizens' lives through sustainable infrastructure and quality jobs;
Amendment 94 #
2017/2071(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Welcomes the EIB group Strategy on Gender Equality and Women’s Economic Empowerment released in 2017; Believes that the Gender Perspective should be applied to all EIB Group financial operations; Calls for a Gender Action Plan to be implemented soon, to set ambitious targets and to be accompanied by concrete indicators;
Amendment 98 #
2017/2071(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 b (new)
Paragraph 9 b (new)
9b. Notes that some of the projects managed by the European Investment Bank involved Mossack Fonseca and that the European Commission blocked 18 projects in 2016, preventing €1billion to end up in tax havens; Calls on the Commission to make public an annual report on the use of EU funds as well as EIB and EBRD money transfers to offshore structures, including the number and nature of projects blocked, the reasons for blocking them and follow-up actions taken to ensure no EU funds directly or indirectly help tax avoidance and tax fraud;
Amendment 101 #
2017/2071(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 c (new)
Paragraph 9 c (new)
9c. Asks for a country-by-country reporting without exemptions as a key part of the Corporate Social Responsibility strategy of the EIB and this before the EU adopts legislation in the field;
Amendment 102 #
2017/2071(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 d (new)
Paragraph 9 d (new)
9d. Reiterates its call to the Commission to amend European legislation, including those concerning the European Investment Bank (EIB) Statute, the European Fund for Strategic Investment (EFSI) regulation, the four Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) Regulations, and the five European Structural and Investment Funds (European Regional Development Fund, European Social Fund, Cohesion Fund, European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development, European Maritime and Fisheries Fund) to prohibit the use of EU funding going to ultimate beneficiaries or financial intermediaries proven to be involved in tax evasion or aggressive tax planning;
Amendment 103 #
2017/2071(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 e (new)
Paragraph 9 e (new)
9e. Urges the EIB group to adopt the review of its whistleblowing policy as soon as possible and to reinforce the independence, legitimacy, accessibility, predictability, equitability and transparency of its Complaints Mechanism, including by involving Directors and enhancing protection of complainants. Believes that such measures are clearly in the interest of the bank, the stakeholders and the EU institutions;
Amendment 104 #
2017/2071(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 f (new)
Paragraph 9 f (new)
9f. Recommends that the new European Public Prosecutor's Office (EPPO) examine the possibility of covering EIB operations in the EU Member States concerned as part of its activities;
Amendment 33 #
2017/2053(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Points out that these new types of ORs are essential to finance more recent Union priorities such as migration, the Paris Climate Agreement and internal security and defence and to offset the loss in revenue of EUR 9 to 12 billion a year which could result from Brexit; notes also that new ORs are needed to avoid the potential spending cuts to the common agricultural policy (CAP) presented in the Commission’s ‘Reflection Paper on the Future of EU Finances’;
Amendment 29 #
2017/0251(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) In 1967, when the Council adopted the common system of value added tax (VAT) by means of Council Directives 67/227/EEC42 and 67/228/EEC43 , the commitment was made to establish a definitive VAT system operating within the European Community in the same way as it would within a single Member State. Since the political and technical conditions were not ripe for such a system, when the fiscal frontiers between Member States were abolished by the end of 1992 transitional VAT arrangements were adopted. Council Directive 2006/112/EC44 , which is currently in force, provides that these transitional rules have to be replaced by definitive arrangements. However, those rules have now been in place for several decades, resulting in a complex transitional VAT system prone to intra- EU cross-border VAT fraud. Those transitional arrangements suffer from numerous shortcomings, which result in the VAT system being neither fully efficient nor compatible with the requirements of a true single market. _________________ 42 First Council Directive 67/227/EEC of 11 April 1967 on the harmonisation of legislation of Member States concerning turnover taxes (OJ 71, 14.4.1967, p. 1301). 43 Second Council Directive 67/228/EEC of 11 April 1967 on the harmonisation of legislation of Member States concerning turnover taxes — Structure and procedures for application of the common system of value added tax (OJ 71, 14.4.1967, p. 1303). 44 Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (OJ L 347, 11.12.2006, p. 1).
Amendment 34 #
2017/0251(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) These principles should be established in the Directive and should replace the current concept according to which the definitive arrangements shall be based on the taxation in the Member State of origin. Those new principles would enable the Member States to better fight VAT fraud, especially Missing Trader Intra-Community (MTIC), estimated to amount to at least EUR 50 billion a year.
Amendment 38 #
2017/0251(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) The creation of the certified taxable person status is needed for the efficient application of the improvements to the Union VAT rules for cross-border transactions as well as for the gradual transition towards the definitive system for intra-Union trade. However, strict criteria, applied in a harmonised way by all Member States, need to be put in place to determine which enterprises can benefit from the status of the certified taxable person.
Amendment 43 #
2017/0251(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) In the current system no distinction is made between reliable and less reliable taxable persons as regards the VAT rules to be applied. The granting of the certified taxable person status on the basis of certain objective criteria, to be applied in a harmonised way by Member States, should enable the identification of those reliable taxable persons. This status would allow them to benefit from the application of certain fraud-sensitivesimplified rules not applicable to other taxable persons.
Amendment 47 #
2017/0251(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) Access to the certified taxable person status should be based on criteria harmonised at Union level and therefore certification provided by one Member State should be valid in the whole Union. The Commission should be responsible for presenting further guidelines and verifying the proper application by Member States of such harmonised criteria across the Union.
Amendment 51 #
2017/0251(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) Certain taxable persons covered by particular arrangements excluding them from the general VAT rules, or who only occasionally carry out economic activities, should not be granted the certified taxable person status as far as those particular arrangements or occasional activities are concerned. Otherwise the smooth application of the proposed changes could be disrupted. In addition, special attention should be paid to ensuring that small enterprises are not put at a competitive disadvantage compared to large enterprises in respect of the obtainment of the status of certified taxable persons.
Amendment 56 #
2017/0251(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Directive 2006/112/EC
Article 13 a – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 13 a – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Any taxable person who has a place of business or a fixed establishment in the Community or in absence of place of business and fixed establishment has his permanent address or usual residence in the Community and who, in the course of his economic activity, carries out, or intends to carry out, any of the transactions referred to in Articles 17a, 20 and 21, or transactions in accordance with the conditions specified in Article 138 may apply to the tax authorities for the status of certified taxable person.
Amendment 59 #
2017/0251(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Directive 2006/112/EC
Article 13 a – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 13 a – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) the absence of any serious infringement or repeated infringements of taxation rules and customs legislation, the absence of any serious tax adjustment by tax administrations, as well as of any record of serious criminal offences relating to the economic activity of the applicant;
Amendment 60 #
2017/0251(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Directive 2006/112/EC
Article 13 a – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
Article 13 a – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
Amendment 62 #
2017/0251(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Directive 2006/112/EC
Article 13 a – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
Article 13 a – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
(ca) the applicant shall be the beneficial owner of a bank account in a financial institution established in the Union.
Amendment 63 #
2017/0251(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Directive 2006/112/EC
Article 13 a – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 13 a – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. In order to ensure a harmonised interpretation in the granting of the certified taxable person status, the Commission shall adopt by means of an implementing act further guidance for Member States regarding the evaluation of those criteria, which shall be valid across the Union. The first implementing act shall be adopted no later than one month after the entry into force of this Directive.
Amendment 66 #
2017/0251(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Directive 2006/112/EC
Article 13 a – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point d a (new)
Article 13 a – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point d a (new)
(da) taxable persons which do not have or cease to have a valid VAT registration number;
Amendment 70 #
2017/0251(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Directive 2006/112/EC
Article 13 a – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2 – point c
Article 13 a – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2 – point c
Amendment 72 #
2017/0251(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Directive 2006/112/EC
Article 13 a – paragraph 5
Article 13 a – paragraph 5
5. Where the application is refused, the grounds for refusal shall be notified by the tax authorities to the applicant together with the decision. Member States shall ensure that the applicant is granted a right of appeal against any decision to refuse an application. Member States shall inform other Member States of that refusal decision and the reasons accompanying that decision through their tax authorities.
Amendment 74 #
2017/0251(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Directive 2006/112/EC
Article 13 a – paragraph 6
Article 13 a – paragraph 6
6. The taxable person who has been granted the status of certified taxable person shall inform the tax authorities without delay of any factor arising after the decision was taken, which may affect or influence the continuation of that status. The tax status shall be withdrawn by the tax authorities where the criteria set out in paragraph 2 are no longer met. Tax authorities of the Member States having granted the status of certified taxable person shall review that decision, at least every two years, to ensure that the conditions are still met. If the taxable person has not informed the tax authorities of any factor possibly affecting the certified taxable person status, it shall be subject to proportionate, efficient and dissuasive sanctions, including the loss of the certified taxable person status.
Amendment 95 #
2017/0251(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Every three years starting from the adoption of this Directive, the Commission shall, on the basis of information obtained from the Member States, present a report to the European Parliament and to the Council on the implementation of the criteria to define a certified taxable person in the Member States and, in particular, on the impact it can have in fighting VAT fraud. That report shall be accompanied, where appropriate, by a proposal for a legislative act.
Amendment 25 #
2017/0248(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1 a (new)
Recital 1 a (new)
(1a) VAT fraud is often linked with organised crime and a very small number of these organised networks can be responsible for billions of euro in cross- border VAT fraud, not only affecting revenue collection in Member States but also having a negative impact on the Union’s own resources. Member States have therefore a shared responsibility for the protection of all Member States’ VAT revenues.
Amendment 32 #
2017/0248(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) In order to combat the most serious cross-border fraud schemes, it is necessary to clarify and strengthen the governance, tasks and functioning of Eurofisc. Eurofisc liaison officials should be able to access, exchange, process and analyse all necessary information swiftly and coordinate any follow-up actions. It is also necessary to strengthen the cooperation with other authorities involved in the fight against VAT fraud at Union level, in particular through the exchange of targeted information with Europol and the European Anti-Fraud Office. Therefore, Eurofisc liaison officials should be able to share, spontaneously or on foot of a request, information and intelligence with Europol and, the European Anti-Fraud Office, and, for participating Member States, the European Public Prosecutor’s Office, especially for suspicion of VAT fraud above a certain amount. This would enable Eurofisc liaison officials to receive data and intelligence held by Europol and the European Anti-Fraud Office in order to identify the real perpetrators of the VAT fraud activities.
Amendment 34 #
2017/0248(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) Organising the forwarding of requests for VAT refunds — pursuant to Article 5 of Council Directive 2008/9/EC35 offers an opportunity to reduce the administrative burden for the competent authorities to recover unpaid VAT debttax liabilities in the Member State of establishment. __________________ 35 Council Directive 2008/9/EC of 12 February 2008 laying down detailed rules for the refund of value added tax, provided for in Directive 2006/112/EC, to taxable persons not established in the Member State of refund but established in another Member State (OJ L 44, 20.2.2008, p. 23).
Amendment 37 #
2017/0248(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) The Commission mayshould have access to the information communicated or collected pursuant to Regulation (EU) No 904/2010 only in so far as it is necessary for care, maintenance and development of the electronic systems hosted by the Commission and used by the Member States for the purpose of this Regulation. In addition, the Commission should be able to conduct visits in Member States to evaluate how the administrative cooperation arrangements work.
Amendment 40 #
2017/0248(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20 a (new)
Recital 20 a (new)
(20a) Given the low number of Member States publishing estimates of VAT losses due to intra-community fraud, having comparable data on intra-Community VAT fraud would contribute to a better targeted cooperation between Member States. Therefore, a common statistical approach should be developed by the Commission together with the Member States to quantify and analyse VAT fraud.
Amendment 52 #
2017/0248(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 a (new)
Regulation (EU) No 904/2010
Article 10 – paragraph 2
Article 10 – paragraph 2
(1a) Article 10(2) is replaced by the following: ‘However, where the requested authority is already in possession of that information, the time limit shall be reduced to a maximum period of one month.”15 working days.’
Amendment 53 #
2017/0248(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 b (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 b (new)
(1b) The following Article is inserted: ‘Article 12a All Member States shall implement a set of operational targets for reducing the percentage of late replies and improving the quality of requests for information and shall inform the Commission about their targets.’
Amendment 70 #
2017/0248(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11 – point b – point i
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11 – point b – point i
Regulation (EU) No 904/2010
Article 33 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 33 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) coordinate the work of the Eurofisc liaison officials as referred to in Article 36(1) of the participatingall Member States in acting on warnings and intelligence received;
Amendment 71 #
2017/0248(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11 a (new)
Regulation No 904/2010
Article 34 – paragraph 1
Article 34 – paragraph 1
(11a) Article 34(1) is replaced by the following: “1. Member States shall participate in theall Eurofisc working fields of their choice and may also decide to terminate their participation therein, to the extent of their capacity.”
Amendment 72 #
2017/0248(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12
Regulation No 904/2010
Article 34 – paragraph 2
Article 34 – paragraph 2
2. Member States having chosen to take part in a Eurofisc working field shall actively participate in the multilateral exchange and the joint processing and analysis of targeted information between all participatingwith the other Member States and in the coordination of any follow-up actions.’
Amendment 75 #
2017/0248(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 14 – point c
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 14 – point c
Regulation (EU) No 904/2010
Article 36 – paragraph 3
Article 36 – paragraph 3
3. Eurofisc working field coordinators mayshall forward, on their own initiative or on request, some of the collated and processed information to Europol and, the European Anti-Fraud Office (‘OLAF’), and for participating countries to the European Public Prosecutor’s Office, when total damage is of at least 5 000 000 EUR. Eurofisc working field coordinators may forward, on their own initiative or on request, relevant collated and processed information to the same institutions for cases below EUR 5 000 000, as agreed by the working field participants.
Amendment 84 #
2017/0248(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 17 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 17 a (new)
Regulation (EU) No 904/2010
Article 49 – paragraph 1
Article 49 – paragraph 1
(17a) Article 49(1) is replaced by the following: “1. The Member States and the Commission shall examine and evaluate how the arrangements for administrative cooperation provided for in this Regulation are working. The Commission shall pool the Member States’ experience with the aim of improving the operation of those arrangements.” In addition, the Commission shall conduct visits in Member States to evaluate how the administrative cooperation arrangements work. The Commission shall adopt by means of implementing acts the practical and procedural arrangements in relation to these visits. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 58(2).”
Amendment 86 #
2017/0248(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18
Regulation (EU) No 904/2010
Article 49 – paragraph 2a – subparagraph 2
Article 49 – paragraph 2a – subparagraph 2
Amendment 87 #
2017/0248(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18 a (new)
Regulation (EU) No 904/2010
Article 49 a (new)
Article 49 a (new)
(18a) The following article is inserted: “Article 49a The Member States and the Commission shall establish a common system of collecting statistics on intra-Community VAT fraud and publish national estimates of VAT losses due to this fraud, as well as estimates for the Union as a whole. The Commission shall adopt by means of implementing acts the practical arrangements for such statistical system. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 58(2).’
Amendment 88 #
2017/0248(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18 b (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18 b (new)
Regulation (EU) No 904/2010
Article 50 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 50 – paragraph 1 a (new)
(18b) In Article 50, the following paragraph is added: ‘1a. When a Member State provides wider information to a third country than that provided for under Chapters II and III of this Regulation, that Member State may not refuse to provide this information to any other Member State requesting cooperation or having an interest to receive it.’
Amendment 90 #
2017/0248(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19 – point a
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19 – point a
Regulation (EU) No 904/2010
Article 55 – paragraph 2
Article 55 – paragraph 2
2. Persons duly accredited by the Security Accreditation Authority of the Commission may have access to this information only in so far as it is necessary for care, maintenance and development of the electronic systems hosted by the Commission and used by the Member States to implement this Regulation.
Amendment 25 #
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 policiesfinancing public services and managing a more progressive tax system. It is therefore critical that Member States' tax authorities obtain comprehensive and relevant information about potentially aggressive tax arrangementsarrangements facilitating tax evasion and tax avoidance. 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. A lack of reaction from tax authorities on reported schemes should not however be interpreted as implicit clearance by the authorities.
Amendment 31 #
2017/0138(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) Considering that most of the potentially aggressive tax planning arrangements span across more than one jurisdiction, the disclosure of information about those arrangements would bring additional positive results where that information was also exchanged amongst Member States. In particular, the automatic exchange of information between tax administrations is crucial in order to provide these authorities with the necessary information to enable them to take action where they observe aggressive tax practices. However, Member States are encouraged to establish similar disclosure requirement for arrangements that exist solely in their jurisdiction only.
Amendment 33 #
2017/0138(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) Recognising how a transparent framework for developing business activity could contribute to clamping down on tax avoidance and evasion in the internal market, the Commission has been called on to embark on initiatives on the mandatory disclosure of potentially aggressive tax planning arrangements along the lines of Action 12 of the OECD Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS). In this context, the European Parliament has demonstrated the crucial role of intermediaries in advising, creating and managing tax schemes and called for tougher measures against intermediaries who assist in arrangements that may lead to tax avoidance and evasion.
Amendment 35 #
2017/0138(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) It is necessary to recall how certain financial intermediaries and other providers of tax advice, and auditors, seem to have actively assisted their clients to conceal money offshore. Furthermore, although the CRS introduced by Council Directive (EU) 2014/10727 is a significant step forward in establishing a tax transparent framework within the Union, at least in terms of financial account information, it can still be improved. _________________ 27 Council Directive (EU) 2014/107 of 9 December 2014 amending Directive 2011/16/EU as regards mandatory automatic exchange of information in the field of taxation (OJ L 359, 16.2.2014, p. 1).
Amendment 37 #
2017/0138(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) It is necessary to recall how certain financial intermediaries and other providers of tax advice seem to have actively assisted their clients to conceal money offshore. Furthermore, although the CRS introduced by Council Directive (EU) 2014/10727 is a significant step forward in establishing a tax transparent framework within the Union, at least in terms of financial account information, it can still be improved. In addition, Member States' capacity to process the amount of financial information received should be enhanced accordingly and tax administrations' financial, human and IT resources should be increased. _________________ 27 Council Directive (EU) 2014/107 of 9 December 2014 amending Directive 2011/16/EU as regards mandatory automatic exchange of information in the field of taxation (OJ L 359, 16.2.2014, p. 1).
Amendment 42 #
2017/0138(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) The disclosure of potentially aggressive tax planning arrangements of a cross-border dimension can contribute effectively to the efforts for creating an environment of fair taxation in the internal market. In this light, an obligation on intermediaries to inform tax authorities on certain cross-border arrangements that could potentially be used for tax avoidance purposes would constitute a step in the right direction. In order to develop a more comprehensive policy, it would also be significant that as a second step, following disclosure, the tax authorities automatically share information with their peers in other Member States. Such arrangements should also enhance the effectiveness of the CRS. In addition, it would be crucial to grant the Commission access to a sufficient amount ofrelevant information so that it can monitor the proper functioning of this Directive and live up to its responsibilities under competition policies. Such access to information by the Commission does not discharge a Member State from its obligations to notify any state aid to the Commission.
Amendment 44 #
2017/0138(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) The disclosure of potentially aggressive tax planning arrangements of a cross-border dimension can contribute effectively to the efforts for creating an environment of fair taxation in the internal market. In this light, an obligation on intermediaries and auditors to inform tax authorities on certain cross-border arrangements that could potentially be used for tax avoidance purposes would constitute a step in the right direction. In order to develop a more comprehensive policy, it would also be significant that as a second step, following disclosure, the tax authorities share information with their peers in other Member States. Such arrangements should also enhance the effectiveness of the CRS. In addition, it would be crucial to grant the Commission access to a sufficient amount of information so that it can monitor the proper functioning of this Directive. Such access to information by the Commission does not discharge a Member State from its obligations to notify any state aid to the Commission.
Amendment 58 #
2017/0138(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) Given that the primary objective of such legislation should focus on ensuring the proper functioning of the internal market, it would be critical not to regulate at the level of the Union beyond what is necessary to achieve the envisaged aims. This is why it would be necessary to limit any common rules on disclosure to cross- border situations, namely situations in either more than one Member State or a Member State and a third country. In such circumstances, due to the potential impact on the functioning of the internal market, one can justify the need for enacting a common set of rules, rather than leaving the matter to be dealt with at the national level. If a Member State implements further national reporting measures of a similar nature, the additional information collected should be shared with other Member States if relevant.
Amendment 77 #
2017/0138(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 3 – point 18 – point c
Article 3 – point 18 – point c
(c) one or more of the parties to the arrangement or series of arrangements carries on a businessn activity in another jurisdiction through a permanent establishment or a controlled foreign company situated in that jurisdiction and the arrangement or series of arrangements forms part or the whole of the businessactivity of that permanent establishment;
Amendment 79 #
2017/0138(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 3 – point 18 – point d
Article 3 – point 18 – point d
(d) one or more of the parties to the arrangement or series of arrangements carries on a businessn activity in another jurisdiction withrough a permanent establishment which is not situated in that jurisdiction and the arrangement or series of arrangements forms part or the whole of the business of that permanent establishmentt creating a taxable presence in that jurisdiction;
Amendment 82 #
2017/0138(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 3 – point 20
Article 3 – point 20
20. "hallmark" means a typical characteristic or feature of an arrangement or series of arrangements which is listed in Annex IV.
Amendment 85 #
2017/0138(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b (new)
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 3 – point 21 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 3 – point 21 – paragraph 2 a (new)
While conducting tax and financial statements audits of intermediaries, as defined in this Article, auditors shall be subject to the same identification and disclosure obligations regarding potential aggressive tax schemes covered by article 8aaa of this Directive.
Amendment 88 #
2017/0138(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b (new)
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 3 – point 23 – point c a (new)
Article 3 – point 23 – point c a (new)
(ca) A taxpayer is the beneficial owner of another taxpayer within the meaning of Directive (EU) 2015/849.
Amendment 90 #
2017/0138(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive 2011/16/EU
Chapter II – section II – Article 8 a a a – paragraph 1
Chapter II – section II – Article 8 a a a – paragraph 1
1. Each Member State shall take the necessary measures to require intermediaries and auditors to file information with the competent tax authorities on a reportable cross-border arrangement or series of such arrangements within five working days, beginning on the day after the reportable cross-border arrangement or series of arrangements is made available for implementation by the intermediary to one or more taxpayers following contact with that taxpayer or those taxpayers, or where the first step in a series of arrangements has already been implemented.
Amendment 92 #
2017/0138(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive 2011/16/EU
Chapter II – section II – Article 8 a a a – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Chapter II – section II – Article 8 a a a – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Each Member State shallmay take the necessary measures to give intermediaries the right to a waiver from filing information on a reportable cross-border arrangement or series of such arrangements where they are entitled to a legal professional privilege under the national law of that Member State. In such circumstances, the obligation to file information on such an arrangement or series of arrangements shall be the responsibility of the taxpayer and intermediaries shall inform taxpayers of this responsibility due to the privilege.
Amendment 93 #
2017/0138(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive 2011/16/EU
Chapter II – section II – Article 8 a a a – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Chapter II – section II – Article 8 a a a – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Each Member State shall take the necessary measures to give intermediaries and auditors the right to a waiver from filing information on a reportable cross- border arrangement or series of such arrangements where they are entitled to a legal professional privilege under the national law of that Member State. In such circumstances, the obligation to file information on such an arrangement or series of arrangements shall be the responsibility of the taxpayer and intermediaries shall inform taxpayers of this responsibility due to the privilege.
Amendment 97 #
2017/0138(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive 2011/16/EU
Chapter II – section II – Article 8 a a a – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Chapter II – section II – Article 8 a a a – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Intermediaries and auditors may only be entitled to a waiver under the first subparagraph to the extent that they operate within the limits of the relevant national laws that define their professions.
Amendment 101 #
2017/0138(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive 2011/16/EU
Chapter II – section II – Article 8 a a a – paragraph 4
Chapter II – section II – Article 8 a a a – paragraph 4
4. Each Member State shall take the necessary measures to require intermediaries and taxpayers to file information on reportable cross-border arrangements that were implemented between [date of political agreement] and 31 December 2018since 1 January 2009. Intermediaries and taxpayers, as appropriate, shall file information on those reportable cross- border arrangements by 31 March 2019.
Amendment 103 #
2017/0138(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive 2011/16/EU
Chapter II – section II – Article a a a – paragraph 4
Chapter II – section II – Article a a a – paragraph 4
4. Each Member State shall take the necessary measures to require intermediaries, auditors and taxpayers to file information on reportable cross-border arrangements that were implemented between [date of political agreement] and 31 December 2018 Intermediaries, auditors and taxpayers, as appropriate, shall file information on those reportable cross- border arrangements by 31 March 2019.
Amendment 106 #
2017/0138(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive 2011/16/UEU
Chapter II – section II – Article 8 a a a – paragraph 6 – point a
Chapter II – section II – Article 8 a a a – paragraph 6 – point a
(a) the identification of intermediaries, or, where applicable auditors, and taxpayers, including their name, residence for tax purposes, and taxpayer identification number (TIN) and, where appropriate, the persons who are associated enterprises to the intermediary or taxpayer;
Amendment 107 #
2017/0138(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive 2011/16/EU
Chapter II – section II – Article 8 a a a – paragraph 6 – point a
Chapter II – section II – Article 8 a a a – paragraph 6 – point a
(a) the identification of intermediaries and taxpayers, including their name, nationality, residence for tax purposes, and taxpayer identification number (TIN) and, where appropriate, the persons who are associated enterprises to the intermediary or taxpayer;
Amendment 108 #
2017/0138(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive 2011/16/EU
Chapter II – section II – Article 8 a a a – paragraph 6 – point c
Chapter II – section II – Article 8 a a a – paragraph 6 – point c
(c) a summary of the content of the reportable cross-border arrangement or series of such arrangements, including a reference to the name by which they are commonly known, if any, and a description in abstract terms of the relevant business activities or arrangements, without leading to the disclosure of a commercial, industrial or professional secret or of a commercial process, or of information whose disclosure would be contrary to public policy;
Amendment 110 #
2017/0138(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive 2011/16/EU
Chapter II – section II – Article 8 a a a – paragraph 6 – point d
Chapter II – section II – Article 8 a a a – paragraph 6 – point d
(d) the starting date thatof the implementation of the reportable cross- border arrangement or of the first step in a series of such arrangements is to start or started;
Amendment 111 #
2017/0138(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive 2011/16/EU
Chapter II – section II – Article 8 a a a – paragraph 6 – point e
Chapter II – section II – Article 8 a a a – paragraph 6 – point e
(e) details of the national tax provisions the application of which creates a tax advantageforming the basis for the reportable arrangements or series of arrangements, if applicable;
Amendment 112 #
2017/0138(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive 2011/16/EU
Chapter II – section II – Article 8 a a a – paragraph 6 – point h
Chapter II – section II – Article 8 a a a – paragraph 6 – point h
(h) the identification of any person in the other Member States, if any, likely to be affected by the reportable cross-border arrangement or series of such arrangements indicating to which Member States the affected intermediaries, auditors or taxpayers are linked.
Amendment 114 #
2017/0138(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive 2011/16/EU
Chapter II – section II – Article 8 a a a – paragraph 8
Chapter II – section II – Article 8 a a a – paragraph 8
Amendment 119 #
2017/0138(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 21 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 3
Article 21 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 3
The competent authorities of all Member States shall have access to the information recorded in that directory. Tand the Commission shall also have access to the information recorded in that directory, however within the limitations set out in Articles 8a(8) and 8aaa(8). The necessary practical arrangements shall be adopted by the Commission in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 26(2).
Amendment 120 #
2017/0138(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 23 – paragraph 3
Article 23 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall communicate to the Commission a yearly assessment of the effectiveness of the automatic exchange of information referred to in Articles 8, 8a, 8aa and 8aaa as well as the practical results achieved. The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, adopt the form and the conditions of communication for that yearly assessment. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 26(2). Member States shall communicate to the Commission information about the number of arrangements or series of arrangements disclosed (as classified in Annex IV), the nationality of taxpayers benefiting from these arrangements and the number of sanctions applied to intermediaries or taxpayers disclosing aggressive tax arrangements. The Commission shall produce a yearly public report with this information.
Amendment 7 #
2017/0115(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) In its White Paper of 28 March 201113 the Commission set out a goal to move towards the full application of the 'polluter pays' and 'user pays' principles, to generate revenue and ensure financing for future transport investments. _________________ 13 White Paper of 28 March 2011 ‘Roadmap to a Single European Transport Area – Towards a competitive and resource efficient transport system' (COM(2011) 144 final).
Amendment 8 #
2017/0115(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 1 a (new)
Recital 1 a (new)
(1 a) The Commission should introduce a framework of harmonising rules on sustainable vehicle taxation.
Amendment 10 #
2017/0115(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) By nature, annual vehicle taxes are unrequited payments linked to the fact that the vehicle is registered on behalf of the taxpayer during a given period and, as such do not reflect any particular use of infrastructure. For similar reasons, vehicles taxes are not effective when it comesshould not overlap infrastructure distance based charging, but should be additional to incentivising cleaner and more efficient operations, or reducing congestion.
Amendment 14 #
2017/0115(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) Tolls being directly linked to distance-based road- use, they are considerably better fitted to achieve some of these objectives. In accordance with Article 7k of Directive 1999/62/EC, Member States which introduce tolls may provide appropriate compensation to national hauliers, without excluding nonetheless taxation on the economic, environmental and social impact of the entire lifecycle of the vehicle.
Amendment 17 #
2017/0115(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) The application of vehicle taxes represents a cost the industry must so far bearn incentive to the industry to develop more sustainable motorised vehicles in any event, even if tolls were to be levied by Member States. Therefore, vehicle taxes may act as an obstacleshould be seen as an addition to the introduction of tolls.
Amendment 19 #
2017/0115(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) Therefore, Member States should be afforded more scope to lower vehicle taxes, namely by way of a reduction of the minima set out in Directive 1999/62/EC. In order to minimise the risk of distortions of competition between transport operators established in different Member States, such reduction should be gradualencouraged to implement more sustainable vehicle taxes, like a carbon tax, on the basis of the impact of the entire lifecycle as well as the weight and dimensions of the vehicle.
Amendment 22 #
2017/0115(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5 a (new)
Recital 5 a (new)
(5 a) Member States should be encouraged to dismantle any contradictory tax incentives that discourage low-emission mobility and subsidise inefficient and polluting vehicles, like company diesel cars.
Amendment 28 #
2017/0115(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Annex I – paragraph 1 – point a
Annex I – paragraph 1 – point a
Directive 1999/62/EC
Annex I – Table A – title
Annex I – Table A – title
Amendment 29 #
2017/0115(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Annex I – paragraph 1 – point b
Annex I – paragraph 1 – point b
Directive 1999/62/EC
Annex I – Table B
Annex I – Table B
Amendment 31 #
2017/0115(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Annex I – paragraph 1 – point b
Annex I – paragraph 1 – point b
Directive 1999/62/EC
Annex I – Table C
Annex I – Table C
Amendment 33 #
2017/0115(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Annex I – paragraph 1 – point b
Annex I – paragraph 1 – point b
Directive 1999/62/EC
Annex I – Table D
Annex I – Table D
Amendment 35 #
2017/0115(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Annex I – paragraph 1 – point b
Annex I – paragraph 1 – point b
Directive 1999/62/EC
Annex I – Table E
Annex I – Table E
Amendment 37 #
2017/0115(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Annex I – paragraph 1 – point b
Annex I – paragraph 1 – point b
Directive 1999/62/EC
Annex I – Table F
Annex I – Table F
Amendment 900 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 15 – paragraph 1
Rule 15 – paragraph 1
The President, Vice-Presidents and Quaestors shall be elected by secret ballot, in accordance with Rule 182. Nominations shall be with consent. They may only be made by a political group or by at least 40 Members. However, if the number of nominations does not exceed the number of seats to be filled, the candidates may be elected by acclamation. Members shall be permitted to serve a maximum of two terms in the office of President pursuant to Rule 19(1), regardless of whether they are served consecutively or not.
Amendment 191 #
2016/2047(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 60 b (new)
Paragraph 60 b (new)
60 b. stresses that the Parliament and the Council, in order to create long term savings in the Union budget, must address the need for a roadmap to a single seat, as requested by the large majority of this Parliament in several resolutions;
Amendment 2 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 9
Citation 9
– having regard to the ECOFIN conclusions on corpthe exchange of tax-related informate tax avoidanceion on the activities of multinational companies and on the code of conduct on business taxation of 8 March 2016, on corporate taxation, base erosion and profit shifting of 8 December 2015, on business taxation of 9 December 2014 and on taxation policy of 1 December 1997,
Amendment 4 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 13
Citation 13
– having regard to the Commission’'s joint follow-up, as adopted by it on 16 March 2016, to the resolucommendations of Parliament with recommendations to the Commission's resolutions on bringing transparency, coordination and convergence to the corporate tax policies in the Union, and the resolution of Parliament on tax rulings and other measures similar in nature or effect,
Amendment 5 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 17
Citation 17
– having regard to the resolution of the Council and the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States of 1 December 1997 on a code of conduct for business taxation12 7a, and to the regular reports to the Council of the Code of Conduct Group on Business Taxation Group, __________________ 127a OJ C 2, 6.1.1998, p. 2.
Amendment 6 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 19
Citation 19
– having regard to the agreement signed between the EU and the Principality of Andorra on 12 February 2016 aiming at improving tax compliance by private savers,
Amendment 7 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 24
Citation 24
– having regard to the Guernsey-UK Double Taxation Arrangement as amended by the 2009 Arrangement, signed 20 January 20109 and in force as from 27 November 2009, relating to exchange of information,
Amendment 8 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 25
Citation 25
– having regard to the amendParliament's adopted by Parliamentlegislative position on 8 July 2015 to the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 2007/36/EC as regards the encouragement of long-term shareholder engagement and Directive 2013/34/EU as regards certain elements of the corporate governance statement,
Amendment 9 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 29
Citation 29
– having regard to the various parliamentary hearings and consecutive reports on tax avoidance and tax evasion held in national parliaments and in particular in the UK House of Commons, the US Senate and the French Assemblée Natio, the Australian Senate and the French National Assembly and Senalte,
Amendment 10 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 32
Citation 32
– having regards to the state aid decisions of the Commission relating to Fiat16 , Starbucks17 , and the Belgian excess-profit rulings18 , and decisions to open state aid investigations on McDonalds, Apple and Amazon; __________________ 16 SA.38375 - State aid which Luxembourg granted to Fiat. 17 SA.38374 State aid implemented by the Netherlands to Starbucks. 18 C(2015)9837, Commission Decision of 11 January 2016 on the excess profit exemption state aid scheme SA.37667 (2015/C) (ex 2015/NN) implemented by Belgium.
Amendment 11 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 1
Subheading 1
Overall considerations and establishment of fact, facts and figures
Amendment 27 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the scale of tax evasion and avoidance is estimated by the Commission to be EUR 1 trillion19 a year, while the OECD estimates20 the revenue loss at global level to be between 4 % and 10 % of all corporate income tax revenue, representing between EUR 75 and EUR 180 billion annually, at 2014 levels; whereas these are only estimates and the actual figures might be even higher; whereas the costs to societynegative impacts of such practices on Member States' budgets and on citizens are evident; whereas tax fraud, tax evasion and aggressive tax planning erode the tax base of Member States and thereby lead to loss of tax revenues; __________________ 19 http://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/taxati on/tax_fraud_evasion/a_huge_problem/ind ex_en.htm, European Commission, 10 May 2016. 20 Measuring and Monitoring BEPS, Action 11 - 2015 Final Report, OECD/G20 Base Erosion and Profit Shifting Project.
Amendment 32 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas the Panama Papers reminded us that the issue of tax avoidance goes beyond multi-national companies, is strongly liked to criminal activities and that offshore wealth is estimated to approximately $10 trillion; whereas more than two and a half trillion USD of offshore wealth is held in Switzerland;
Amendment 34 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B b (new)
Recital B b (new)
Bb. whereas G20 Leaders took action in April 2009, especially requesting offshore jurisdictions to sign at least 12 information exchange treaties, with the objective to end the era of bank secrecy; whereas economists seriously questioned the effectiveness of these measures explaining that treaties have led to the relocation of bank deposits between tax havens but have not triggered significant repatriation of funds1a ; whereas there is no evidence that portfolio investments in offshore jurisdictions are on the decline at least until 2014 despite recent international efforts to increase financial transparency; whereas it is too early to assess whether the adoption of automatic exchange of tax information (Common Reporting Standard) will bring changes to this trend; __________________ 1ahttp://gabriel- zucman.eu/files/JohannesenZucman2014
Amendment 35 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B c (new)
Recital B c (new)
Bc. whereas according to information provided by the Bank for International Settlements, cross-border deposits in offshore centres between 2008 and 2015 have on average grown by 2.81% annually while they have grown by 1.24% only in the rest of the world1a; whereas the most important financial offshore centres in terms of foreign deposits are the Cayman Islands ($663 bn), Luxembourg ($360 bn), Switzerland ($137 bn), Hong Kong ($125 bn), Singapore ($95 bn), Bermuda ($77 bn), Panama ($67 bn), Jersey ($58 bn) and Bahamas ($55 bn); whereas cross-border deposits in European havens such as Andorra, Gibraltar, Liechtenstein and Switzerland have been declining or stagnating in the past few years, leading to the supposition of a shift of the offshore activities to other jurisdictions and a restructuring of the offshore's industry as a consequence of an increasing number of bilateral tax information agreements; __________________ 1a BIS 2016 - locational banking statistics
Amendment 36 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B d (new)
Recital B d (new)
Amendment 37 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B e (new)
Recital B e (new)
Be. whereas the OECD has been mandated again in April 2016 to create a blacklist of non-cooperative jurisdictions; whereas criteria for identifying tax havens are being defined by the European Commission, which acknowledged the importance of not only looking at transparency and cooperation criteria but also to consider harmful tax regimes as well;
Amendment 41 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) are the primary job creators in Europe, having created around 85 % of all new jobs in Europe21 during the last five years; whereas the CommissionOECD has stated that SMEs pay on average 30 % more in tax than multinational enterprises (MNEs); whereas this seriously distorts competition, leads to loss of jobs in the Union and hinders sustainable growth; __________________ 21 http://ec.europa.eu/growth/smes/, European Commission, 10 May 2016.
Amendment 42 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas aggressive tax planning is defined by the Commission as taking advantage of the technicalities of a tax system or of mismatches between two or more tax systems for the purpose of reducing tax liability; whereas the Commission recognises that aggressive tax planning can take a multitude of forms which leads to tax law not applied as intended by law makers; whereas the main forms of aggressive tax planning include debt shifting, location of intangible assets and intellectual property, strategic transfer pricing, hybrid mismatches and offshore loan structures; whereas companies heard by its Special Committee have mostly reiterated that they pay a lot of taxes and their behaviour is legal; whereas only a small percentage of companies have publicly admitted yet that corporate tax avoidance is a priority to be addressed;
Amendment 45 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas close to one third of allcross- border corporate investments are channelled through offshore financial constructions; whereas the Commission notes that 72% of profit shifting in the European Union makes use of transfer pricing and tax-effective location of intellectual property and that the remaining profit shifting schemes involve debt-shifting1a ; __________________ 1a https://polcms.secure.europarl.europa.eu/ cmsdata/upload/a0cf64ee-8e0d-4b5f- b145- 6ffbaa940e10/TheRoleFinancialSectorTa xPlanning_Draft_210316.pdf
Amendment 47 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas bilateral tax treaties allocate taxing rights between source and residence countries; whereas source countries often are allocated the right to tax active business income provided a permanent establishment exists in the source countries and residence countries obtain taxing rights over passive income such as dividends, royalties and interest; whereas such division of taxing rights is essential to understand aggressive tax planning schemes;
Amendment 49 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D b (new)
Recital D b (new)
Db. whereas accounting practices consist in portraying the corporation's financial state by matching revenues and expenses, and gains and losses to the calendar period in which they arise, rather than to the period in which the cash flows actually take place; whereas if taxable income passes from one jurisdiction to another, and both treat it in a different manner, the opportunity to exploit mismatches arises; whereas though royalty payments can be justified for business purposes, without proper fiscal coordination, they can receive favourable tax treatment in one country leading to an erosion of the tax base in other countries;
Amendment 51 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas convergence of tax policies should also be accompanied by greater controls and more investigations of harmful tax practices; whereas the Commission has started new formal investigations regarding tax treatment of MNEs; whereas a number of investigations by the Commission in matters of state aid were still ongoing at the time of adoption of this report; whereas certain Member States have initiated recovery procedures against some MNEs but at this stage and to our knowledge, despite three decisions by the Commission of recovery for illegal tax state aids, only Luxembourg has recovered the amount due and all of them have appealed the decisions of the Commission;
Amendment 64 #
Amendment 65 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital - F (new)
Recital - F (new)
-F. whereas the Parliament held meetings with representatives of the Governments of Andorra, Liechtenstein, Monaco, Guernsey and Jersey; whereas the Cayman Islands have only appeared at a coordinators' meeting and not at a formal hearing of the Special Committee; whereas the Isle of Man declined to appear before the Special Committee but sent a written contribution instead;
Amendment 67 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas some specific tax jurisdictions actively contribute to designing aggressive tax policies on behalf offor MNEs who thereby avoid taxation; whereas the corporate tax rate in some jurisdictions is close or equal to zero per cent; whereas the complexity of different tax systems create a lack of transparency which is globally harmfulcan use these opportunities to avoid taxation; whereas despite commitments by these jurisdictions to automatically exchange tax information with other countries, the statutory or effective corporate tax rate in some jurisdictions is close or equal to zero per cent; whereas some of these jurisdictions are included in blacklists of several Member States; whereas specific tax regimes of some jurisdictions have been assessed by the Code of Conduct Group on business taxation, leading to reforms in these countries;
Amendment 74 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)
Recital F a (new)
Fa. whereas these jurisdictions have all committed to automatic information exchange by 2017, except Andorra and Monaco in 2018; whereas it is important to monitor whether effective legislative changes are already being introduced to ensure effective automatic information exchange as of 2017;
Amendment 81 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas the lack of transparency and, more generally, non-compliance with control requirements, deficient knowledgelack of information ofn final beneficiaries and continued banking secrecy are obstacles to ending tax evasion and avoidance; whereas the opacity of such practices is used by some tax agents in the financial sector for aggressive tax practices; whereas there is no automatic exchange of information between countries, beyond the pre-existing bilateral tax conventions; whereas, without effective enforcement, the weaknesses of the systems will encourage tax evasion and avoidance;
Amendment 83 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas some specific tax jurisdictions are not willing to reform their tax systems, despite the ongoing global initiatives and despite the fact that some of them are involved in the work of the OECD; the "Panama Papers" clearly had an effect on some specific tax jurisdictions which were so far reluctant to commit to the OECD Common Reporting Standards for automatic information exchange and announced in May 2016 that they will commit to it; whereas the United States is therefore the only major economy not having committed yet to implement the OECD Common Reporting Standards and only applying its national legislation (FATCA);
Amendment 87 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
Recital I
I. whereas the hearings organised with Andorra, Guernsey, Jersey, Liechtenstein and Monaco (see Annex 1) showed that the conditions for registration of offshore companies and the information to be provided in this regard vary from one jurisdiction to another; whereas full information on the final beneficiaries of trusts, foundations and companies by official tax authorities of some of these jurisdictions is not known to exist or collected nor is neverit made publicly available; whereas Andorra, Liechtenstein, Monaco, San Marino and Switzerland have signed agreements for exchange of information with the EU; whereas the Channel Islands have signed agreements with the UK and have declared their readiness to enter into similar agreements with other Member States; whereas the Cayman Islands have only appeared at a coordinators’ meeting and not at a formal hearing of the Special Committee; whereas the Isle of Man declined to appear before the Special Committee but sent a written contribution instead;
Amendment 89 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital J
Recital J
J. whereas the existing legislation of some jurisdictions does not ensure good governance or respect of the highest international standards as regards final beneficiaries and, transparency and cooperation;
Amendment 90 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital J a (new)
Recital J a (new)
Ja. whereas some of these jurisdictions are dependent or associate territories of Members States and therefore, even if self-governing, are partially subject to national and European laws; whereas Member States should therefore consider legislating to ensure that their associate and dependent territories comply with highest standards;
Amendment 93 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K
Recital K
K. whereas some Member States have prepared their own lists of uncooperative jurisdictions and/or substantive definitions of "tax havens" or "privileged tax jurisdiction"; whereas there are bsignificant differences between these lists as to how uncooperative jurisdictions or tax havens are defined or assessed; whereas the OECD’'s list of uncooperative jurisdictions has not proved effective; whereas a common Union-wide list of uncooperative jurisdictions is still lacking; the Commission announced the creation of a common European list of tax havens accompanied with counter-measures and this proposal has received unanimous political support by the member States in April 2016;
Amendment 103 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital L
Recital L
L. whereas some financial institutions and accounting or law firms have played a role as intermediaries in setting up complex legal structures leading to aggressive tax planning schemes used by MNEs, as evidenced in ‘'LuxLeaks’' and the ‘'Panama Papers’'; whereas legal loopholes and lack of coordination, cooperation and transparency between countries create an environment that facilitates tax evasion and avoidance; whereas banks cshould have played a positive role in combating the erosion of national tax bases by, for instance, using the means of exchange of information at their disposal in a more cooperative spiritax evasion and avoidance by, for instance, applying strong due diligence rules and by collecting information for tax authorities about their clients;
Amendment 104 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital L a (new)
Recital L a (new)
La. whereas several tax scandals involving banks became public during the timeframe of this investigation; whereas financial institutions can use several aggressive tax planning schemes to support their clients to evade or avoid taxes; whereas banks can act on the market on behalf of their clients and claim to be the beneficial owner of these transactions towards tax authorities, leading to clients unduly benefiting from tax advantages granted to banks by reason of their banking status or of their residence; whereas the role of banks (particularly those with investment banking operations) in designing and implementing aggressive tax planning should be considered as dual: first, in providing aggressive tax planning for use by clients - often using financial products such as loans, derivatives, repos or any equity-linked instruments - and second, in the use of aggressive tax planning themselves - through their own inter-bank and proprietary structured finance transactions;
Amendment 105 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital L b (new)
Recital L b (new)
Lb. whereas all banks appearing in front of the Special Committee officially denied advising their clients to evade or avoid taxes in any form whatsoever and denied having relations with accounting and law firms for that purpose; whereas however banks often seek legal opinions from accounting or consultancy firms to validate contracts they offer to their clients; whereas these paid legal opinions can be used to cover tax evasion operations and to avoid allegations of intentional fraud by the banks;
Amendment 106 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital M
Recital M
M. whereas major financial institutions have set up an important number of subsidiaries in special tax jurisdictions or in jurisdictions with low or very low corporate tax rates in order to avoid taxes on behalf of their corporate and private clients or for their own benefit; whereas some financial institutions have recently closed down some of their branches in those jurisdictions; whereas several financial institutions have been prosecuted for tax evasion, avoidance or money laundering in the United States, leading to the payments of substantial fines but very few prosecutions have been started in the European Union;
Amendment 108 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital M a (new)
Recital M a (new)
Ma. whereas banks are operating in a competitive market and are incentivised to promote tax attractive schemes in order to attract new clients and serve existing ones; whereas bank employees are often under enormous pressure to validate clients' contracts allowing for tax evasion and avoidance at the risk of being fired if they do not; whereas there are conflicts of interest and revolving door cases between banks top employees, consultancy firms and representatives of tax administrations; whereas tax administrations do not always have sufficient access to information or means to investigate banks and detect cases of tax evasion;
Amendment 110 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital M b (new)
Recital M b (new)
Mb. whereas it is important to acknowledge that not all complex structured finance transactions (CSFTs) have a dominant tax motivation, and that predominantly tax-driven products are only a small part of overall CSFT business; whereas the amounts involved in aggressive tax planning transactions can however be very large, with single deals involving sometimes funding of €billions and tax advantages of €100s millions 1a ; whereas revenue authorities are concerned with the lack of transparency of CSFTs that are used for aggressive tax planning purposes, particularly where separate legs of these arrangements are executed in different jurisdictions; __________________ 1aOECD, 2008, "Study into the role of tax intermediaries"; OECD, 2008, "Study into the role of tax intermediaries"; http://www.oecd.org/tax/administration/39 882938.pdf
Amendment 112 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital N
Recital N
N. whereas the biggest European banks are already subject to public country-by-country reporting requirements; whereas none of the financial institutions which appeared in front of the Special Committee raised any significant objection with regard to the disclosure requirements; whereas some of them clearly said they were in favour of this requirement and would support it becoming a global standard; whereas the CRD IV reporting requirements for financial institutions leave room for improvement as the data reporting is inconsistent between various EU countries and the reporting requirements are differently interpreted by various financial institutions;
Amendment 119 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital Q
Recital Q
Q. whereas schemtax incentives linked to intellectual property, patents and research and development (R&D) are widely used across the Union and are multiplying; whereas these arecan be easily used by MNEs to artificially reduce their overall tax contribution; whereas the Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS) action plan (action No 5) refers to the ‘Modified Nexus Approach’; whereas the role of the Code of Conduct Group is also to analyse and effectively monitor such practices in Member States;
Amendment 120 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital R
Recital R
R. whereas Member States could still grthe Code of Conduct Group analysed Europeant patent boxes until June 2016; whereas they are obliged to implement the OECD BEPS proposal for the mregimes but did not conclude its analysis on specific regimes; whereas in the meantime, the OECD Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS) action plan (action No 5) refers to the 'Modified Nexus Approach' as the new standard for granting R&D incentives; whereas Member States agreed in the Code of Conduct Group to implement the Modified ‘Nexus Approach’ on patent boxes until 2021 as agreed at Code of Conduct Group in their national legislation as of 2015; whereas they also agree that existing patent box schemes should be phased out by 2021 only; whereas Member States are seriously delayed in the implementation of the Modified Nexus Approach at national level;
Amendment 121 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital S
Recital S
S. whereas several studies from the Commission have clearly shown that the link between the patent box and R&D is in most cases arbitrary and/or artificial; whereas this inconsistency may lead to the assumption that these schemes are in most cases set up for tax avoidance reasons; whereas tax incentives for incomes generated by R&D, chiefly patent boxes, often result in large decreases in tax revenue for all governments, including those engaging in such a policy; whereas the OECD and the IMF also confirmed several times that they do not believe patent boxes to be the right tool to promote R&D; whereas the IMF is calling for a rationalisation of tax incentives in advanced economies;
Amendment 127 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital T
Recital T
T. whereas the central role of patent boxes in harmful tax practices schemes was initially observed in the fact-finding missions of Parliament’'s previous Special Committee (TAXE 1) in the Netherlands and the UK, and subsequently confirmed in its mission to Cyprus; whereas similar systems exist in other Member Statesor have been announced in other Member States (Belgium, France, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Malta, Portugal and Spain (including Basque country and the region of Navarra));
Amendment 132 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 5
Subheading 5
Documents from the Code of Conduct Group documenton business taxation, the High Level Working Group on taxation and the Working Party on tax questions
Amendment 133 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital V
Recital V
V. whereas it was only five months after the beginning of the term of its Special Committee that some Rnon-redacted sensitive room documents and minutes of the Code of Conduct Group were made available to MEPs in camera on EP premises; whereas, while additional documents have been made available, some documents and minutes still remain undisclosed or missing; whereas the Commission stated at an informal meeting that it has made all the documents at its disposal available to the Special Committee and any further relevant meeting documents, should they ever have been in the Commission’s possession, must therefore have been lost;
Amendment 136 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital V a (new)
Recital V a (new)
Amendment 139 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital W
Recital W
W. whereas Member States have given unsatisfactory answers to Parliament’s repeated requests for full disclosure of the documents concerned; whereas this practice has been going on for several months; whereas these documents have nonetheless recently been made available; whereas transparency and access to information are essential elements of parliamentary work;
Amendment 140 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital W a (new)
Recital W a (new)
Wa. whereas specific issues have been examined within the Code of Conduct Group without leading to concrete reforms; whereas for example, discussions on rulings have been going one since 1999 at least and there are still difficulties in implementing recommendations agreed, even after the Luxleaks scandal; whereas examination of patent box regimes has never been fully concluded in 2014 and no other examination has started, despite member states being late in implementing the new Modified Nexus Approach;
Amendment 141 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital X
Recital X
X. whereas the OECD, the UN and other international organisations are interested parties in the fight against corporate tax base erosion; whereas there is a need to ensure global harmonisation of practices and implementation of common standards such as those proposed by the OECD vis-à-vis the BEPS package; whereas the meeting of G20 finance ministers and central bank governors held in Washington on 14 and 15 April 2016 concluded in favour of initiating implementation of the BEPS measures, and has called for full financial transparency, especially as regards beneficial ownershipreiterated its calls for all countries and jurisdictions to implement the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) standards on transparency and beneficial ownership of legal persons and legal arrangements; whereas some G20 members have called for automatic information exchange of beneficial ownership information and requested FATF and the Global Forum on Transparency and Exchange of Information for Tax Purposes to make initial proposals to that effect by October 2016;
Amendment 146 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital Y
Recital Y
Amendment 149 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital Z
Recital Z
Z. whereas the G20 members have reaffirmed their commitment to ensure that efforts are made to strengthen the capacities of developing countries’ economies and to encourage developed countries to abide by the principles of the Addis Tax Initiative as set out at the UN meeting of 27 July 2015; whereas developing countries’ views and priorities are essential to effective global coordination;
Amendment 156 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital AD
Recital AD
AD. whereas Parliament’s Special Committee TAXE 2, constituted on 2 December 2015, held 11 meetings, some of them jointly with the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs, the Committee on Legal Affairs and the Committee on Development, at which it heard the Commissioner for Competition, Margrethe Vestager, the Commissioner for Economic and Financial Affairs, Taxation and Customs, Pierre Moscovici, the Commissioner for Financial Stability, Financial Services and Capital Markets Union, Jonathan Hill, the Dutch State Secretary for Finance, Eric Wiebes (representing the Council Presidency), experts in the field of taxation and development, representatives of multinational companies (MNCs), representatives of banks, and members of national parliaments of the EU; whereas it also held meetings with representatives of the Governments of Andorra, Liechtenstein, Monaco, Guernsey and Jersey, and received a written contribution from the Government of the Isle of Man (see Annex 1); whereas it also organised fact-finding missions to the US (Washington), to look into specific aspects of the third-country dimension of its mandate, and to Cyprus; whereas members of the Special Committee were personally invited to take part in the work of the high- level interparliamentary group ‘TAXE’ of the OECD; whereas the Special Committee held in camera meetings at coordinators’ level at which it heard representatives of the Government of the Cayman Islands, investigative journalists and Commission officials; whereas all these activities, which have provided a wealth of very useful information on practices and tax systems both inside and outside the Union, have helped to clarify some of the relevant issues, while others remain unanswered;
Amendment 159 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital AE
Recital AE
AE. whereas the work of the Special Committee was hindered to some extent by the fact that out of 7 MNCs invited, only 4 agreed on first invitation to appear before its members (see Annex 2);
Amendment 167 #
Amendment 168 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Regrets that thirteen countries do not have proper rules to counter aggressive tax planning based on tax-free- flow-through of dividends and thirteen member states did not apply any beneficial-owner test when accepting a claim for a reduction or exemption of withholding tax; Regrets that so far, fourteen member states still have no controlled foreign company rules to prevent aggressive tax planning and that twenty-five member states have no rules to counter the mismatching tax qualification of a local company by another state; condemns that no single member state has called for a ban on aggressive tax planning structures so far;
Amendment 170 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Calls on Member States and the Commission to adopt further legislative proposals on corporate tax avoidance as scope exists for member states to tighten their anti-abuse rules to counter base erosion; strongly regrets that Member States did not discuss the Parliament's recommendations in any Council working group and did not reflect on the breach of their obligation of sincere cooperation under the Treaty through enabling aggressive tax avoidance and tax evasion in other member states;
Amendment 171 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Condemns that twenty-four Member States offer a general deductibility of interest costs without making it conditional on the creditor being taxed on the interest income and/or without imposing the full scale of thin- capitalisation or other interest-limitation rules, interest withholding tax or a beneficial-owner test as a condition for withholding tax exemptions in the context of group financing;
Amendment 175 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Welcomes the Anti-tax Avoidance Package (ATAP) published by the Commission on 28 January 2016, as well as all legislative proposals and communications already undertaken afterwards; calls on the Council to reach a unanimous ambitious position on the ATAP and keep the Anti-Tax Avoidance Directive as one single directiventi- Tax Avoidance Directive; strongly regrets that the current Council draft position has been weakened, especially with a grand- fathering clause on interest deduction or a narrowed approach on controlled foreign company rule; regrets that several member states, including Ireland, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Hungary, Luxembourg, Cyprus and Malta have not supported the compromise on May 25th; welcomes the initiative to create a common Union list of uncooperative jurisdictions in the External Strategy for Effective Taxation;
Amendment 190 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Urges the Commission to come forward with a proposal for a common corporate consolidated tax base (CCCTB) which would provide a comprehensive solution to harmful tax practices within the Union; believes that the consolidation of the CCCTB is essential and is becoming increasingly urgent; calls on the Member States to promptly reach an agreement on this and to swiftly implement it; reminds the Member States that different corporate tax rates can create an unlevelled playing field and unfair tax competition within the EU as well;
Amendment 198 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. WelcomNotes the Commission’s adoption on 12 April 2016 of a proposal for a directive amending Directive 2013/34/EU as regards disclosure by companies, their subsidiaries and branches, of information relating to income tax and to increased transparency in company tax; regrets, however, that the proposed scope, criteria and thresholds are not in line with the previous positions adopted by Parliament; re-calls its support for the disclosure of full disaggregated data for third countries to ensure transparency on whether companies pay their taxes where their economic activity is taking place and its support for a lower threshold of EUR40 million annual turnover to be applied; welcomes the commitment by France, Italy, the Netherlands, Spain and the UK to support public country by country reporting for large multinational enterprises;
Amendment 206 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes the agreement in Council on 8 December 2015 on automatic exchange of information on tax rulings; stresseregrets that at the time of this report, several member states, despite the Luxleaks scandal, still have not put in place the necessary legislative framework to start automatically exchanging information on tax rulings; regrets that the Commission shoulddoesn't have full access to the new Union database of tax rulings; insists on the need for a comprehensive and efficient database of all rulings having potential cross-border effect; calls, therefore, on the Member States to grant the Commission full access to the new Union database of tax rulings in order to enable the Commission to effectively monitor the potentially harmful tax policy of Member States; strongly regrets that as of mid-2015, only eight member states (Austria, Denmark, Estonia, Hungary, Ireland, Lithuania, the Netherlands and Slovakia) had completed the necessary administrative work to implement the guidance on the Model Instruction concerning rulings;
Amendment 213 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Underlines that the automatic exchange of information will result in a large volume of data needing to be treated, and that the issues relating to computer processing of the data concerned must be coordinated, as must the necessary human resources for analysing the data; calls for the strengthening of the Commission’s role in this work; calls on the Commission and Member States to carefully monitor the implementation of the Directive on Administrative Cooperation at national level, especially with the objective to verify how many member states request tax information through bilateral tax treaties rather than under this legal basis; calls on Member States to reinforce their tax administrations with adequate staff capacity; calls on Member States to integrate the information exchanged with fiscal authorities and the information exchanged with financial supervisors and regulators;
Amendment 216 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Welcomes the announcement by France, the Netherlands and the UK on May 12 to put in place public registers of beneficial owners of companies; applauds France for committing to create a public register for trusts; supports UK's commitment to make any foreign company either buying property in the country, or entering into a contract with the state to declare its beneficial owner; calls on all Member States to adopt similar initiatives;
Amendment 220 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
Amendment 222 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Insists that concrete legislative action needs to be takenCalls on the Commission to present a concrete legislative proposal on transfer pricing, since 70 % of profit shifting is done through transfer pricing; calls on Member States to grant tax rulings only if taxation of cross-border transactions is ensured;
Amendment 231 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Welcomes the fact that the Commissioner for Competition, Margrethe Vestager, has categorised transfer pricing as a particular focus area for state aid cases, as it is reported to be a common tool used by MNEs for tax evasionavoidance schemes such as inter-group loans;
Amendment 234 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Regrets that many multinational companies heard have not strongly condemned tax avoidance practices and aggressive tax planning; stresses that MNEs can easily grant artificial inter- group loans for aggressive tax planning purposes; stresses that the preference for such debt financing is to the detriment of the taxpayers as well as financial stability; calls, therefore, on the Member States to eliminate the debt-equity bias in their respective tax laws;
Amendment 239 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Strongly emphasises that the work of whistleblowers is crucial for revealing scandals of tax evasion and avoidance, and that, therefore, protection for whistleblowers needs to be legally guaranteed and strengthened EU-wide; notes that the European Court of Human Rights and the Council of Europe have undertaken work on this issue; considers that courts and Member States should ensure the protection of legitimate business secrets while in no way hindering, hampering or stiflinge the capacity of whistleblowers and journalists to document and reveal illegal, wrongful and harmful practices where this is clearly and overwhelmingly in the public interest; regrets that the Commission has no plans for prompt action on the matterin the public interest;
Amendment 249 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Welcomes the communication External Strategy for Effective Taxation which called on the European Investment Bank (EIB) to transpose good governance requirements in their contracts with all selected financial intermediaries; calls on the EIB to establish a new responsible taxation policy, starting from the review of its non-cooperative jurisdictions policy in 2016 in close dialogue with civil society; calls on the EIB to make both direct funding and funding via intermediaries contingent upon disclosure of both country-by-country tax-relevant data along the lines of the CRD IV provision for credit institutions, and beneficial ownership information; reiterates that the EIB should reinforce its due diligence activities so as to improve the quality of information on ultimate beneficiaries and to more effectively prevent transactions with financial intermediaries with a negative record in terms of transparency, fraud, corruption, organised crime, money laundering and harmful social and environmental impacts or registered in offshore financial centres or tax havens which resort to aggressive tax planning;
Amendment 250 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Calls on the Commission to issue clear legislation on the definition of economic substance, value creation and permanent establishment, with a view to tackling, in particular, the issue of letterbox companies; calls on Member States to revise the burden of proof when it comes to re- collection of assets obtained through crimes or recovery of unlawful profits;
Amendment 254 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 b (new)
Paragraph 11 b (new)
11b. Notes the Commission's answer to Parliament's recommendations on tax matters; Regrets that several initiatives recommended by the Parliament, such as mandatory notification of new tax schemes by tax advisory firms to tax authorities, proposal to change the EU state aid regime (as it relates to tax) or introducing withholding taxes to avoid profits leaving the EU untaxed, will not be followed up by the Commission; regrets that the Commission did not answer on some of the recommendations such as the issue of taxing royalty payments in the EU; calls again on the Commission to propose legislation in markets that are distorted through aggressive tax competition such as retail services and professional football;
Amendment 258 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Notes that so far, the only concrete initiatives taken by the Commission regarding uncooperative jurisdictions, including overseas territories, has beenincluding the External Strategy for Effective Taxation; observes that until now the criteria for listing of uncooperative jurisdictions by the OECD have not proved efficientective in tackling this issue and have not served as a deterrent; reminds the shortcomings and difficulties of a blacklisting exercise, often based on political considerations rather than objective criteria;
Amendment 265 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Calls on the Commission to come up as soon as possible with a common Union list of uncooperative jurisdictions (i.e. a ‘'blacklist of tax havens’'), based on sound and objective criteria, including full implementation of OECD recommendations, BEPS actions and Automatic Exchange of Information standards,level of secrecy and disclosure of legal and beneficial ownership information and structure of legal entities (companies, trusts, foundations, charity...), lack of commitment to implement the OECD common reporting standard on automatic information exchange, low or zero tax rates for non-residents; lack of requirement of economic substance; and welcomes the Commission’'s intention to reach an agreement on such a list within the next six months; calls on the Commission to assess Member States with the same established criteria; calls on the Member States to endorse that agreement by the end of 2016;
Amendment 279 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Calls for a concrete Union regulatory framework for sanctions against the blacklisted non-cooperative jurisdictions, including, but not limited to, the possibility of reviewing and, in the last resort, suspending free trade agreements and prohibiting access to Union funds; calls for the sanctions also to apply to companies, banks, and accountancy and law firms, and to tax advisers proven to be involved with those jurisdictions; calls on the European Commission to propose and Member States to agree on a European version of FATCA to impose a sanction (such as a 30% withholding tax on all EU-sourced payments) against any financial institution that does not apply a look-through approach and concentrates only on account holders or refuses to automatically exchange information about EU residents holding accounts abroad;
Amendment 289 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Calls on the Member States to renegotiate their bilateral tax treaties with third countries in order to introduce anti- abuse clauses and thus prevent ‘'treaty shopping’; stresses furthermore that this process would be expedited considerably if the Commission were mandated by Member States'; calls on Member States to revise their bilateral tax treaties with developing countries to redefine taxation rights and use the UN model treaty as the general standard; calls on Member States and the commission to dress a check list for free trade agreements of necessary criteria to protect the partner countries concerned against tax avoidance, evasion or money laundering activities; stresses furthermore that this process would be expedited considerably if the Commission were mandated by Member States to negotiate such tax treaties on behalf of the Union while fully respecting its obligation of policy coherence for development under the treaty; calls, therefore, on the Member States to mandate the Commission to negotiate such tax treaties on behalf of the Union;
Amendment 302 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Recommends introducingCalls on the Commission to present a legislative proposal for an EU- wide withholding tax, in order to ensure that profits generated within the Union no matter of their qualification are taxed at least once before leaving it; notes that such a proposal should include a refund system to prevent double taxation;
Amendment 309 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16a. Regrets that Andorra and Monaco have committed to automatic information exchange by 2018 instead of 2017; points out that some non-cooperative jurisdiction such as Andorra comply with exchange of information standards but are moving towards becoming low-tax jurisdictions; is concerned that the double taxation agreement between Andorra and Spain does not currently ensure effective automatic exchange of information; calls on the Commission to closely monitor the effective application of the automatic exchange of information included in the Member States’ agreements signed with former or actual non-cooperative jurisdictions;
Amendment 315 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Notes that until now, patent, knowledge and R&D boxes have not proven effective in fostering innovation in the Union, but are, rather, used by MNEs for profit-shifting through aggressive tax planning schemes, such as the well-known ‘double Irish with a Dutch sandwich’; considers that patent boxes are an ill-suited tool for achieving economic objectivespromoting R&D; insists that R&D can be promoted through subsidies which should be given preference over patent boxes, as subsidies are less at risk of being abused by tax avoidance schemes; observes that the link between patent boxes and R&D activities is often arbitrary and that current models lead to a race to the bottom with regard to the effective tax contribution of MNEs; calls on Member States to phase out existing and prohibit new patent boxes by 2021 at the latest;
Amendment 320 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Observes that so far, Member States, in particular within the framework of the Code of Conduct Group, have been neglecting this issue and have yet to come up with a proper time-frame to tackle it; regrets that barely any progress has been made by Member States in implementing into national law the modified nexus approach agreed by Ministers in December 2014; calls on Member States to implement these changes as soon as possible as they are already behind schedule; calls on the Commission to do an assessment of these legislative changes by mid-2016 and to inform the European Parliament about progress;
Amendment 326 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Calls on the Commission to put forward proposals for binding Union legislation on patent boxes that goes beyond the OECD Modified Nexus Approach and calls for prohibition of tax exemption on income from intellectual property, so as to prohibit the misuse of patent boxes for tax avoidance purposes and to ensure that if and when used they are linked to genuine economic activity; calls in the meantime on all Member States to publicly disclose which companies benefit from a patent box regime in their country;
Amendment 333 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Calls on the Member States to integrate a Minimum Effective Taxation (MET) clause in the Interests and Royalties Directive and to ensure that no exemptions are granteds well as in the Parent- Subsidiary Directive and to ensure that no exemptions are granted; calls on Member States to consider greater harmonisation of tax rates at the European level in order to avoid competition on rate and a race to the bottom in the European Union;
Amendment 337 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. ObserveRegrets that some banks, tax advisers, law and accounting firms and other intermediaries have played a key role in designing aggressive tax planning schemes for their clients and also help national governments design their tax codes and laws, creating a significant conflict of interest;
Amendment 343 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Is concerned about the lack of transparency and adequate documentation within financial institutions and law firms pertaining to the specific models of company ownership and control recommended by tax and legal advisors, as confirmed by the recent ‘Panama Papers’ scandal; calls on the Commission to put forward a legislative proposal to ensure necessary complementary information should be provided by banks as part of their public country by country reporting obligation; calls on the Commission to ensure that accounting firms have to confirm in the Group Audit Report that the figures in respect of taxes, turnovers, number of employees and profit made are also in line with the "true and fair view" particularly allocated/shown per country;
Amendment 349 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Calls on the Commission to come forward with a Union Code of Conduct for legislative proposals for the separation of accounting firms and financial or tax service providers as well as for all advisory services, including a Union incompatibility regime for tax advisers, in order to prevent them from advising both public and private sectorevenue authorities and taxpayers and to prevent other conflicts of interest; calls on the Commission to launch an inquiry in order to assess the state of concentration in the sector and to suggest a cap of no one firm covering more than 10% of the market;
Amendment 363 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Stresses again the importance of clear separation between tax advising services and auditing services within accountancy firms; askscalls on the Commission to study the possibility of revising the Accounting Directive and Regulationrevise relevant legislative texts to this effect;
Amendment 367 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Stresses the need for concrete sanctions, includingCalls on Member States to adopt effective and dissuasive sanctions, including criminal sanctions on financial institutions and companies' managers involved in tax evasion and the possibility of revoking business licences for professionals and companies proved to be involved in designing, advising on the use of, or utilising aggressive tax planning and evasion schemes; requests that the Commission explore the feasibility of introducing proportional financial liability for tax advisers engaged in unlawful tax practices;
Amendment 373 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Calls on the Commission to strengthen the requirements on banks to report to the Member States’ tax authorities transfers to and from jurisdictions included on the common Union list of tax havens and uncooperative tax jurisdictions; calls on Member States to ensure that banks and other financial institutions provide similar information to regulating and tax authorities; calls on Member States to strengthen the capacity of their tax administrations to investigate cases of tax evasion and avoidance;
Amendment 376 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 a (new)
Paragraph 27 a (new)
27a. Calls on the Commission to conduct constant screening and monitoring of derivatives and securities financing transactions - using data held in trade repositories (TRs) in accordance with the provisions of the Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 and Regulation (EU) 2015/2365 - with the aim of identifying transactions structured to potentially produce significant tax benefits; insists that the Commission automatically provides Member States tax authorities concerned with all information, including data1a; __________________ 1a See Article 18 (Professional secrecy), paragraph 3 of REGULATION (EU) 2015/2365 on transparency of securities financing transactions and of reuse and amending Regulation (EU) : http://eur- lex.europa.eu/legal- content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:3201 5R2365&from=FR
Amendment 377 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 b (new)
Paragraph 27 b (new)
27b. Calls on the Commission to put forward a legislative proposal to ensure that both credit institutions established in a Member State and undertakings admitted to trading on a regulated market or on a multilateral trading facility within the Union include in their annual financial reports a description of their use of securities financing transactions (SFTs) and of their re-use of collateral, as well as comprehensive and detailed data on the contribution of SFTs to their earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization (EBITDA) and earnings after taxes (EAT);
Amendment 378 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 c (new)
Paragraph 27 c (new)
Amendment 379 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 d (new)
Paragraph 27 d (new)
27d. Calls on the Commission to explore the possibility of introducing common rules aimed at curbing tax avoidance on EU-source income achieved through interposition; stresses furthermore that such rules could be similar to those applied in the US1a; __________________ 1asee for example the « qualified intermediaries » (QI) and « qualified derivatives dealers » (QDD) regimes, as well as Section 871(m) regulations of the US Internal Revenue Code which impose US withholding tax on certain amounts arising in derivative transactions over US equities when those amounts are paid to a non-US person
Amendment 382 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Reiterates the crucial role of whistleblowers in revealing misconduct and illegal and wrongful practices; considers that such revelations, which shine a light on the magnitude of tax evasion and avoidance, are clearly in the public interest, as demonstrated in Luxleaks and the recent ‘'Panama papers’' leak; welcomes that Antoine Deltour, one of the whistleblowers at the origin of the Luxleaks received the European citizen price, honouring exceptional Europeans;
Amendment 390 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. ObserveRegrets that the Commission is limiting its action to monitoring developments in different areas of Union competences, without planning to take any concrete steps to tackle the issue; notesis concerned that this lack of ambition could endanger the publication of new revelations, thereby potentially leading to European tax authoritand other countries losing legitimate tax revenue; regrets that the Commission has not provided a satisfactory response to the demands contained in paragraphs 144 and 145 of Parliament’'s resolution of 25 November 2015;
Amendment 396 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
Paragraph 31
31. NoteRegrets, that despite the fact that its first and second Special Committees (TAXE 1 and TAXE 2) have both on repeated occasions requested full access to Code of Conduct Group documents and minutes, only a limited number of new documents have been made available for in camera consultation by MEPSs, and that this was only achieved five months after the beginning of the mandate of TAXE2; notes furthermore that the condemns the unwillingness of the Council to satisfy thisour request remains unsatisfactoryto access to documents;
Amendment 401 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
Paragraph 33
33. Notes the continuing lack of transparency of the working methods of the Code of Conduct Group, which is preventing any concrete potential improvement in terms of tackling harmful tax practices; regrets not having received several room documents from the Code of Conduct Group emanating from the Council or the Member States which are critical to the good implementation of the Special committee's mandate;
Amendment 409 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 a (new)
Paragraph 33 a (new)
33a. Determines from public information that the Code of Conduct Group looked at 421 measures between 1998 and 2014 and considered 111 of them harmful (26%) but two-third of these measures were actually examined during the first five years of existence of the Group; notes that the scrutiny of measures by Member States has decreased over the years with only 5% of the total measures been examined in 2014 and regrets that no harmful tax measures have been found by the Group since November 2012; concludes that the Code of Conduct Group hasn't been fully working over the past decade and that its governance and mandate needs urgent revision;
Amendment 421 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
34. UrgesStresses that it has become clear that the self-notification of potentially harmful measures by Member States, the criteria for identifying harmful measures as well as the unanimity principle for reaching decisions on harmfulness are outdated; regrets that several Member States are opposing a needed reform of the Code of Conduct Group; urges therefore the Member States to reform, as soon as possible, the criteria and governance aspects of the Code of Conduct Group, in order to increase its transparency, effectiveness and accountability and ensure the strong involvement of Parliament;
Amendment 425 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 a (new)
Paragraph 34 a (new)
34a. Notes that a pattern of systematic obstruction by some Member States in achieving any progress on fighting tax avoidance became clear to the Special Committee; notes that discussions on administrative practices (rulings) were going on in the Code of Conduct for nearly two decades; condemns that several Member States were reluctant to agree on exchanging information about their ruling practices before Luxleaks and are still reluctant to implement in national law the model instruction developed in the Code of Conduct Group despite their commitments after the Luxleaks revelations;
Amendment 426 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 b (new)
Paragraph 34 b (new)
34b. Concludes that, therefore, Member States violated their obligation for sincere cooperation enshrined in Article 4(3) of the Treaty on European Union and that the Commission was aware of the non- compliance of certain Member States with the principle of sincere cooperation; stresses that the violation of Union law by Member States as well as non-action of the Commission against the violation of Union law by Member States need a follow-up;
Amendment 427 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 c (new)
Paragraph 34 c (new)
34c. Calls on the Commission to grant Parliament permanent, timely and regular access to the room documents and minutes of the Council groups working on tax matters, including the Code of Conduct on Business Taxation, the High Level Working Group and the Working Party on Tax Questions; suggests to the Commission to use the agreement reached with the Parliament on access to SSM/ECB minutes as an example for that purpose;
Amendment 434 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
Paragraph 35
35. Calls on the Commission, in case of an unsatisfactory response on the part of the Member States, to present a legislative proposal under Article 116 of TFEU to incorporate the Code of Conduct Group into the Community method;
Amendment 472 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40
Paragraph 40
40. Calls on the Union, the G20, the OECD and the UN to cooperate further to promote global guidelines that will also be beneficial to developing countries; calls on the Commission and Member States to support the creation of a Global Tax Body under the auspices of the UN, as recommended by the Parliament in a resolution in July 2015;
Amendment 480 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41
Paragraph 41
41. Calls on the Commission to include in all trade and partnership agreements good governance clauses, including an effective and comprehensive implementation of BEPS measures and global automatic exchange of information standardand ensure that trade and partnership agreements cannot be misused by companies or intermediaries to avoid and evade taxes or launder revenues from illegal activities;
Amendment 483 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42
Paragraph 42
42. Calls on the OECDinternational instances to start working on an ambitious BEPS II project, to be based primarily on minimum standards and concrete objectives for implementation; calls on the Commission and Member States to ensure that all countries interested in participating is granted participation on equal footing in all phases of the project;
Amendment 488 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 43
Paragraph 43
Amendment 496 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44
Paragraph 44
44. Calls for the establishment of a Union public register of both legal and beneficial ownership, which would form the basis of a global initiative in this regard; stresses the vital role of institutions such as the OECD and the UN in this connection;
Amendment 506 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 46
Paragraph 46
46. Stresses the need for a comprehensive EU/US approach on the implementation of OECD standards and on beneficial ownership; stresses furthermore that good governance clauses and the full BEPS action plan should be included in the Transatlantic Trade Investment Partnership (TTIP) in order to ensure a level playing field, create more value for society as a whole and combat tax fraud and avoidance;
Amendment 517 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 47
Paragraph 47
47. Calls on all national parliaments to work together to ensure proper control and coherence of tax systems between Member States; calls for national parliaments to remain vigilant as to the decisions of their governments in this matter and to increase their own commitment to the work of interparliamentary forums on tax matters; regrets that its Special Committee could not invite former or current Ministers of Finance, as done for the Special Committee TAXE, especially Mr Juncker as former Minister of Finance of Luxembourg and Mr Dijsselbloem as current Minister of Finance of the Netherlands; calls on the Parliament to create a sub-committee on taxation within its economic and monetary affairs committee to ensure proper follow-up of TAXE and TAX2's recommendations;
Amendment 519 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 47 a (new)
Paragraph 47 a (new)
47a. Calls on the Commission to investigate all cases of illegal state aid brought to its attention in order to ensure equality of treatment before the law in the Union; calls on the Commission to issue decision with recovery in all cases where the alleged tax advantage is considered illegal state aid; is concerned by allegations that Luxembourg could be granting oral rulings in order to circumvent its obligation to share information under the directive on administrative cooperation; calls on the Commission to carefully monitor and report whether Member States are replacing one harmful practice by another after legislative progress has been achieved in the Union; calls on the Commission to monitor and report any case of market distortion due to the granting of specific tax advantage;
Amendment 525 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 48
Paragraph 48
48. Regrets deeply that the timeframe for the present report has not allowed for a thorough examination of the ‘'Panama Papers’' case; stresswelcomes the Eurgent need for a full and proper follow-up by Parliament in this regardopean Parliament decision to set-up an inquiry committee in this regard and to continue working on tax evasion, tax avoidance and money laundering; underlines the immense political importance of analysing the modus operandi of the companies and private citizens involved with the Panama papers scandal with a view to tackling legislative loopholes;
Amendment 528 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 49
Paragraph 49
49. Notes that the Panama Papers scandal has documented systematic use of shell companies by private citizens in order to conceal taxable assets, although this specific issue could not be dealt with sufficiently within the mandate or timeframe of the Special Committee; is of the firm conviction that this subject must be addressed swiftly by Parliamentthe upcoming inquiry committee; is concerned that some Member States have very low requirements for the establishment of companies and calls, therefore, on the Commission to make proposals for minimum standards for the establishment of companies; calls on the Commission to withdraw its proposal on single-member private limited liability companies;
Amendment 533 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 50
Paragraph 50
50. Notes, that further work is needed on access to documents of the Member States, the Commission and the Code of Conduct Group; reiterates that further analysis of the documents already made available to Parliament is needed in order to adequately gauge the need for further political action and policy initiatives; calls on the upcoming inquiry committee to continue this work and adopt a different format to the Special Committee, which follows more closely an interrogative committee, such as the Public Accounts Committee in the UK;
Amendment 27 #
2016/2033(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas VAT is a tax on consumption that should only be levied on the final consumer so as to achieve a significant reduction in administthrough, as a general principle, a system of fractive and financial cosoned payments along the supply chain and reduce the possibility of fraud;
Amendment 44 #
2016/2033(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Objects to the narrowing down of the proposed improvements to parts ofTakes the view that improving the existing system is also important, and calls for fundamental reforms with a view to removing or at least substantially reducing the problems affecting it;
Amendment 50 #
2016/2033(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Takes the view that the Commission should examine all possible options equally without prejudging the outcome and should include them in the legislative proceselecting those options ensuring the application of a consistent and robust VAT system without distinction between Member States and between national VAT systems and cross border transactions;
Amendment 88 #
2016/2033(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Supports the aim of the action plan to establish a single European VAT area to buttress a deeper and more equitable single market and in order to help promote tax justice, sustainable consumption, gender equality, employment, growth, investment and competitiveness;
Amendment 111 #
2016/2033(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Notes that the current plethora of VAT rates causes great uncertainty for companies involved in cross-border trading; calls for increasing convergence in VAT rates, including the re- introduction of higher VAT rates on luxury goods;
Amendment 117 #
2016/2033(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Notes that the current system of reduced VAT rates is incould be improved for greater efficientcy in terms of social policy and redistribution, as is confirmed by the Court of Auditors in its most recent report;
Amendment 126 #
2016/2033(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Takes the view that the complete abolition of minimum tax rates as an alternative, as advocated by the Commission, might cause considerable distortions of competition and problems in the single market and can only be sanctioned if the reverse charge procedure is introduced for all levels and types of VAT and not only for individual sectors which are particularly susceptible to fraud;
Amendment 146 #
2016/2033(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Takes the view that the present complicated system could be considerably simplified if the goods and services eligible for reduced tax rates were determined jointly at EU level; while allowing Member States to adopt reduced, super- reduced or zero rates on a limited set of goods, that they are free to choose, provided that this does not create risks of unfair competition;
Amendment 150 #
2016/2033(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Calls on the Commission to submit a proposal for agreeing on general principles covering the use of reduced, super-reduced or zero rates for specific products which demonstrate benefits for the environment, human health, or social wellbeing, while conversely applying the standard rate, as a minimum, to those products, which are most harmful for the environment and human health;
Amendment 153 #
2016/2033(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 b (new)
Paragraph 17 b (new)
17b. Takes the view that additional revenue, arising from VAT rates differentiation, could be used to reduce direct taxation for low income earners to smooth negative distributional effects,
Amendment 154 #
2016/2033(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 c (new)
Paragraph 17 c (new)
17c. Highlights the #EndTamponTax campaign across Europe, which calls for zero rates on tampons, towels and other sanitary products; calls on Member States that don't already apply reduced rates to do so on these items, and for the freedom of Member States to apply super-reduced, exemptions or zero rates to these items; calls for all reductions in price to be passed on to the consumer;
Amendment 163 #
2016/2033(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Calls on the Member States to apply as a general principle VAT equally to private and public companies in areas in which they actually compete with each other with the exclusion of services of general economic interest, of cases where the public service is provided below market prices or when there are particular reasons justifying the different treatment;
Amendment 173 #
2016/2033(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Notes that the application of a general reverse charge procedure might enable cross-border carousel fraud to be largely eradicated and would significantly reduce thebut other types of fraud are likely to arise, especially at retail level, while it is uncertain whether SMEs administrativeon costs for SMEswill actually decrease;
Amendment 181 #
2016/2033(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
Amendment 195 #
2016/2033(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Takes the view that national tax administrations must take greater responsibility for ensuring tax compliance and reducing opportunities for evasion in the reverse charge procedure and in the general implementation of the country-of- destination principle;
Amendment 200 #
2016/2033(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Notes that a 'one-stop shop' is essential if the country-of-destination principle is to be imposed and made less prone to fraud; calls for improving the one-stop shop based on the current experience of the Mini One Stop Shops for digital products, and providing adequate assistance to SMEs dealing with this tool; calls for a clear definition of which Member State is responsible for tax inspection in the case of cross-border transactions;
Amendment 207 #
2016/2033(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Calls for all proposals to be studied in order to keep turnover tax for companiesminimise the administrative burden, in particular for SMEs, cost- neutral as far as possible and to minimise the administrative burden; support the Commission proposal to introduce a VAT-free threshold of €100,000 to help start-ups and microbusinesses and extend it to all sectors;
Amendment 233 #
2016/2033(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Takes the view that the VAT reform plans announced by the Commission in the action programme must be subject to comprehensive and qualitatively-sound impact assessments with input from science, tax administrations, SMEs and companies in the EU;
Amendment 2 #
2016/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 13 a (new)
Citation 13 a (new)
– having regard to the FATF’s Guidance for a Risk-Based Approach to Virtual Currencies of June 201514a; __________________ 14ahttp://www.fatf- gafi.org/documents/documents/guidance- rba-virtual-currencies.html
Amendment 40 #
2016/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 – point a
Paragraph 2 – point a
(a) the potential for ‘black market’ transactions, money laundering, terrorist financing24 and tax fraud based on the ‘pseudonymity’ and ‘mixing services’ that some such services offer, bearing in mind that the traceability of cash transactions tends to be much lower still; __________________ 24 While there is potential for use of VC for terrorist financing, Europol has recently (18 January 2016) pointed out that ‘despite third party reporting suggesting the use of anonymous currencies like Bitcoin by terrorists to finance their activities, this has not been confirmed by law enforcement’.
Amendment 41 #
2016/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 – point b
Paragraph 2 – point b
(b) the absence of flexireliable and reliablesilient governance structures, or indeed a practical definition of such structures for future regulatory purposes, both of which are needed to ensure a sufficient degree of accountability, especially in some DLT applications such as bitcoin that, which creates uncertainty and consumer protection problems, especially in case of challenges unforeseen by the original software designers;
Amendment 51 #
2016/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 – point d a (new)
Paragraph 2 – point d a (new)
(da) notes that, according to the UK Government Chief Scientific Adviser’s report on DLT, it has been estimated that the energy requirements to run Bitcoin are in excess of 1GW and may be comparable to the electricity usage of Ireland. Calls for the research into and promotion of less energy intensive forms of ‘mining’ to ensure the future increase in VC transactions is energy efficient;
Amendment 54 #
2016/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 – point d b (new)
Paragraph 2 – point d b (new)
(db) notes that in FATF’s guidance for a Risk-Based Approach to Virtual Currencies it is mentioned that a least one supervisor receives a growing number of enquiries on derivative and fund-like products related to Bitcoin; is of the opinion that it is premature to allow the development in derivatives on an underlying of which the nature and risks relating to price formation are so poorly understood;
Amendment 90 #
2016/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Welcomes the Commission’s suggestions for including VC exchange platforms in the AMLD in particular in relation to ending the anonymity associated with the exchange of VC for real currencies; recommends further extending the scope to custodian wallet providers if and when the use of the VC(s) in question were to become so prevalent that users would no longer routinely need to exchange their VCs into legal tender;
Amendment 99 #
2016/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Recommends a review of the EU legislation on payments, including PAD, PSD and EMD, in light of the new possibilities afforded by new technological developments including VCs and DLT, with a view to further enhancing competition and lowering transaction costs, including by means of enhanced interoperability and possibly also via the promotion of a universal and non- proprietary electronic wallet;
Amendment 102 #
2016/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Urges particular caution when defining virtual currencies, in the context of any future legislative proposals, to take proper account of the existence of ‘local currencies’ of a not for profit nature, often having limited fungibility and performing significant social and environmental benefits and avoid disproportionate regulation in this area;
Amendment 115 #
2016/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Calls for the creation of a horizontal Task Force DLT (TF DLT) under the leadership of the Commission, in order to provide the necessary technical and regulatory expertise to support the relevant public actors, at both EU and Member State level, in their efforts to ensure a timely and well-informed response to the new opportunities and challenges arising with the introduction of DLT applications; recommends that the task force accompany any assessment of opportunities and challenges with the associated benefits and risks to end users of the financial system to help the Commission and legislators prioritise any legislative initiatives accordingly; observes that the potential of DLT use and the present investment dynamics justify TF DLT being equipped with a proper budget and being staffed with regulators and external technical experts dedicated cross- sectorally to the monitoring of DLT-based applications, identifying standards for best practice, and, where appropriate, recommending regulatory measures and addressing potentially arising consumer protection issues and systemic challenges;
Amendment 117 #
2016/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Recommends that the task force have as one of its specific objectives to define the core set of attributes of virtual currencies and DLT conducive to the general interest; believes that these should include the amenability of distributed ledgers to tools (such as open software and cloud technology) that allow easy monitoring by stakeholders, beyond direct participants and supervisory authorities, to increase the chance of detection of suspicious activities;
Amendment 24 #
Amendment 86 #
2016/0382(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 10 a (new)
Recital 10 a (new)
(10 a) The promotion of energy from renewable sources should be based on the principles of the circular economy and be fully part of the building of a sustainable bioeconomy, in particular with respect to forest and agricultural biomass. These principles aim to achieve the utmost resource efficiency, where the value of products, biobased materials and other resources is maintained in the economy, and the generation of waste minimised. Policies should therefore take into account these principles and promote the keeping of biobased raw materials in the economy for as long as possible by supporting the production of long lived products and only support recovery for energy purposes at the end of the life cycle of these resources, as required among others by the waste hierarchy established in Directive 2008/98/EC.
Amendment 155 #
2016/0382(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 62 a (new)
Recital 62 a (new)
(62 a) Based on estimates of indirect land-use change emissions for different biofuel feedstocks, greenhouse gas emissions linked to indirect land use change are significant, and will negate some or all of the greenhouse gas savings of individual biofuels, even when taking into account the production of co- products for the protein sector. This is because almost the entire biofuel production in 2020 is expected to come from crops grown on land that could be used to satisfy food and feed markets. Furthermore, biofuel production from food crops contributes to food price volatility. In order to reduce such emissions and mitigate such negative effects on food security, it is appropriate to lower the limit laid down in Article 7(1) to 0% in 2030.
Amendment 164 #
2016/0382(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 63 a (new)
Recital 63 a (new)
(63 a) In view of the overcapacity in the food and feed crop-based biofuels and bioliquids on the market, and in light of the need to reduce their consumption, financial aid and other support measures, including in the form of investment and operating aid in new and existing capacity for food and feed crop-based biofuels and bioliquids, and, by extension, biomass fuels produced from food and feed crops, can no longer be justified.
Amendment 195 #
2016/0382(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 74
Recital 74
(74) In the framework of the Common Agricultural Policy Union, farmers should comply with a comprehensive set of environmental requirements in order to receive direct support. Compliance with those requirementAgricultural and forestry residues for the production of biofuels, bioliquids cand be most effectively verified in the context of agricultural policy. Including those requirements in the sustainability scheme is not appropriate as the sustainability criteria for bioenergy should set out rules that are objective and apply globally. Verification of compliance under this Directive would also risk causing unnecessary administrative burdeiomass fuels should be cultivated and harvested using practices that are consistent with the protection of soil quality and soil organic carbon.
Amendment 208 #
2016/0382(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 77
Recital 77
(77) In order to minimise the administrative burden, the Union sustainability and greenhouse gas saving criteria should apply only to electricity and heating from biomass fuels produced in installations with a fuel capacity equal or above to 201 MW. In its report, the Commission recommended that sustainability schemes and MS record keeping apply to energy producers of ≥1MW thermal or electrical capacity, helping to improve statistics on biomass use and to monitor the effects of biomass use on the areas of origin. Also Dir.2015/2193 defines “medium combustion plants” as those with a rated thermal input ≥1MW and less than 50MW. Also, setting the threshold as high as 20MW risks undermining the sustainability criteria and the EU’s climate objectives.Or. enJustification
Amendment 211 #
2016/0382(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 78
Recital 78
(78) Biomass fuels should be converted into electricity and heat in an efficient way in order to maximise energy security and greenhouse gas savings, as well as to limit emissions of air pollutants and minimise the pressure on limited biomass resources. For this reason, public support, including State Aid, to installations with a fuel capacity equal to or exceeding 201 MW, if needed, should only be given to highly efficient combined power and heat installations as defined Article 2(34) of Directive 2012/27/EU. Existing support schemes for biomass- based electricity should however be allowed until their due end date for all biomass installations. In addition electricity produced from biomass in new installations with a fuel capacity equal to or exceeding 201 MW should only count towards renewable energy targets and obligations in the case of highly efficient combined power and heat installations. In accordance with State aid rules, Member States should however be allowed to grant public support for the production of renewables to installations, and count the electricity they produce towards renewable energy targets and obligations, in order to avoid an increased reliance on fossil fuels with higher climate and environmental impacts where, after exhausting all technical and economic possibilities to install highly efficient combined heat and power biomass installations, Member States would face a substantiated risk to security of supply of electricity.
Amendment 212 #
2016/0382(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 78
Recital 78
(78) Biomass fuels should be converted into electricity and heat in an efficient way in order to maximise energy security and greenhouse gas savings, as well as to limit emissions of air pollutants and minimise the pressure on limited biomass resources. For this reason, public support to installations with a fuel capacity equal to or exceeding 201 MW, if needed, should only be given to highly efficient combined power and heat installations as defined Article 2(34) of Directive 2012/27/EU. Existing support schemes for biomass- based electricity should however be allowed until their due end date for all biomass installations. In addition electricity produced from biomass in new installations with a fuel capacity equal to or exceeding 201 MW should only count towards renewable energy targets and obligations in the case of highly efficient combined power and heat installations. In accordance with State aid rules, Member States should however be allowed to grant public support for the production of renewables to installations, and count the electricity they produce towards renewable energy targets and obligations, in order to avoid an increased reliance on fossil fuels with higher climate and environmental impacts where, after exhausting all technical and economic possibilities to install highly efficient combined heat and power biomass installations, Member States would face a substantiated risk to security of supply of electricity.
Amendment 237 #
2016/0382(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point u
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point u
Amendment 244 #
2016/0382(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point dd b (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point dd b (new)
Amendment 273 #
2016/0382(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Member States shall ensure, in meeting the objectives in paragraph 3, that their national policies are designed to conform to the principles of resource efficiency according to the objectives of the Circular Economy as well as the waste hierarchy, as set out in Directive 2008/98/EC, in particular with respect to the consumption of forest and agricultural biomass for energy purposes. To this end, Member States shall regularly review their national policies to ensure conformity with these principles and justify any deviations in the reports required under Article 18(c) of Regulation [Governance].
Amendment 300 #
2016/0382(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 4
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 4
For the calculation of a Member State’s gross final consumption of energy from renewable energy sources, the contribution from biofuels and bioliquids, as well as from biomass fuels consumed in transport, if produced from food or feed crops, shall be no more than 70% of final consumption of energy in road and rail transport in that Member State. This limit shall be reduced to 3,8% in 2030 following the trajectory set out in part A of Annex X. Member States may set a lower limit and may distinguish between different types of biofuels, bioliquids and biomass fuels produced from food and feed crops, for instance by setting a lower limit for the contribution from food or feed crop based biofuels produced from oil crops, taking into account indirect land use changthat Member State.
Amendment 309 #
2016/0382(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 4
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 4
For the calculation of a Member State’s gross final consumption of energy from renewable energy sources, the contribution from biofuels and bioliquids, as well as from biomass fuels consumed in transport, if produced from food or feed crops, shall be no more than 7% of final consumption of energy in road and rail transport in that Member State. This limit shall be reduced to 3,8% in 2030 following the trajectory set out in part A of Annex X. The contribution from food and feed crop- based biofuels and bioliquids produced from oil crops shall be reduced to 0% by no later than 2025. Member States may set a lower limit and may distinguish between different types of biofuels, bioliquids and biomass fuels produced from food and feed crops, for instance by setting a lower limit for the contribution from food or feed crop based biofuels produced from oil crops, taking into account indirect land use change.
Amendment 311 #
2016/0382(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 4
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 4
For the calculation of a Member State’s gross final consumption of energy from renewable energy sources, the contribution from biofuels and bioliquids, as well as from biomass fuels consumed in transport, if produced from food or feed crops, shall be no more than 7% of final consumption of energy in road and rail transport in that Member State. This limit shall be reduced to 3,80% in 2030 following the trajectory set out in part A of Annex X. Member States may set a lower limit and may distinguish between different types of biofuels, bioliquids and biomass fuels produced from food and feed crops, for instance by setting a lower limit for the contribution from food or feed crop based biofuels produced from oil crops, taking into account indirect land use change.
Amendment 323 #
2016/0382(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
Article 7 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
The Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 32 to amend the list of feedstocks in parts A and B of Annex IX in order to add or remove feedstocks, but not to remove them. Each delegated act shall be based on an analysis of the latest scientific and technical progress, taking due account of the principles of the waste hierarchy established in Directive 2008/98/EC, in compliance with the Union sustainability criteria, supporting or contradicting the conclusion that the feedstock in question does not create an additional demand for land and promoting the use of wastes and residues, while avoiding significant distortive effects on markets for (by-)products, wastes or residues, delivering substantial greenhouse gas emission savings compared to fossil fuels, and not creating risk of negative impacts on the environment and biodiversity.
Amendment 326 #
2016/0382(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
Article 7 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
The Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 32 to amend the list of feedstocks in parts A and B of Annex IX in order to add feedstocks, but not to remove them. Each delegated act shall be based on an analysis of the latest scientific and technical progress, taking due account of the principles of the waste hierarchy established in Directive 2008/98/EC, in compliance with the Union sustainability criteria, supporting the conclusion that the feedstock in question does not create an additional demand for land and promoting the use of wastes and residues, while avoiding significant distortive effects on markets for (by-)products, wastes or residues, delivering substantial greenhouse gas emission savings compared to fossil fuels based on a life cycle assessment of emissions including emissions from the land sector and possible displacement effects, and not creating risk of negative impacts on the environment and biodiversity.
Amendment 327 #
2016/0382(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
Article 7 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
The Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 32 to amend the list of feedstocks in parts A and B of Annex IX in order to add feedstocks, but not to remove them. Each delegated act shall be based on an analysis of the latest scientific and technical progress, taking due account of the principles of the waste hierarchy established in Directive 2008/98/EC, and principles of resource efficiency according to the objectives of the Circular Economy; in compliance with the Union sustainability criteria, supporting the conclusion that the feedstock in question does not create an additional demand for land and promoting the use of wastes and residues, while avoiding significant distortive effects on markets for (by- )products, wastes or residues, delivering substantial greenhouse gas emission savings compared to fossil fuels, and not creating risk of negative impacts on the environment and biodiversity.
Amendment 330 #
2016/0382(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 3
Article 7 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 3
Every 2 years, the Commission shall carry out an evaluation of the list of feedstocks in parts A and B of Annex IX in order to add or remove feedstocks, in line with the principles set out in this paragraph. The first evaluation shall be carried out no later than 6 months after [date of entry into force of this Directive]. If appropriate, the Commission shall adopt delegated acts to amend the list of feedstocks in parts A and B of Annex IX in order to add or remove feedstocks, but not to remove them.
Amendment 391 #
2016/0382(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 25 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 25 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
The minimum share shall be at least equal to 1.5% in 2021, increasing up to at least 6.8% in 2030, following the trajectory set out in part B of Annex X. Within this total share, the contribution of advanced biofuels and biogas produced from feedstock listed in part A of Annex IX shall be at least 0.5% of the transport fuels supplied for consumption or use on the market as of 1 January 2021, increasing up to at least 3.62.3% by 2030, following the trajectory set out in part C of Annex X.
Amendment 420 #
2016/0382(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
Biofuels, bioliquids and biomass fuels produced from food and feed crops and other crops grown primarily for energy purposes shall not be eligible for financial support.
Amendment 424 #
2016/0382(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3
Biomass fuels shall have to fulfil the sustainability and greenhouse gas emissions saving criteria set out in paragraphs 2 to 7 only if used in installations producing electricity, heating and cooling or fuels with a fuel capacity equal to or exceeding 201 MW in case of solid biomass fuels and with an electrical capacity equal to or exceeding 0.5 MW in case of gaseous biomass fuels. Member States may apply the sustainability and greenhouse gas emission saving criteria to installations with lower fuel capacity.
Amendment 431 #
2016/0382(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 26 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 26 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Biofuels, bioliquids and biomass fuels produced from agricultural or forest biomass taken into account for the purposes referred to in points (a), (b) and (c) of paragraph 1 shall not be made from raw material obtained from land with high biodiversity value, namely land that had one of the following statuses in or after January 2008, whether or not the land continues to have that status:
Amendment 434 #
2016/0382(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 26 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b – paragraph 1 – point ii a (new)
Article 26 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b – paragraph 1 – point ii a (new)
(ii a) as forest or area with high or exceptional conversation value by international and national certification schemes;
Amendment 439 #
2016/0382(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 26 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point c – point ii
Article 26 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point c – point ii
(ii) non-natural, namely grassland that would cease to be grassland in the absence of human intervention and which is species-rich and not degraded andor has been identified as being highly biodiverse by the relevant competent authority, unless evidence is provided that the harvesting of the raw material is necessary to preserve its status as highly biodiverse grassland.
Amendment 443 #
2016/0382(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 26 – paragraph 4
Article 26 – paragraph 4
4. Biofuels, bioliquids and biomass fuels produced from agricultural biomass taken into account for the purposes referred to in points (a), (b) and (c) of paragraph 1 shall not be made from raw material obtained from land that was peatland or permanently or intermittently flooded wetland in January 2008.
Amendment 447 #
2016/0382(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 26 – paragraph 5 – introductory part
Article 26 – paragraph 5 – introductory part
5. Biofuels, bioliquids and biomass fuels produced from forestry biomass taken into account for the purposes referred to in points (a), (b) and (c) of paragraph 1 shall only be made from the biomass fraction of wastes and residues from forestry and forest-based industries, namely bark, branches, leaves, needles, tree tops, saw dust, cutter shavings, black liquor, brown liquor, fibre sludge and lignin., and shall meet the following requirements to minimise the risk of using unsustainable forest biomass production:
Amendment 479 #
2016/0382(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 26 – paragraph 6 a (new)
Article 26 – paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Biofuels, bioliquids and biomass fuels produced from agricultural and forest biomass taken into account for the purposes referred to in points (a), (b) and (c) of paragraph 1 shall meet the following requirements: (a) raw material is obtained from lands or forests for which third parties’ rights concerning use and tenure of the land or forest are respected by obtaining free, prior and informed consent of these third parties, with the participation by representative institutions and organisations; (b) human and labour rights of third parties are respected; and (c) the availability of food and feed for third parties is not at risk. For purposes of this paragraph, third parties refers to local and indigenous communities or any other persons involved in the production or harvesting of raw materials or affected by the operations to produce or extract raw material.
Amendment 480 #
2016/0382(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 26 – paragraph 6 b (new)
Article 26 – paragraph 6 b (new)
6b. Agricultural and forestry raw materials including residues produced in the Union and used for the production of biofuels, bioliquids and biomass fuels taken into account for the purposes referred to in points (a), (b) and (c) of paragraph 1 shall be collected without impacting soil fertility and long term productivity of the producing ecosystems. Economic operators are required to implement residue management plans to ensure collection rates are sustainable. The provisions of this paragraph shall apply equally to crop and forestry raw materials and residues produced in countries within and outside the Union.
Amendment 486 #
2016/0382(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 26 – paragraph 8 – subparagraph 1
Article 26 – paragraph 8 – subparagraph 1
Electricity from biomass fuels produced in installations with a fuel capacity equal to or exceeding 20 MW shall be taken into account for the purposes referred to in points (a), (b) and (c) of paragraph 1 only if it is produced applying high efficient cogeneration technology as defined under Article 2(34) of Directive 2012/27/EUwith a minimum net total fuel utilisation of 85% and is produced in installations that exclusively use biomass fuels. For the purposes of points (a) and (b) of paragraph 1, this provision shall only apply to installations starting operation and exclusive use of biomass fuels after [3 years from date of adoption of this Directive]. For the purposes of point (c) of paragraph 1, this provision is without prejudice to public support provided under schemes approved by [3 years after date of adoption of this Directive]. Or. en (Directive 2009/28/EC is the existing Renewable Energy Directive (RED))
Amendment 487 #
2016/0382(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 26 – paragraph 8 – subparagraph 1
Article 26 – paragraph 8 – subparagraph 1
Electricity from biomass fuels produced in installations with a fuel capacity equal to or exceeding 20 MW shall be taken into account for the purposes referred to in points (a), (b) and (c) of paragraph 1 only if it is produced applying high efficient cogeneration technology as defined under Article 2(34) of Directive 2012/27/EU. For the purposes of points (a) and (b) of paragraph 1, this provision shall only apply to installations starting operation after [3 years from date of adoption of this Directive]1 January 2021. For the purposes of point (c) of paragraph 1, this provision is without prejudice to public support provided under schemes approved by [3 years after date of adoption of this Directive]1 January 2021.
Amendment 489 #
2016/0382(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 26 – paragraph 8 – subparagraph 1
Article 26 – paragraph 8 – subparagraph 1
Electricity from biomass fuels produced in installations with a fuel capacity equal to or exceeding 201 MW shall be taken into account for the purposes referred to in points (a), (b) and (c) of paragraph 1 only if it is produced applying high efficient cogeneration technology as defined under Article 2(34) of Directive 2012/27/EU. For the purposes of points (a) and (b) of paragraph 1, this provision shall only apply to installations starting operation after [3 years from date of adoption of this Directive]. For the purposes of point (c) of paragraph 1, this provision is without prejudice to public support provided under schemes approved by [3 years after date of adoption of this Directive]. (“Report on Sustainability Requirements for the Use of Solid and Gaseous Biomass Sources in Electricity, Heating and Cooling” (2010), European Commission. Also Directive (EU) Or. en 2015/2193 on the limitation of emissions of certain pollutants from medium combustion plants)
Amendment 492 #
2016/0382(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 26 – paragraph 8 – subparagraph 2
Article 26 – paragraph 8 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 495 #
2016/0382(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 26 – paragraph 9
Article 26 – paragraph 9
Amendment 500 #
2016/0382(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 26 – paragraph 10
Article 26 – paragraph 10
10. For the purposes referred to in points (a), (b) and (c) of paragraph 1, Member States may place additional sustainability requirements for biofuels, bioliquids and biomass fuels.
Amendment 544 #
2016/0382(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex IX – part Part A – point h
Annex IX – part Part A – point h
Amendment 549 #
2016/0382(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex IX – part Part A – point o
Annex IX – part Part A – point o
(o) Biomass fraction of wastes and residues from forestry and forest-based industries, i.e. bark, branches, pre- commercial thinnings, leaves, needles, tree tops, saw dust, cutter shavings, black liquor, brown liquor, fibre sludge, lignin .
Amendment 552 #
2016/0382(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex IX – part Part A – point p
Annex IX – part Part A – point p
Amendment 554 #
2016/0382(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex IX – part Part A – point q
Annex IX – part Part A – point q
Amendment 558 #
2016/0382(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex IX – part Part B – point c
Annex IX – part Part B – point c
Amendment 570 #
Amendment 572 #
2016/0382(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex X – part 1 – title
Annex X – part 1 – title
2021 7.0% 2022 6.73% 2023 6.45.6% 2024 6.14.9% 2025 5.84.2% 2026 5.43.5% 2027 5.02.8% 2028 4.62.1% 2029 4.21.4% 2030 3.80.0%
Amendment 575 #
2016/0382(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex X – part 3 – title
Annex X – part 3 – title
Part C: Calendar year Minimum share 2021 0.5 % 2022 0.76% 2023 0.97% 2024 1.10.8% 2025 1.30.9% 2026 1.75% 2027 2.21.3% 2028 21.65% % 2029 3.11.9% 2030 3.62.3%
Amendment 38 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) The European Council also concluded on 24 October 201414 that a reliable and transparent governance system, without any unnecessary administrative burden, should be developed to help ensure that the Union meets its energy policy goals, with the necessary flexibility for Member States and fully respecting their freedom to determine their energy mix. It emphasized that such governance system should build on existing building blocks, such as national climate programmes, national plans for renewable energy and energy efficiency as well as the need to streamline and bring together separate planning and reporting strands. It also agreed to step up the role and rights of consumers, transparency and predictability for investors, inter alia by systematic monitoring of key indicators for an affordable, safe, competitive, secure and sustainable energy system and to facilitate coordination of national energy and climate policies and foster regional cooperation between Member States, in order to maintain and enhance carbon sink function of the affected ecosystems and long term sustainability of the resources used. _________________ 14 Conclusions of the European Council 23 - 24 October 2014 (EUCO 169/14).
Amendment 41 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7 a (new)
Recital 7 a (new)
(7 a) Given the complex and finite yet renewable nature of the resources used for bioenergy, it is important to support only those energy sources that do not compete with other sectors and are shown by realistic and accurate accounting of carbon to have positive results beneficial for the climate.It should be demonstrated by holistic and comprehensive assessment that they are coherent with other EU policy objectives including biodiversity, development policy and food security.
Amendment 51 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) Therefore, the main objective of the Energy Union Governance should be to enable the achievement of the objectives of the Energy Union and in particular the targets of the 2030 Framework for Climate and Energy. This Regulation is therefore linked to sectorial legislation implementing the 2030 targets for energy and climate. While Member States need flexibility to choose policies that are best-matched to their national energy mix and preferences, that flexibility should be compatible with further market integration, increased competitionwith the principle of resource use hierarchies due to increased competition for finite natural resources between energy and material use and food, the attainment of climate and energy objectives and the gradual shift towards a low-carbon economy.
Amendment 58 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) The integrated national energy and climate plans should cover ten-year periods and provide an overview of the current energy system and policy situation. They should set out national targets and objectives for each of the five key dimensions of the Energy Union and corresponding policies and measures to meet those objectives and have an analytical basis. The national plans covering the first period from 2021 to 2030 should pay particular attention to the 2030set out 2030 national binding targets for greenhouse gas emission reductions, renewable energy, and energy efficiency and targets on electricity interconnection. Member States should aim to ensure that the national plans are consistent with and contribute to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals.
Amendment 60 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18 a (new)
Recital 18 a (new)
(18 a) For each of the five key dimensions of the Energy Union, Member States should ensure that EU funding from the 2014 - 2020 multiannual financial framework is included into integrated national energy and climate plans.National allocations from the post- 2020 multiannual financial framework should actively contribute to the achievement of national binding targets for greenhouse gas emission reductions, renewable energy and energy efficiency.For doing so, the programming process at national and local level for the post-2020 multiannual financial framework should take place in combination with Commission assessment of integrated national energy and climate plans to reflect high ambition, in particular in the light of the long-term objectives of the Paris Agreement on Climate Change and the Sustainable Development Goals.
Amendment 91 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b a (new)
(b a) ensure predictability, transparency and effective public participation in climate and energy planning undertaken by Member States to build-up a broad societal consensus around climate change and the energy transition as well as to contribute to greater investors' certainty.
Amendment 102 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
(a a) the national binding targets related to the decarbonisation (greenhouse gas emissions and renewable energy) and the energy efficiency dimensions of the Energy Union;
Amendment 130 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d – point iv a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d – point iv a (new)
(iv a) realistic, accurate, holistic and comprehensive assessments of the climate change mitigation potential of different sources of energy, the level of impact on levels of greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere and time needed for mitigation processes to start reducing GHG concentrations.
Amendment 141 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
(a a) ensure the achievement by Member States of national binding targets;
Amendment 155 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) emissions reductions and enhancement of removals in individual sectors including electricity, industry, transport, the buildings sector (residential and tertiary), agriculture and land use, land-use change and forestry (LULUCF)a post 2020 target for enhancing sinks beyond net carbon emission neutrality for land use, land-use change and forestry (LULUCF), which are in line with EU commitments to limit the temperature rise to 1.5 °C;
Amendment 178 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 25 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the progress made at Union level towards meeting the objectives of the Energy Union, including for the first ten- year period the Union's 2030 targets for energy and climate, notably in view of avoiding any gaps to the Union's 2030 targets for renewable energy and energy efficiency and in view of the revised EU climate and energy action as appropriate, as outlined in Article 38;
Amendment 182 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 2
Article 25 – paragraph 2
2. In the area of renewable energy, as part of its assessment referred to in paragraph 1, the Commission shall assess the progress made in the share of energy from renewable sources in the Union’s gross final consumption on the basis of a linear trajectory starting from 20% in 2020 and reaching at least 27% in 2030 as referred to in Article 4(a)(2)(i). This shall include holistic and comprehensive assessment with a view to maintaining and enhancing carbon sink capacity and GHG emission reduction.
Amendment 183 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 – point a a (new)
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 – point a a (new)
(a a) assess developments in bioenergy in the renewable energy mix on the sustainability of resource use, inter alia carbon sinking by forest areas and peatlands, and the effects on food security and land tenure;
Amendment 187 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – title
Article 26 – title
Follow-up in case of inconsistencies with overarching Energy Union objectives and targets under the Effort Sharing Regulation and the Renewable Energy Directive [recast of Dir.2009/28/EC]
Amendment 209 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 38 – paragraph 1
Article 38 – paragraph 1
The Commission shall report to the European Parliament and to the Council by 28 February 2026 and every five years thereafter on the operation and implementation of this Regulation, its contribution to the Governance of the Energy Union and the conformity of the planning, reporting and monitoring provisions of this Regulation with other Union legislation or future decisions relating to the UNFCCC and the Paris Agreement. The Commission may make proposals ifadequacy of its contribution to the goals of Paris Agreement. The reports shall be accompanied by proposals to enhance the Union's climate and energy action as appropriate.
Amendment 212 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – Part 1 – Section B – subsection 4 a (new)
Annex I – Part 1 – Section B – subsection 4 a (new)
4a. Reporting the current state of the resource, including status and sustainability of forest or peatland biomass feedstocks used for energy, and impacts on carbon sinks and biodiversity.
Amendment 213 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – Part 1 – Section B – subsection 4 b (new)
Annex I – Part 1 – Section B – subsection 4 b (new)
4b. Reporting the current state of social sustainability of the resource use; social impacts including regarding rights of local people that depend on forests.
Amendment 214 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – Part 1 – Section B – subsection 5 – point 5.2
Annex I – Part 1 – Section B – subsection 5 – point 5.2
5.2. Macroeconomic, environmental, skills and social impacts (in terms of costs and benefits as well as cost-effectiveness) of the planned policies and measures described in section 3 at least until the last year of the period covered by the plan, including comparison to projections with existing policies and measures. These should also include evaluation of social impacts of biomass use especially regarding people that depend on forests
Amendment 215 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – Part 2 – Section B – paragraph 2 – point 3 – point 5 a (new)
Annex I – Part 2 – Section B – paragraph 2 – point 3 – point 5 a (new)
(5a) Reporting on forest area, including (a) deforestation (b) afforestation (including composition/type of regrowth) (c) yearly increment (d) annual harvests.
Amendment 216 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex VII – Part 1 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
Annex VII – Part 1 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
(aa) origin and volume of energy, in energy units, from renewable sources generated and consumed in electricity, heating and cooling, differentiated by type as listed in Article 2(a) to [recast of Directive 2009/28/EC as proposed by COM(2016) 767] and sector;
Amendment 217 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex VII – Part 1 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
Annex VII – Part 1 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(ba) the volume of and energy from renewable sources supplied for consumption and used in transport, including biofuels from food and feed stocks, biofuels and biogas produced from feedstock listed in Annex IX to [recast of Directive 2009/28/EC as proposed by COM(2016) 767], renewable liquid and gaseous transport fuels of non-biological origin, waste-based fossil fuels and renewable electricity supplied for consumption and used in transport, differentiated by type of feedstock and fuel, origin, and greenhouse gas saving;
Amendment 219 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex VII – Part 1 – paragraph 1 – point g a (new)
Annex VII – Part 1 – paragraph 1 – point g a (new)
(ga) the estimated net greenhouse gas emission saving due to the use of energy from renewable sources in transport, including emissions from indirect land- use change (1) Fuel type (a) bioethanol (b) biodiesel (2) Biofuels and bioliquids produced from food and feed crops (3) Advanced biofuels and bioliquids (4) Other (differentiated by type and feedstock)
Amendment 224 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex VII – part 1 – paragraph 1 – point m – point 1 – point a – point i
Annex VII – part 1 – paragraph 1 – point m – point 1 – point a – point i
i) Branches and tree tops (reporting is voluntary)
Amendment 226 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex VII – part 1 – paragraph 1 – point m – point 1 – point a – point ii
Annex VII – part 1 – paragraph 1 – point m – point 1 – point a – point ii
ii) Stumps (reporting is voluntary)
Amendment 228 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex VII – part 1 – paragraph 1 – point m – point 1 – point a – point iii a (new)
Annex VII – part 1 – paragraph 1 – point m – point 1 – point a – point iii a (new)
iiia) precommercial thinnings or trimmings
Amendment 229 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex VII – part 1 – paragraph 1 – point m – point 1 – point b – point i
Annex VII – part 1 – paragraph 1 – point m – point 1 – point b – point i
i) Bark (reporting is voluntary)
Amendment 230 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex VII – part 1 – paragraph 1 – point m – point 1 – point b – point iii a (new)
Annex VII – part 1 – paragraph 1 – point m – point 1 – point b – point iii a (new)
iiia) precommercial thinnings or trimmings
Amendment 231 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex VII – part 1 – paragraph 1 – point m – point 2 – point b a (new)
Annex VII – part 1 – paragraph 1 – point m – point 2 – point b a (new)
(ba) manure, slurry and other animal waste
Amendment 232 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex VIII – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Annex VIII – paragraph 1 – introductory part
The EU bioenergy sustainability report on energy from biomass to be adopted biennially starting 2022 and published by the Commission together with the State of the Energy Union report pursuant to Article 29(2)(d), shall contain as a minimum the following information:
Amendment 233 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex VIII – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
Annex VIII – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(ba) in respect of both third countries and Member States that are a significant source of raw material for biofuel, bioliquids and biomass fuels consumed within the Union, whether the country has ratified and implemented: – the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety, – the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora;
Amendment 234 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex VIII – paragraph 1 – point b (new)
Annex VIII – paragraph 1 – point b (new)
(bb) evaluation of the effectiveness of bioenergy policy and sustainability criteria in safeguarding climate, carbon sinking, biodiversity food security and people's rights;
Amendment 235 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex VIII – paragraph 1 – point f
Annex VIII – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) in respect of both third countries and Member States that are a significant source of raw materials for biofuels, bioliquids and biomass fuels consumed within the Union, on national measures taken to respect the sustainability criteria and greenhouse gas saving criteria set out in Article 26, paragraphs 2 to 7, of [recast of Directive 2009/28/EC as proposed by COM(2016) 767], for soil, water and air protection.
Amendment 236 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex VIII – paragraph 1 – point f a (new)
Annex VIII – paragraph 1 – point f a (new)
(fa) the impact on social sustainability in the Union and in third countries of increased demand for biofuel, the impact of Union biofuel policy on the availability of foodstuffs at affordable prices, in particular for people living in developing countries, and wider development issues. Reports shall address the respect of land- use rights. Reports shall state, both for third countries and Member States that are a significant source of raw material for biofuel, bioliquid or biomass fuel consumed within the Union, whether the country has ratified and implemented each of the following Conventions of the International Labour Organisation: Nos 29, 87, 100, 111, 138, 182, and 169.1a The Commission shall, if appropriate, propose corrective action, in particular if evidence shows that biofuel production has a significant impact on food prices or on land-use rights, in particular the rights of local and indigenous communities in developing countries. __________________ 1a Convention concerning Forced or Compulsory Labour (No 29); Convention concerning Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise (No 87); Convention concerning Equal Remuneration of Men and Women Workers for Work of Equal Value (No 100); Convention concerning Discrimination in Respect of Employment and Occupation (No 111); Convention concerning Minimum Age for Admission to Employment (No 138); Convention concerning the Prohibition and Immediate Action for the Elimination of the Worst Forms of Child Labour (No 182); Convention concerning Indigenous and Tribal People's Rights (N° 169).
Amendment 9 #
2016/0374(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital -1 (new)
Recital -1 (new)
(-1) The difference between expected VAT revenues and VAT actually collected (the so-called 'VAT gap') in the Union was approximately EUR 170 billion in 2013 and cross-border fraud amounts to a VAT revenue loss in the Union of approximately EUR 50 billion a year, all of which makes VAT an important issue to be addressed at Union level.
Amendment 14 #
2016/0374(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) In the Action Plan on VAT9 , the Commission outlined that electronically supplied publications should be able to benefit from the same preferential VAT rate treatment as publications on any means of physical support. To achieve this aim, this needs to include the possibility for all Member States to apply to the supply of books, newspapers and periodicals either a reduced VAT rate or lower reduced VAT rates including the possibility of granting exemptions with deductibility of the VAT paid at the preceding stage. That proposal is in line with the objective of granting Member States more freedom to set their own VAT rates within a definitive destination-based VAT system. _________________ 9 COM(2016) 148 final
Amendment 18 #
2016/0374(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5 a (new)
Recital 5 a (new)
(5 a) Granting freedom to Member States to apply reduced or super-reduced VAT rates for e-books, e-newspapers and e-periodicals could provide an opportunity for new profit margins for publishers and for investment in new content, compared to the current model which depends heavily on advertisement. A more general reflection on the funding model of e- content should also be started at Union level.
Amendment 25 #
2016/0374(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 a (new)
Article 2 a (new)
Article 2 a Monitoring The European Commission shall, by three years after the entry into force of this Directive, produce a report identifying the Member States that have adopted similar reduced or super-reduced VAT rates for books, newspapers and periodicals and their electronic equivalent, and evaluate the impact of those measures in terms of budgetary implications and development of the cultural sector.
Amendment 9 #
2016/0371(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1a (new)
Recital 1a (new)
(1 a) The VAT gap in the Union was approximately EUR 170 billion in 2013 and cross-border fraud amounts to a VAT revenue loss of around EUR 50 billion per year in the Union, making VAT an important issue to be addressed at Union level.
Amendment 12 #
2016/0371(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) As under the special schemes, a Member State of identification collects and controls VAT on behalf of the Member States of consumption, it is appropriate to provide for a mechanism whereby the Member State of identification would receive a fee from the Member States of consumption concerned compensating for the costs of collection and control. However, as the current system whereby a fee is retained from the VAT amounts to be transferred by the Member State of identification to the Member States of consumption has caused complications for tax administrations, in particular when dealing with reimbursements, such a fee should be calculated and paid annually, outside the special schemes, and where a rebate is paid between differing national currencies, the valid exchange rate published by the Central European Bank should be applied.
Amendment 13 #
2016/0371(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) To simplify the collection of statistical data concerning the application of the special schemes, the Commission should be authorised to automatically access general information related to the special schemes stored in the Member States' electronic systems, with the exception of data concerning individual taxable persons. Member States are encouraged to ensure that such general information is available to other relevant national authorities, if this is not already the case, in order to fight VAT fraud and money laundering.
Amendment 18 #
2016/0371(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point b
Regulation (EU) No 904/2010
Section 3 – Subsection 3 – Article 47j – paragraph 4
Section 3 – Subsection 3 – Article 47j – paragraph 4
4. Each Member State shall communicate to the other Member States and the Commission the details of the competent person responsible for coordination of administrative enquiries within that Member State. That information shall be published on the website of the European Commission.
Amendment 19 #
2016/0371(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point b Regulation (EU) No 904/2010
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point b Regulation (EU) No 904/2010
Subsection 5Statistical Sharing information with the Commission
Amendment 20 #
2016/0371(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point b
Regulation (EU) No 904/2010
Section 3 – Subsection 5 – Article 47m – paragraph 1
Section 3 – Subsection 5 – Article 47m – paragraph 1
Member States shall grant the Commission access to statistical information stored in their electronic system pursuant to Article 17(1)(d). This information shall not contain any personal data.’could be used by the European Commission to monitor respect for Union competition rules.
Amendment 21 #
2016/0371(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5a (new)
Regulation (EU) No 904/2010
Article 50 – paragraph 1
Article 50 – paragraph 1
Amendment 14 #
2016/0370(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital -1 (new)
Recital -1 (new)
(-1) The VAT gap in the Union was around €170 billion in 2013 and cross- border fraud amounts to a VAT revenue loss of around €50 billion a year in the Union, making VAT an important issue to be addressed at Union level and the adoption of a definitive VAT regime based on the destination principle even more urgent.
Amendment 15 #
2016/0370(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3 a (new)
Recital 3 a (new)
(3a) While the assessment of the Mini- One Stop Shop (MOSS) is largely positive, 99% of the VAT revenue processed via the MOSS is declared by only 13 % of the business registered, demonstrating the need for Member States to promote the MOSS to a wider range of small and medium enterprises, in order overcome barriers to cross-border e-commerce.
Amendment 16 #
2016/0370(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3 b (new)
Recital 3 b (new)
(3b) The current MOSS system means that certain Member States still require businesses to submit both a national VAT return, even in those cases where businesses are below national VAT thresholds, and an EU VAT MOSS return, resulting in unnecessary compliance costs. The Commission should create a harmonised VAT administration system, whereby businesses which are below the national VAT threshold, but exceed the MOSS threshold, are required to submit only one return concerning the VAT MOSS liability. Further to the creation of such a system, the simplification of this system should also be applicable to the claiming back of VAT paid on business purchases relevant to the sale of VAT MOSS related goods.
Amendment 18 #
2016/0370(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) The realisation of the internal market, globalisation, and technological change have resulted in an explosive growth of electronic commerce and, hence, of distance sales of goods, both supplied from one Member State to another and from third territories or third countries to the Community. The relevant provisions of Directives 2006/112/EC and 2009/132/EC should be adapted to this evolution, taking into account the principle of taxation at destination, the need to protect Member States' tax revenue, to create a level playing field for the businesses concerned and to minimise burdens on them. The special scheme for telecommunications, broadcasting or electronically supplied services supplied by taxable persons established within the Community but not in the Member State of consumption should therefore be extended to intra- Community distance sales of goods and a similar special scheme should be introduced for distance sales of goods imported from third territories or third countries. Luxembourg and Ireland currently collect the majority of VAT revenue collected under the Union scheme of the MOSS system (70% in 2015). Therefore, Member States should take steps towards more harmonised VAT rates in the future in order to fight tax dumping in the area of indirect taxation.
Amendment 22 #
2016/0370(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 13 a (new)
Recital 13 a (new)
(13a) MOSS audit guidelines encourage close cooperation of Member States on audit but greater coordination when auditing cross-border businesses using the VAT system is necessary to ensure higher compliance rates. Member States should create a European MOSS audit team with coordinating and advising functions to the Member States. In addition, the Commission should present a legislative proposal to include current audit guidelines into binding legislation.
Amendment 26 #
2016/0370(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 a (new)
Directive 2006/112/EC
Article 34 – paragraph 1
Article 34 – paragraph 1
(1a) In Article 34, the first paragraph is replaced by the following: " 1. Provided the following conditions are met, Article 33 shall not apply to supplies of goods all of which are dispatched or transported to the same Member State, where that Member State is the Member State in which dispatch or transport of the goods ends: (a) the goods supplied are not products subject to excise duty; (b) the total value, exclusive of VAT, of such supplies effected under the conditions laid down in Article 33 within that Member State does not in any one calendar year exceed EUR 100 35,000 or the equivalent in national currency; (c) the total value, exclusive of VAT, of the supplies of goods, other than products subject to excise duty, effected under the conditions laid down in Article 33 within that Member State did not in the previous calendar year exceed EUR 100 35,000 or the equivalent in national currency. (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:32006L0112&from=en)" Or. en
Amendment 27 #
2016/0370(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 b (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 b (new)
Directive 2006/112/EC
Article 34 – paragraph 2
Article 34 – paragraph 2
(1b) In Article 34, paragraph 2 is deleted.
Amendment 30 #
2016/0370(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive 2006/112/EC
Article 58 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 58 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) the total value, exclusive of VAT, of such supplies does not in the current calendar year exceed EUR 100 000, or the equivalent in national currency, and did not do so in the course of the preceding calendar year.
Amendment 33 #
2016/0370(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 a (new)
Directive 2006/112/EC
Article 404 a (new)
Article 404 a (new)
(7a) The following Article is inserted: "Article 404a By 31 December 2019, the Commission shall present a report to the European Parliament and the Council on the possibility to create EU MOSS audit teams in order to increase audit coordination for cross-border VAT payments among the Member States. This report shall also include recommendations as to whether a legislative proposal is necessary to implement audit guidelines into binding legislation."
Amendment 34 #
2016/0370(CNS)
(c) the total value, exclusive of VAT, of the supplies covered by these provisions does not in the current calendar year exceed EUR 100 000, or the equivalent in national currency, nor did it do so in the course of the preceding calendar year.
Amendment 263 #
2016/0365(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 60
Recital 60
Amendment 279 #
2016/0365(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Each Member State shall designate one or more resolution authoritiesy that areis empowered to use the resolution tools and exercise the resolution powers as set out in this Regulation.
Amendment 282 #
2016/0365(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3
Article 3 – paragraph 3
3. Where a resolution authority designated pursuant to paragraph 1 is entrusted with other functions, the Member State shall ensure the full operational independence of that resolution authority and shall put in place all necessary arrangements to avoid conflicts of interest between the functions entrusted to the resolution authority pursuant to this Regulation and all other functions entrusted to that authority.
Amendment 288 #
2016/0365(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 9 – introductory part
Article 3 – paragraph 9 – introductory part
9. Where a Member State designates more than one resolution authority pursuant to paragraph 1, tThe notification referred to in paragraph 8 shall include the following:
Amendment 289 #
2016/0365(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 9 – point a
Article 3 – paragraph 9 – point a
(a) thewhere the designated reasons justifylution authority combines other functions with those referred to ing that mis Regulatiple desigon, the reasons justifying that combination;
Amendment 290 #
2016/0365(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 9 – point b
Article 3 – paragraph 9 – point b
(b) the precise allocation of functions and responsibilities betweewithin those authorities;
Amendment 291 #
2016/0365(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 9 – point b a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 9 – point b a (new)
(ba) the measures taken to ensure full operational independence in conformity with this Article;
Amendment 292 #
2016/0365(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 9 – point c
Article 3 – paragraph 9 – point c
(c) the way in which coordinationnflict of interest between them is ensuravoided;
Amendment 293 #
2016/0365(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 9 – point d
Article 3 – paragraph 9 – point d
Amendment 305 #
2016/0365(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. ESMA shall assess CCP recovery and resolution arrangements across the Union in terms of their aggregate effect on Union financial stability through regular stress-testing and crisis simulation exercises with respect to potential system-wide stress events. In exercising this role, ESMA shall ensure consistency with the assessments of the resilience of individual CCPs carried out pursuant to Article 21(6) of Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 with regard to the frequency and design of the tests and shall cooperate closely with the ESRB and competent authorities designated under Article 4 of Directive 2013/36/EU, including the ECB in carrying out its tasks within a single supervisory mechanism under Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013, and any national competent authorities tasked with the supervision of CCPs. In areas where these arrangements are found to be wanting as a result of these comprehensive stress tests, the responsible institution or institutions will have to address the shortcomings and resubmit their arrangements for another round of stress tests within 6 months of the previous stress tests.
Amendment 306 #
2016/0365(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. ESMA shall assess CCP recovery and resolution arrangements across the Union in terms of their aggregate effect on Union financial stability through regular stress-testing and crisis simulation exercises with respect to potential system-wide stress events. In exercising this role, ESMA shall ensure consistency with the assessments of the resilience of individual CCPs carried out pursuant to Article 21(6) of Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 with regard to the frequency and design of the tests and shall cooperate closely with the ESRB and competent authorities designated under Article 4 of Directive 2013/36/EU, including the ECB in carrying out its tasks within a single supervisory mechanism under Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013, and any national competent authorities tasked with the supervision of CCPs. In areas where these arrangements are found to be wanting as a result of these comprehensive stress tests, the responsible institution or institutions will have to address the shortcomings and resubmit their arrangements for another round of stress tests within 6 months of the previous stress tests.
Amendment 358 #
2016/0365(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3
Article 10 – paragraph 3
3. When assessing the recovery plan, the competent authority shall take into consideration the CCP's capital structure, its default waterfall and whether it respects the general principle that losses should be distributed between CCPs, clearing members and clients as a function of their ability to monitor and manage risks, the level of complexity of the organisational structure and the risk profile of the CCP, and the impact that the implementation of the recovery plan would have on clearing members, their clients, financial markets served by the CCP and on the financial system as a whole.
Amendment 396 #
2016/0365(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 7 a (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. The resolution authority shall ensure that the resolution plan is compatible with resolution plans drawn up by the resolution authorities of the CCP's clearing members.
Amendment 459 #
2016/0365(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point c a (new)
Article 22 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point c a (new)
(ca) the CCP failed to implement one or more of the arrangements or measures required of it under point (a) of Article 9(1) within a specific timeframe;
Amendment 493 #
2016/0365(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 8
Article 27 – paragraph 8
8. National insolvency law rules relating to the voidability or unenforceability of legal acts detrimental to creditors shall not apply to transfers of assets, rights, obligations or liabilities from a CCP in relation to which resolution tools or government financial stabilisation tools are used.
Amendment 497 #
2016/0365(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 9 – introductory part
Article 27 – paragraph 9 – introductory part
9. The resolution authority may recover any reasonable expenses incurred in connection with the use of the resolution tools or powers or government financial stabilisation tools in any of the following ways:
Amendment 524 #
2016/0365(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 32 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
The resolution authority shall use the write-down and conversion tool in accordance with Article 33 in respect of instruments of ownership and debt instruments issued by the CCP in resolution or other unsecured liabilities other than initial margin in order to absorb losses, recapitalise that CCP or a bridge CCP, or to support the use of the sale of business tool.
Amendment 540 #
Amendment 542 #
2016/0365(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 45
Article 45
Amendment 552 #
2016/0365(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46
Article 46
Amendment 553 #
2016/0365(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 47
Article 47
Amendment 560 #
2016/0365(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 60 – paragraph 1
Article 60 – paragraph 1
Where the resolution authority uses one or more resolution tools, it shallould aim to ensure that shareholders, creditors and, clearing participants do not incur: (a) clearing member,members and their clients do not incur greater losses than they would have incurred had the resolution authority not taken resolution action in relation to the CCP at the time the resolution authority considered that the conditions for resolution pursuant to Article 22(1) were met and had they instead been subject to all possible outstanding obligations pursuant to the CCP's recovery plan orand all other contractual arrangements in its operating rules; (b) of a clearing member, greater losses than they would have incurred had the CCP been wound up under normal insolvency proceedings including by taking account of its contractu for either a default or a non-default event and had the CCP been a gone concern with no residual franchise value and wound up under normal insolvency proceedings, properly taking into account any plausible adverse effects of systemic instability and market turmoil, including fire sales, replacement costs and the breakdown of entire segments of the financial marrangements in its operating rules.ket on the positions of the stakeholders in question. in the event of the default of a in an event other than the default
Amendment 570 #
2016/0365(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 61 – paragraph -1 (new)
Article 61 – paragraph -1 (new)
-1. For the purpose of informing stakeholders exposed to the CCP, the CCP shall produce a daily estimate of how losses would affect each category of creditor under extreme but plausible scenarios for a default and non-default event leading to the insolvency of the CCP. This estimate shall fully reflect the contractual arrangements governing the CCP's loss waterfall and be consistent with the margining and stress testing methodology used to fulfil the CCP's obligations under Regulation (EU) No 648/2012.
Amendment 573 #
2016/0365(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 61 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 61 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) the treatment that shareholders, creditors and clearing participants would have received had the resolution authority not taken resolution action in relation to the CCP the resolution authority considered that the conditions for resolution pursuant to Article 22(1) were met, and they had instead been subject to possible outstanding obligations pursuant to the CCP's recovery plan or other arrangements in its operating rules or the CCP had been wound up under normal insolvency proceedings as a gone concern with no residual franchise value, properly taking into account any plausible adverse effects of systemic instability and market turmoil, including fire sales, replacement costs and the breakdown of entire segments of the financial market on the positions of the stakeholders in question ;
Amendment 600 #
2016/0365(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 80 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 80 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Regulation (EU) No 648/2012
Article 6a – paragraph 1 – point b – introductory part
Article 6a – paragraph 1 – point b – introductory part
(b) the suspension of the clearing obligation laid down in Article 4 for those specific classes of OTC derivatives is necessary to avoid a serious threat to financial stability in the Union in connection with the resolution of the CCP, in particular where both of the following criteria are met:
Amendment 605 #
2016/0365(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 80 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 80 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Regulation (EU) No 648/2012
Article 6a – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
Article 6a – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(ba) no alternative CCPs are available to offer the clearing service to the clearing participants of the CCP in resolution, or clearing members and clients are not operationally and technically able to meet within a reasonable timeframe all legal or operational requirements of those alternative CCPs
Amendment 243 #
2016/0364(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18 – point a a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18 – point a a (new)
Directive 2013/36/EU
Article 98 – paragraph 1 – point j a (new)
Article 98 – paragraph 1 – point j a (new)
(aa) in paragraph 1, point ja is added; (ja) the assessment of the integration of environmental, social and governance (ESG) factors and risks in the institution’s risk-management system;
Amendment 261 #
2016/0364(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18 – point c a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18 – point c a (new)
Directive 2013/36/EU
Article 98 – paragraphs 7 a (new) and 7 b (new)
Article 98 – paragraphs 7 a (new) and 7 b (new)
(ca) the following paragraphs 7a and 7b are inserted: 7 a. For the purpose of point (ja) and for Article 448a of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013, EBA shall by 1 June 2020 issue guidelines in accordance with Article 16 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010 to specify further details of the supervisory review and evaluation process regarding the integration of ESG factors and risks including risks related to the depreciation of assets due to regulatory change. The evaluation process shall integrate, as appropriate, specific qualitative and quantitative criteria and metrics for assessing whether the overall business strategy and investment policy of the institution is aligned with the Paris targets and EU related ESG goals. 7b. Taking into account the experience acquired in the application of the guidelines referred to in paragraph 7a, EBA shall develop draft regulatory technical standards for developing a methodological standard for identifying and measuring sustainability risks and factors within the capital adequacy framework relying on clearly demonstrated risks. EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 1 July 2022. Power is conferred on the Commission to adopt the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
Amendment 983 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 116
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 116
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 448 a (new)
Article 448 a (new)
Article 448a Disclosure of environmental, social and governance risk 1. From [1 year after entry into force of this Regulation], institutions shall disclose the following information related to environmental, social and governance risks in accordance with Article 98 of Directive 2013/36/EU: (a) A description of specific environmental, social and governance risks, which could arise in the short-, medium-, or long-term and could have a material and financial impact on the institution; (b) A description of the processes that are used to determine which risks could have a material or financial impact on the institution and how these are integrated into the overall risk management; (c) A description of significant concentrations of credit exposures against greenhouse gas-related assets, including risks related to the depreciation of assets, due to regulatory change if these are material; (d) A description of the impact of environmental, social and governance risks on the business, strategy and financial planning of the institution, if these are material; (e) A description of the processes that the institution uses to identify, evaluate and manage these risks; (f) The parameters that the institution used to evaluate the impact of short-, medium- and long-term environmental, social and governance risks on lending and financial intermediary services, if these are material; (g) A description of the role of the board with regard to the evaluation and management of environmental, social and governance risks.” (h) Whether the fiduciary duty within the institution encompasses ESG factors (i) Whether model contracts with clients incorporate the transmission of the beneficiary interest as well as clear expectations on the identification and integration of ESG risks (j) whether a the do-no-harm principle according to ESG risk analysis is effectively integrated by the institution management; 2. For the purpose of paragraph 1 EBA shall develop by 1 June 2020 draft regulatory technical standards to specify further details on the disclosure requirements provided for in paragraph 1. Power is conferred on the Commission to adopt the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
Amendment 83 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) Rapid technological developments continue to transform the way works and other subject-matter are created, produced, distributed and exploited. New business models and new actors continue to emerge. The objectives and the principles laid down by the Union copyright framework remain sound. However, legal uncertainty remains, for both rightholders and users, as regards certain uses, including cross-border uses, of works and other subject-matter in the digital environment. As set out in the Communication of the Commission entitled ‘Towards a modern, more European copyright framework’26 , in some areas it is necessary to adapt and supplement the current Union copyright framework. This Directive provides for rules to adapt certain exceptions and limitations to digital and cross-border environments, as well as measures to facilitate certain licensing practices as regards the dissemination of out-of- commerce works and the online availability of audiovisual works on video- on-demand platforms with a view to ensuring wider access to content. In order to achieve a well-functioning marketplace for copyright, there should also be rules on rights in publications, on the use of works and other subject-matter by online service providers storing and giving access to user uploaded content and on the transparency of authors' and performers' contracts. _________________ 26 COM(2015) 626 final. COM(2015) 626 final.
Amendment 281 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 31
Recital 31
Amendment 295 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 32
Recital 32
Amendment 312 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 33
Recital 33
(33) For the purposes of this Directive, it is necessary to defineclarify the sconceptpe of press publication in a way that embraces only journalistic publications, published by a service provider, periodically or regularly updated in any media, for the purpose of informing or entertaining. Such publications would include, for instance, daily newspapers, weeklotection set out in Article s2 and 3 of Directive 2001/29/EC. In order to improve legal certainty for all concerned parties, and to ensure the freedom to carry out certain acts necessary for monthly magazines of general or special ithe normal functioning of the Internest and news websites. Periodical publications which are published for scientific or academic purposes, such as scientific journals, should not be covered by the protection granted to press publications under this Directive. This protection doess well as to take account of certain fundamental rights, these Articles should not extend to acts of hyperlinking, which do not constitute communication to the public.
Amendment 326 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 34
Recital 34
Amendment 340 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 35
Recital 35
Amendment 519 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 4
Article 2 – paragraph 4
Amendment 731 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11
Article 11
Amendment 995 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 2
Article 18 – paragraph 2
Amendment 15 #
2016/0209(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 1 a (new)
Recital 1 a (new)
(1a) Council Directive 2011/16/EU is still characterised by several loopholes used by tax-dodging experts to circumvent the automatic exchange of information therefore, undermining its effectiveness. In order to prevent their use to avoid reporting, as a result of a situation where asset management and beneficial ownership are located in the same jurisdiction, entities which are effectively untaxed and unsupervised should not be considered to be investment entities. In addition, a Union financial institution should be considered as the reporting entity for a Custodial Institution with a foreign account to prevent the circumvention of reporting by placing clients’ assets in a foreign custodial institution. To avoid the exploitation of "synthetic" tax residents’ certificates easily available in countries such as Panama, Gibraltar, the Bahamas and thereby circumventing reporting to the Union authority, any previous residence in the Union within the last ten years should be deemed as an indication of current residence. A tax clearance certificate should be used to establish actual residence. In order to avoid selling newly created investment-linked insurances which are non-cash value and thereby allow the circumvention of reporting, Union law should provide that such instruments are treated as cash value policies. The exception allowing non-reporting of insurance policies sold by foreign agents to Union residents should be abolished. Whereas they currently fall into the category of an Holding active non-financial entity which is exempt from reporting, trusts owing companies should be considered to be a reporting entity. In order to prevent the use of loans which are not repaid as a way of redistributing profits and investment returns, credit interest should, like equity and debt interest, be reportable. The possibility of exploiting current provisions which exempt newly created entities which merely state the intention of being an operational company from reporting should be removed. Gold should be included among financial assets since it produces a financial income in the form of gold leasing, which is currently excluded from reporting.
Amendment 21 #
2016/0209(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3 a (new)
Recital 3 a (new)
(3a) The observed link between tax evasion, tax avoidance and money laundering calls for exploiting, to the maximum extent, synergies stemming from domestic, Union and international cooperation between the different authorities involved in fighting these crimes and abuses. Issues, such as beneficial ownership transparency or the extent to which entities, such as legal professions, are subject to the AML framework in third countries, are crucial to enhancing the ability of Union authorities to address tax dodging and money laundering.
Amendment 30 #
2016/0209(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4 a (new)
Recital 4 a (new)
(4a) Enhanced customer due diligence measures should also be made available to tax authorities. However, enhanced measures currently have little scope to fight tax evasion since they are largely applied to countries included in the list of high-risk countries as defined by the Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2016/1675 of 14 July 20161a. Currently, the list mirrors the existing Financial Action Task Force (FATF) list and does not include a number of countries where recent scandals and observed scant adherence to a number of FATF recommendations still point to widespread tax evasion and money laundering activities occurring in such jurisdictions. Therefore, it is vital to adopt an extended updated list of high-risk countries on the basis of additional and more stringent criteria. Moreover, in order to exploit synergies in the Union legislative framework, specific enhanced customer due diligence measures shall also be applied to those countries which will be included in the forthcoming Union common list of non-cooperative tax jurisdictions to be published by the Commission. _________________ 1aCommission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2016/1675 of 14 July 2016 supplementing Directive (EU) 2015/849 of the European Parliament and of the Council by identifying high-risk third countries with strategic deficiencies (OJ L 254, 20.9.2016, p.1)
Amendment 35 #
2016/0209(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4 b (new)
Recital 4 b (new)
(4b) Since AML information is in many cases of a cross-border nature, it should be included, when relevant, in the automatic exchange between Member States and should be made available on request to the Commission in the framework of its power to enforce state aid rules. Moreover, given the complexity and the need to verify the reliability of this information, such as in the case of data on beneficial ownership, tax authorities should cooperate on cross-border enquiries.
Amendment 42 #
2016/0209(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point -1 (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point -1 (new)
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 5 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Amendment 43 #
2016/0209(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point -1a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point -1a (new)
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 5 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 b (new)
In Article 5, the following paragraph is added: “The Commission, in the framework of its power to enforce state aid rules, shall have access on request to the information referred to Article 22 of this Directive.”
Amendment 46 #
2016/0209(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point -1b (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point -1b (new)
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 8 a (new)
Article 8 a (new)
The following article is inserted: “Article 8a The tax authorities of a Member State shall automatically exchange the documents and information referred to in Article 22 of this Directive with any other Member State if the beneficial owner of a firm, or, in the case of a trust, the settler, one of the trustees, the protector (where applicable), a beneficiary or any other natural person exercising effective control over the trust, or, lastly, the holder of an account referred to in Article 32a of Directive (EU) 2015/849 is a taxpayer in that Member State.”
Amendment 49 #
2016/0209(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 22 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 22 – paragraph 1 a (new)
(1a) For the purpose of the implementation and enforcement of the laws of the Member States giving effect to this directive, and to ensure the functioning of the administrative cooperation it establishes, Member States shall provide by law for access by tax authorities to the mechanisms, procedures, documents and information referred to in articles 7, 13, 30, 31, 32a and 4018, 18a, 19, 27, 30, 31, 32a, 40, 44, 48 of Directive 2015/849/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council*.
Amendment 22 #
2016/0010(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) Union tax authorities need comprehensive and relevant information on MNE Groups regarding their structure, transfer pricing policy and internal transactions in and outside the EU. That information will enable the tax authorities to react to harmful tax practices through changes in the legislation or adequate risk assessments and tax audits, and to identify whether companies have engaged in practices that have the effect of artificially shifting substantial amounts of income into tax-advantaged environments. The foregoing does not negate the importance of greater transparency towards citizens of the Union and the need for MNEs to make publicly available a set of financial information about their economic activities, subsidiaries, employees, profits made and taxes paid on a country-by- country basis.
Amendment 41 #
2016/0010(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) In order to enhance the efficient use of public resources and reduce thenot to impose an administrative burden for MNE Groupon SMEs, the reporting obligation should only apply to MNE Groups with annual consolidated group revenue exceeding a certain amountdefined as large groups under Article 3(7) of Directive 2013/34/EU. The Directive should ensure that the same information is collected and made available to tax administrations in a timely manner throughout the EU.
Amendment 43 #
2016/0010(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) To ensure the proper functioning of the Internal Market, the EU has to provide for fair competition between EU MNE Groups and non-EU MNE Groups for which one or several of their entities are located in the EU. Both of them should therefore be subject to the reporting obligation and to penalties in the event of non-reporting. The reporting obligation and its accompanying penalties should apply as from 1 January 2016.
Amendment 45 #
2016/0010(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) Member States should lay down rules on penalties applicable to infringements of national provisions adopted pursuant to this Directive and should ensure that those penalties are effective, proportionate and dissuasive and that they are implemented. Member States should consider the application of a withholding tax on financial institutions in the event that third countries do not comply with the international standard of automatic exchange of information and do not provide relevant information to Member States' tax authorities.
Amendment 75 #
2016/0010(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) This Directive respects the fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised in particular by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. The information exchanged under this Directive does not lead to the disclosure of a commercial, industrial or professional secret or of a commercial process, or of information the disclosure of which would be contrary to public policy.
Amendment 92 #
2016/0010(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 8aa – paragraph 1
Article 8aa – paragraph 1
1. Each Member State shall take the necessary measures to require the Ultimate Parent Entity of an MNE Group that is resident for tax purposes in its territory, or any oin the case of secondary reporting, ther Reporting Entity in accordance with Section II of Annex IIIwith the largest annual turnover in the Union, to file a country- by-country report with respect to its Reporting Fiscal Year within 12 months after the last day of the Reporting Fiscal Year of the MNE Group in accordance with Section II of Annex III.
Amendment 127 #
2016/0010(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 a (new)
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 24 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 24 – paragraph 2 a (new)
(5a) In Article 24, the following paragraph is inserted: ‘2a. Competent authorities may communicate information referred to in Article 8aa on a non-reciprocal basis to third countries not having the capacity to exchange information and receiving capacity building to strengthen their tax administrations. Such communication may be done during a transitional period, while ensuring the security and confidentiality of information transmitted.’
Amendment 128 #
2016/0010(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 b (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 b (new)
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 24 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Article 24 – paragraph 2 b (new)
(5b) In Article 24, the following paragraph is inserted: ‘2b. In the event that third countries' competent authorities do not comply with their obligation to communicate relevant information to Member States, Member States shall withhold a 30% tax on all Union-sourced payments to financial institutions of those third countries.’
Amendment 130 #
2016/0010(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 25a
Article 25a
Member States shall lay down the rules on penalties, especially financial ones, applicable to infringements of national provisions adopted pursuant to this Directive and concerning Article 8aa, and shall take all measures necessary to ensure that they are implemented. The penalties provided for shall be effective, proportionate and dissuasive. Member States shall also lay down rules on penalties applicable to infringements of automatic exchange of information by other Member States. Member States shall by 31 December 2016 notify the Commission of those rules and of those measures and shall notify it without delay of any subsequent amendment affecting them.
Amendment 135 #
2016/0010(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Annex – Annex III – Section I – paragraph 4
Annex – Annex III – Section I – paragraph 4
4. "Excluded MNE Group" means, with respect to any Fiscal Year of the Group, a Group thaving total consolidated group revenue of less thant has not exceeded the limits of at least two of the three following thresholds: (a) balance sheet total: EUR 7520 000 000 or an amount in local currency approximately equivalent to EUR 750 000 000 as of January 2015 during; (b) net turnover: EUR 40 000 000; (c) average number of employees during the financial year: 250; as of January 2015 during the Reporting Fiscal Year or the Fiscal Year immediately preceding the Reporting Fiscal Year as reflected in its Consolidated Financial Statements for such preceding Fiscal Year.
Amendment 140 #
2016/0010(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Annex – Annex III – Section II – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Annex – Annex III – Section II – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Where there are more than one Constituent Entities of the same MNE Group that are resident for tax purposes in the Union and one or more of the conditions set out in point (b) apply, the MNE Group may designate one of such Constituent Entities, preferably the one with the highest turnover, to file the country-by-country report conforming to the requirements of Article 8aa(1) with respect to any Reporting Fiscal Year within the deadline specified in Article 8aa(1) and to notify the Member State that the filing is intended to satisfy the filing requirement of all the Constituent Entities of such MNE Group that are resident for tax purposes in the Union. That Member State shall, pursuant to Article 8aa(2), communicate the country-by- country report received to any other Member State in which, on the basis of the information in the country-by- country Report, one or more Constituent Entities of the MNE Group of the Reporting Entity are either resident for tax purposes, or are subject to tax with respect to the business carried out through a permanent establishment.
Amendment 23 #
2015/2322(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas an energy market transformation with renewables at its core, serving the decarbonisation objective, should also provide a EU-wide strategy carefully managing the divestment from conventional generation sources, both fossil and nuclear, from today to 2030; this strategy would thus hedge the risks of the impending carbon bubble, which could bring a rapid worldwide drop of the value of coal, oil and gas assets;
Amendment 1 #
2015/2277(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 (new)
Paragraph -1 (new)
-1. Notes that G8 government have committed themselves, in the 2009 L'Aquila Joint Statement on Food Security, to supporting country-owned strategies to increase food production, and so increasing access to food, with a special focus to empower smallholder and women farmers and improve their access to land and financial services, including microfinances and markets.
Amendment 2 #
2015/2277(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 a (new)
Paragraph -1 a (new)
Amendment 12 #
2015/2277(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Recognises that the 2008 global food price crises, triggered by, inter alia, a combination of drought, fires, land use change due to biofuels, and speculation on food commodities, have shown us that populations in developing countries are not food secure if they depend too heavily upon imports.
Amendment 35 #
2015/2277(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Notes the significant potential of resource efficient and long-term agro- ecological approaches based on high species diversity and presence of beneficial species, the spreading of risk and recycling of waste;
Amendment 36 #
2015/2277(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Notes that such agronomic techniques, boosting natural processes like topsoil formation, water and pest regulation or closed loop nutrient cycling, can assure long-term productivity and fertility at a low cost to farmers and administrations;
Amendment 37 #
2015/2277(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Advocates a soil based approach; notes that sustainable soil management can produce up to 58% more of the world's food1a . ____________ 1a FAO, Global Soil Partnership
Amendment 38 #
2015/2277(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Advocates agro-ecological approaches such as permaculture, agro- forestry, rotation and inter-cropping especially using leguminous plants, under-sowing, composting and mulching, in order to increase delivery of ecosystem functions and so raise productivity and fertility in the long term using natural processes;
Amendment 39 #
2015/2277(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Notes the specificities of tropical and semi-arid agriculture that requires many more trees in the system that shade crops and protect soil; notes especially the large demand for firewood; notes in particular the multiple uses of nitrogen fixing trees;
Amendment 40 #
2015/2277(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Notes the synergies between soil and tree based approaches and adapting agro- ecosystems to climate change;
Amendment 41 #
2015/2277(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Notes the large potential for biological pest control and alternatives to chemical dependency, such as push-pull processes, or natural predators of pests.
Amendment 42 #
2015/2277(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3 b. Recognises that many small farmers in Africa and the countries of the NAFSN already have low chemical inputs because of the prohibitive cost of agrochemicals, especially pesticides; notes that this may help them leapfrog to agro-ecological approaches.
Amendment 43 #
2015/2277(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Recognises the consensus in soil science that synthetic fertilisers can reduce natural soil fertility by turning soils acidic and salty, and inhibiting beneficial fungi and nitrogen fixing bacteria in the soil, leading to soil degradation.
Amendment 44 #
2015/2277(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Realises that pesticides often not only kill the pest but also beneficial species that can prey on the pests and regulate their populations; Realises that following application, pests and pathogens can come back faster and stronger than beneficial species, meaning an over- simplified agro-ecosystem may be susceptible to further attacks; therefore cautions against increasing chemical dependency which reduces agro- ecosystem functioning;
Amendment 45 #
2015/2277(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 d (new)
Paragraph 3 d (new)
3 d. Notes that agrochemicals can be both over-used and inappropriately used in developing countries such as those participating in the NAFSN; notes that this is compounded by illiteracy and lack of appropriate training, and can result in significantly elevated levels of pesticide residues in fresh fruit and vegetables, as well as poisoning and other effects on human health for farmers and their families.
Amendment 57 #
2015/2277(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Welcomes the EU's commitment to end dumping practices for agricultural products, and the recent announcement by the WTO in the Nairobi Ministerial Conference to eliminate all forms of export subsidies
Amendment 62 #
2015/2277(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5 b. Calls for increased outreach and implementation of the desired NAFSN objectives by investing in education and training that includes agricultural extension services and that has an emphasis on community-oriented participative approaches, covering nutrition, land tenure, rights, agro- forestry and low input sustainable agriculture.
Amendment 64 #
2015/2277(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 c (new)
Paragraph 5 c (new)
5 c. Notes the G20 report of 2011 which stresses that tax-driven investment may prove transitory; recalls that numerous investor motivation surveys have shown a neutral or negative impact of special tax incentives on their decisions to invest 1a ___________ 1a World Bank survey in East Africa, OECD in SE Europe
Amendment 65 #
2015/2277(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 d (new)
Paragraph 5 d (new)
Amendment 66 #
2015/2277(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 e (new)
Paragraph 5 e (new)
5 e. Regrets that the only indicator common to the 10 cooperation frameworks within the New Alliance is the World Bank's 'Doing Business' index, which has been criticised for contributing to tax competition, as countries compete to modify their legislation to favour foreign investors over the local population.
Amendment 68 #
2015/2277(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 – indent 1
Paragraph 6 – indent 1
- implement the FAO 2004 Voluntary Guidelines to support the progressive realisation of the right to adequate food in the context of national food security and the FAO 2014 Principles for Responsible Investment in Agriculture and Food Systems, and ensure compliance with the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights; undertake annual evaluations of Country Cooperation Framework (CCF) implementation to check whether commitments have been fulfilled,
Amendment 73 #
2015/2277(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 – indent 1 a (new)
Paragraph 6 – indent 1 a (new)
- undertake , as part of the country progress reports, annual evaluations of Country Cooperation Framework (CCF) implementation to check whether commitments have been fulfilled, to ensure that they go beyond quality of investments and also assess quality of development impact, covering targets on women's rights and smallholder uptake, balanced and healthy nutrition and resilience of food supply, and also to publish those results.
Amendment 82 #
2015/2277(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 – indent 2 a (new)
Paragraph 6 – indent 2 a (new)
- ensure a human rights based approach to land titling by adopting and implementing the UN Voluntary Guidelines on Land Tenure;
Amendment 98 #
2015/2277(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 – indent 5
Paragraph 6 – indent 5
- encourage a wide variety of food crops to improve nutrition, including fruit and vegetables, to improve nutrition, and nuts, in addition to staples such as maize, rice or wheat;
Amendment 102 #
2015/2277(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 – indent 5 a (new)
Paragraph 6 – indent 5 a (new)
- commit to the full implementation of the International Code of Marketing of Breast-Milk Substitutes and the resolutions adopted by the World Health Assembly (WHA) on Infant and Young Child Nutrition
Amendment 110 #
2015/2277(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 – indent 6
Paragraph 6 – indent 6
- design policies which empower women in agriculture,rural women, specifically taking into account their time and mobility constraints, and ensuring they benefit from the transformation of agriculture by removing discriminatory provisions that hinder access to resources and by combating discriminatory customs;
Amendment 118 #
2015/2277(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 – indent 7
Paragraph 6 – indent 7
- ensure that financial, tax or administrative reforms, including any formal or informal tax agreement, do not exempt investors from making a fair contribution to the tax base of participating countries or give an unfair advantage to investors over smallholders; they should also ensure that any formal or informal tax agreements are made public
Amendment 124 #
2015/2277(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 – indent 7 a (new)
Paragraph 6 – indent 7 a (new)
- ensure that a broad range of indicators are used to evaluate progress
Amendment 1 #
2015/2225(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation -1 (new)
Citation -1 (new)
-1 having regard to the TFEU1a, Art. 11, Art. 114(3), Art. 168(1) and Art.191; ___________ 1a OJ C 326, 26.10.2012, p. 47–390
Amendment 4 #
2015/2225(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 a (new)
Citation 6 a (new)
- having regard to Directive 2001/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the deliberate release into the environment of genetically modified organisms and repealing Council Directive 90/220/EEC6a; ___________ 6a OJ L 106 , 17/04/2001 P. 0001 - 0039
Amendment 5 #
2015/2225(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 8 a (new)
Citation 8 a (new)
- having regard to the UN's International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development of the FAO, GEF, UNDP, UNEP, UNESCO, the World Bank and WHO;
Amendment 7 #
2015/2225(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 14 a (new)
Citation 14 a (new)
- having regard to the Scientific opinion8a addressing the safety assessment of plants developed through cisgenesis and intragenesis; ___________ 8a EFSA Journal 2012;10(2):2561 [33 pp.]
Amendment 12 #
2015/2225(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the global population is expecstimated to reach 9.6 billion by 2050, meaning there will be around 2.4 billion extra people to feedhan today;
Amendment 14 #
2015/2225(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
A a. Whereas the EU's population is likely to remain stable;
Amendment 17 #
2015/2225(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas global food production must increase by 60-110 % to meet this demandthe UN's Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) has estimated that the predicted rise in the world's population to 9 billion by 2050 would require increasing food production and supply by approximately 60 %, and whereas on average at least one third of the food produced is wasted, reaching nearly a half in some sectors;
Amendment 22 #
2015/2225(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
Amendment 28 #
2015/2225(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
C a. whereas because short food chains are more resilient, the prevalent approaches to food security have evolved to rather empower different regions of the world to feed themselves;
Amendment 49 #
2015/2225(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)
Recital G a (new)
G a. whereas dominant losses of crop yield are mainly due to climatic factors, some of which may affect pest population dynamics; whereas pests are attracted to and become problematic in large expanses of monocultures, and continuous cropping builds up pest populations in the soil and vegetation year-on-year; whereas therefore climate resilience in biologically and structurally diverse agro-ecosystems is desperately needed to spread risk;
Amendment 55 #
2015/2225(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H a (new)
Recital H a (new)
H a. whereas the EU faces a plateauing and drop-off in intrinsic productivity and fertility, caused by land degradation and loss of ecosystem functions such as topsoil formation, humification, pollination, water retention and nutrient cycling ; whereas there is a broad consensus that to resolve this and maintain and improve productivity, there is a need to increase delivery of such ecosystem functions inter alia to ensure resilience against climate change;
Amendment 57 #
2015/2225(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
Recital I
I. whereas closing the EU's ‘yield gap’ poses a particular problem for the sustainable agriculture research agenda in the EU;
Amendment 65 #
2015/2225(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital J a (new)
Recital J a (new)
J a. whereas precision farming may be an alternative to conventional herbicide application, yet it assumes a rather inert soil or highly impoverished communities of interacting species, or extreme stability and uniformity especially in crops; whereas an agro-ecological approach is based on a living soil, high species diversity and natural self-regulating processes that are able to buffer against and adapt to variations, meaning a healthy biodiverse agro-ecosystem is able to absorb shocks such as climatic volatility or nutrient fluctuations or growth of pest populations;
Amendment 69 #
2015/2225(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K
Recital K
K. whereas the approvals process, including the criteria for defining active substances, is becoming increasingly challenging for EU agricultureintensive, input-dependent agricultural model is becoming increasingly challenging, considering that the approvals process for pesticide active ingredients and products needs to ensure human, animal and environmental health;
Amendment 76 #
2015/2225(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital L a (new)
Recital L a (new)
L a. whereas organic farming and other agro-ecological approaches represent a fusion of longstanding successful techniques with innovative ones, based on living, self-regenerating and self- strengthening biologically diverse systems;
Amendment 79 #
2015/2225(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital L b (new)
Recital L b (new)
L b. whereas soil science shows us that healthy, living soils nurture and protect crops via beneficial species that defend against pathogens and pests and also provide plant crops with nutrients and water in exchange for sugars in plant root exudates; whereas biodiverse agro-ecosystems provide natural predators that regulate populations of plant pests;
Amendment 80 #
2015/2225(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital L c (new)
Recital L c (new)
L c. whereas synthetic fertlisers will cause a growth response if applied to degraded soils in poor health; in a healthy living soil that is already optimally cycling its own nutrients, no growth response is elicited upon artificial fertilisation; whereas synthetic fertilisers, as salts, have an effect on soil microorganisms, notably inhibiting soil-bound nitrogen-fixing bacteria;
Amendment 81 #
2015/2225(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital L d (new)
Recital L d (new)
L d. whereas most of the applied synthetic fertliser is lost via water, causing pollution via eutrophication of freshwater bodies and triggering toxic algal blooms in seawater, which impact coastal economies via fishkills;
Amendment 83 #
2015/2225(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph -1 (new)
Paragraph -1 (new)
-1. Notes that low technology techniques may be less capital intensive in the short and long term, more established, less risky, more reliable and achieve the same goals with less resources than high technology ones; given the high endebtedness and precarious market situation among farmers, where costs of production sometimes do not even meet farmgate prices, lower tech effective solutions should be equally promoted and supported.
Amendment 135 #
2015/2225(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9 a. notes that the most effective way to maintain genetic diversity in agriculture is by using it in vivo; notes that of the three "D.U.S." criteria applied to official EU seed catalogues, Uniformity and Stability are not natural characteristics in genetically diverse plants; notes that adaptation to climate change is dependent upon high genetic variation; notes the increasingly concentrated seed markets and decreased variation per variety; encourages the role played by farm seed systems and exchanges to empower farmers, and recognises participative breeding as a long tradition of innovation in rural communities;
Amendment 136 #
2015/2225(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Recognises the necessity of maintaining and using genetic resources for long-term food security and to broaden the genetic base of modern plant and animal breeding programmes; supports the concept of access and benefit sharing but urges pragmatic and enabling implementation of Regulation (EU) No 511/2014 and Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/1866 so that, without exploiting or disempowering rural communities who have stewarded species and bred varieties throughout the years, breeders are not deterred by complexity and cost from using wild material to introduce new traits such as pest and disease resistance, nutritional quality and environmental resilience;
Amendment 144 #
2015/2225(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
Amendment 153 #
2015/2225(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11 a. acknowledges that new GMOs derived by techniques such as zinc finger nucleases (ZFNs), CRISPR/Cas and oligonucleotide-directed mutagenesis (ODM) do not yet have a long history of safe use, and that due care should be taken in approval processes for plants obtained using them;
Amendment 154 #
2015/2225(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 b (new)
Paragraph 11 b (new)
11 b. notes that the so-called "new breeding techniques" are not yet as reliable as conventional breeding to achieve lasting desired phenotype changes, due to unintended changes in the genotype following introduction of genetic material, which can result in instability under high stress conditions, or unwanted side effects on proteins and metabolites based inter alia on a paucity of knowledge of plant repair mechanisms;
Amendment 155 #
2015/2225(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 c (new)
Paragraph 11 c (new)
11 c. notes the concerns raised about both off-target and also on-target changes with unintended effects on the whole genome, inter alia with regard to plant repair mechanisms and considerable knowledge gaps therein;
Amendment 160 #
2015/2225(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
Amendment 166 #
2015/2225(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12 a. Emphasises that organisms resulting from the application of high-precision breeding techniques are subject to the requirements of Directive 2001/18/EC;
Amendment 169 #
2015/2225(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Considers it timely for the Commission to publish the final report of the ‘'New Techniques’ working group and to use its scientific findings as thea basis, among others, for clarifying the legal status of the breeding techniques currently under scrutiny;
Amendment 176 #
2015/2225(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Encourages open and transparent dialogue among all stakeholders and the public for the responsible development of high-precision, innovative solutions for breeding programmes, including those within the remit of Directive 2001/18/EC;
Amendment 182 #
2015/2225(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Stresses the urgent need to review the implementation of the regulatory framework for PPPs and to develop a coherapply the current regulations as intended by the legislators so as to make the approvals system coherent, fair, transparent and independent, efficient, predictable, hazard and risk-based and scientifically robust approvals system; stresses the need to align guidance documents such as those on negligible exposure with the intention and precautionary approach of the regulation as adopted by Parliament and Council;
Amendment 194 #
2015/2225(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Highlights the importance of fairly and openly assessing the benefiimpacts of active substances in supportwith a view to ensuring sustainable agriculture as well asin line with EU law, and comprehensively evaluating the risk and hazards associated with the use of products, including all adverse effects described in published, peer-reviewed scientific literature;
Amendment 199 #
2015/2225(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Calls on DG Health and Food Safety (SANTE) to establish clear criteria for defining low-risk active substances for the development and use of low-risk pesticides, whilest considering the number of existing substances that could also qualify asevolving scientific knowledge and ensuring that the objectives of health and environmental protection are met, and to ensure that safety data are present for the criteria applied for all potential low- risk substances;
Amendment 204 #
2015/2225(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Takes the view that low-risk substances should be given provisional approval for use and priority for evaluation by the rapporteur Member States and the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) to support implementation of IPM to help meet the aims of Directive 2009/128/EC regarding the sustainable use of pesticides, especially for product use on minor and speciality crops;
Amendment 207 #
2015/2225(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20 a. regrets that the approval process for non-chemical alternatives to plant protection products such as biological controls and nature-based solutions is the same as for conventional synthetic pesticides and biocides; notes the huge success of biological and nature-based pest controls, especially in the fruit sector; calls on the Commission therefore for the proportional easing of these restrictions on non-chemical alternatives, notwithstanding due attention to be given to avoid release of alien species;
Amendment 212 #
2015/2225(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Notes that a faster approvals process would increase the availability of low-risk pesticides on the market, stimulate industry research into the development of new low-risk substanclow risk pesticides are a last resort in IPM, and calls for stimulating research into the development of alternatives to synthetic pesticides and enableing farmers to switch more rapidly to sustainable PPPspest management;
Amendment 217 #
2015/2225(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21 a. Notes that because of unintended non-target effects of pesticides on beneficial bacteria, fungi, arthropoda, nematodes and other groups of species in agro-ecosystems, natural defence and nutrition mechanisms useful for the crop plants may be severely compromised; Notes further that this leads to limited efficacy of IPM, and also increased susceptibility to future pest attack;
Amendment 218 #
2015/2225(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 b (new)
Paragraph 21 b (new)
21 b. Notes the reductions in efficacy of active substances due to evolution of biologically inevitable resistance linked to overuse of commonly used pesticides, including emergence of "superweeds"; Cautions therefore against prophylactic application of pesticides and advocates rather a cascade approach via IPM whereby pesticides are a last resort after physical, non-chemical and biological control methods;
Amendment 219 #
2015/2225(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 c (new)
Paragraph 21 c (new)
21 c. Regrets the slow progress of the member states and Commission to respectively implement and evaluate implementation of IPM and directive 2009/128/EC;
Amendment 220 #
2015/2225(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 d (new)
Paragraph 21 d (new)
21 d. Calls on EFSA to ensure stringent and independent risk assessment, in line with applicable guidance and regulations; Calls for an independent panel of scientists to review EFSA’s risk assessment of glyphosate, so as to identify the reasons behind opposite conclusions by IARC and EFSA regarding its carcinogenic properties, in order for EFSA to regain the trust of the public in its public health mission;
Amendment 221 #
2015/2225(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 e (new)
Paragraph 21 e (new)
21 e. Questions the resource efficiency of using glyphosate as a ripening and drying agent for grain crops, due to the non target effects of this practice, in particular effects on soil microorganisms and on pest resistance;
Amendment 225 #
2015/2225(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Regrets the increasing skill shortages in many of these professions and calls on the Member States to work in partnership with industry and other relevant stakeholders in the design of their next Rural Development Programmes to identify opportunities to support skills development and knowledge transfer in these areas;
Amendment 228 #
2015/2225(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)
Paragraph 23 a (new)
23 a. Calls for publically funded extension of farm advisory services independent of input industries, to offer advice on all options available to farmers, and to respect the principles of IPM in advising a cascade of measures that use pesticides as a last resort
Amendment 238 #
2015/2225(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)
Paragraph 25 a (new)
25 a. Calls for the agricultural sector to diversify away from high cost solutions into low cost, effective practices to ensure sustainable solutions that are less capital intensive, more cost-effective and reach the same sustainability goals;
Amendment 243 #
2015/2225(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)
Paragraph 26 a (new)
26 a. Notes that in the 7th Framework Programme for EU-funded research, funding available for agri-biotech based mainly upon chemical inputs is 426.7 million Euro or 67% of EU agricultural research spending, while organic farming techniques were only allotted 44.6 million Euro or 7% of EU agricultural research spending;
Amendment 247 #
2015/2225(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Considers it essential for the Commission and the Member States to develop projects which focus exclusively on the development of more resource- efficient crop varietiesnutrient exchange, especially given the increasing scarcity of water availability and certain key components of fertilisers such as phosphate; research on crop nutrition approaches should focus on e.g. closed loop nutrient cycling, and fertlility based on natural processes in a healthy living soil, instead of depending on inefficient artificial inputs, of which the majority are not absorbed by plants and are lost in soil and water;
Amendment 254 #
2015/2225(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 a (new)
Paragraph 27 a (new)
27 a. Calls for more research into sustainable food production systems including closed loop nutrient cycling, short feed chains, pasture based grazing, low input production and increasing input independence to reduce production costs, soil science, and non-chemical and biological control options for plant protection;
Amendment 256 #
2015/2225(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Notes that throughout much of the EU, independent or publically-funded centres for education, training and innovation in agriculture have declined or do not adequately cater for transdisciplinary approaches in emerging fields such as agricultural engineering;
Amendment 262 #
2015/2225(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Encourages the Commission and the Member States to develop Trans-European Centres for Agricultural Innovation that would deliver much needed progress towards food security and sustainability; the activities of these centres should be transparent and open to the general public as well as farmers, and should have a trans-sector approach, fostering dialogue between sectors that may be impacted differentially by innovation, e.g. mitigating confrontation between the arable crops sector and the beekeeping sector;
Amendment 270 #
2015/2225(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
32. Notes that rural areas, and in particular agriculture, are most exposed to actual and potential climate change; recognises that agriculture must be allowed to adapt to meet changing circumstances using all available safe technological solutions;
Amendment 278 #
2015/2225(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
Paragraph 33
Amendment 285 #
2015/2225(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 a (new)
Paragraph 33 a (new)
33 a. Considers that in keeping with EU law and treaty obligations, it essential to protect citizens' health and the environment while considering the potential benefits of emerging technologies in a fair, open and balanced way, taking into account long term impacts and externalities, using review systems based on independent, peer- reviewed science;
Amendment 288 #
2015/2225(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
34. Notes in particular the high cost, long timescales and commercial uncertainty of bringing new technologies and products to market under current EU regulationsat new technologies and products that may impact on human or animal health and/or cause environmental damage should be duly assessed before being brought to market in the EU or released into the environment;
Amendment 296 #
2015/2225(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36
Paragraph 36
36. Calls on the Commission to use its new Scientific Advice Mechanism (SAM) to designrefine a regulatory framework which places greater emphasis on risk-based andindependent scientific evidence when determinassessing risks ing the balance between benefits and risks in the adoptionadoption of new technologies, products and practices; Calls on the Commission to foresee post- authorisation adapted field-based monitoring for the verification of the quality of the risk assessments of new technologies, products and practices;
Amendment 301 #
2015/2225(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37
Paragraph 37
37. Notes broad supportCalls for the adoption of the Innovation Principle, which would require EU legislative proposals to be fully assessed in terms of their impact on innovation while taking note of implied costs to society as well as potential benefits and respecting the Treaty obligation to protect the health of citizens and the environment;
Amendment 302 #
2015/2225(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37 a (new)
Paragraph 37 a (new)
37 a. Calls for wider economic impacts to be considered when evaluating emerging agricultural technologies, including long- standing externalities such as costs of pollution especially waterborne pollution, decreased ecosystem functioning, impacts on the renewable but finite natural resources upon which agricultural productivity is based such as biodiversity and soil, and impacts on other primary sectors, notably fisheries
Amendment 28 #
2015/2161(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Takes note of the Ombudsman´s calculations with regard to potential savings of EUR 195 000 should there be only one seat of the institution; takes into account that the seat of the Ombudsman is tied with the seat of the Parliament and therefore deems it necessary that the Ombudsman is included in any debate on centralisation of the Parliament´s seat; stresses that such centralization should be actively promoted;
Amendment 98 #
2015/2132(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 67 b (new)
Paragraph 67 b (new)
67b. Stresses that Parliament and the Council must address the need for a roadmap to a single seat, as requested by a large majority in this Parliament in several resolutions, in order to create long term savings in the Union budget;
Amendment 20 #
2015/2127(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Regrets the lack of diversity in the management committee, the board of governors and the board of directors of the EIB, in particular with regard to gender equality;
Amendment 31 #
2015/2127(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Notes the urgent need for an increase in EIB lending activity; asks Member States to explore innovative ways for stimulating credit demand in future oriented and job rich activities such as renewables, resource efficiency and the circular economy by means of medium-term fiscally neutral instruments such as deferred tax credits associated with eligible loans in these sectors;
Amendment 44 #
2015/2127(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls on the EIB to re-examine its strategic planning programme, given the high degree of concentration of funding for the four biggest economies in the EU accounting for more than 45%, and the disproportionate rise in unemployment levels in some other countries which remains at alarming levels, and which could hamper economic convergence in the EU and further damage growth prospects and social cohesion in specific countries and regions in the EU; emphasises the need to take into account the employment potential of the projects selected in those EU countries suffering from mass unemployment; emphasises the urgent need to stimulate investment in the green transition in the light of the Paris COP2 negotiations in 2015;
Amendment 89 #
2015/2127(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls on the EIB to refrain from cooperating with financial partners with a negative track record and to enforce prevention measures against tax havens, fraud and evasion as well as aggressive tax avoidance; in this vein calls on the EIB to refrain from lending to companies that have undertaken dishonest activities, such as Volkswagen, who have received over €4bn of loans from the EIB since 1990; calls for the EIB to reclaim these loans where they were not spent honestly;
Amendment 99 #
2015/2127(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on the EIB to re-evaluate the private-public partnerships in terms of their profitability for the relevant economies and societies and to examine alternative methods of funding, possibly through increasing public investments and through the creation of green bonds or social bonds; urges with that perspective the EIB to work in cooperation with the ECB for enhancing the provision of eligible assets in the context of the ECB's asset purchase programme; calls for an assessment of the skills and knowledge of the EIB leadership in assessing green loans and financing;
Amendment 105 #
2015/2127(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Welcomes the fact that the EIB will be carrying out and requesting the publication of a climate assessment and calls for the EIB to conduct an audit of the skills of its current members to assess whether they are correctly qualified to make these judgements; Urges the EIB to present a comprehensive phase-out plan of its lending for non-renewable energy and its excessive support to large scale gas infrastructure;
Amendment 106 #
2015/2127(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7b. Calls on the EIB to follow the recommendations of the European Commission and the Waste Framework Directive and to prioritise investment in projects placed at the top of the waste hierarchy, such as waste prevention, and waste preparation for re-use or recycling, and to phase out any investment in end- of-pipeline infrastructure, such as landfills, mechanical biological treatment plants, incinerators or any other form of energy recovery;
Amendment 118 #
2015/2127(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Calls on the EIB to further enhance transparency and access to information both internally and for the public, especially regarding the selection, monitoring and evaluation of activities and programmes; calls for a public nomination target which would contribute to tackling the problem of underrepresentation of women in the leadership of the EIB;
Amendment 1 #
2015/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 2 a (new)
Citation 2 a (new)
– having regard to the ECJ judgment in Case C-62/14 of 16 June 2015
Amendment 23 #
2015/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas the current recovery is mainly supported by private consumption, while private investment in the euro area continues to stagnate at levels significantly below those registered before the start of the crisis and the relative share of investments in GDP has been declining steadily over several decades;
Amendment 51 #
2015/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Recalls that the geographically uneven and modest recovery expected for the coming years in the euro area will not be sufficient to reduce the high unemployment rates recorded in many euro area Member States or to reduce the burden of debt;
Amendment 84 #
2015/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Acknowledges that, in reaction to a complex environment of falling inflation, contraction of credit and sluggish economic growth, and with its interest rates close to the zero lower bound, the ECB resorted to non-conventional monetary policy instruments; Emphasises that non- conventional monetary policy intervention often has an impact on both the wider economy and the financial system; insists that in a mature EMU monetary, fiscal and prudential policy need to be clearly under the responsibility of entirely independent and democratically accountable bodies and that conflicts between them must be resolved in a further democratically accountable forum.
Amendment 94 #
2015/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Points out that, ultimately, a proper, democratically accountable system of checks and balances and coordination between monetary, fiscal and prudential objectives with clear and independent mandates can only be achieved through Treaty change;
Amendment 97 #
2015/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Is concerned at the rise in long-term domestic yields in most Member States observed since the second quarter of 2015, which could ultimately erode the expected positive impact of non-conventional monetary policy measures adopted by the ECB; Welcomes the readiness of the ECB to do whatever it takes to save the Euro; underlines and welcomes the fact that the ECB Governing Council considers explicitly that its mandate allows it to fight excessive borrowing costs for Euro area Member States;
Amendment 100 #
2015/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Is concerned that, in the absence of Union and Member State action to stimulate demand, continued application of unconventional monetary policy actions will further exacerbate the problems posed by sustained low interest rates and excess liquidity chasing yield leading to actual and potential distortions and instabilities in financial markets;
Amendment 111 #
2015/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Asks the ECB to carefully monitor the risks associated with its purchase programmes, in order to avoid an unfair burden on EU taxpayers; Is of the opinion that any ABS purchase should be strictly limited to the most senior tranches of the most simple and transparent products and that purchases of mezzanine tranches should be avoided while originators should retain at least retain 20% of original risks;
Amendment 118 #
2015/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Stresses that the positive impact of the Asset Purchase Programme (APP) on money and credit dynamics remains modest, with new loans to enterprises still weak and with significant differences across euro area economies; notes that since the launch of the APP, medium-term inflation expectations have risen, gradually converging towards the target of 2 %, while the risks of a deflation trap have decreased; asks the ECB to apply the APP to all Member States, without discrimination;
Amendment 122 #
2015/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Remains concerned by the significant levels of non-marketable assets and asset- backed securities put forward as collateral to the eurosystem in the framework of its refinancing operations; reiterates its request to the ECB to provide information on which central banks have accepted such securities as well as to disclose valuation methods regarding such assets; underlines that such disclosure would be beneficial for the purpose of parliamentary scrutiny of supervisory tasks conferred to the ECB;
Amendment 123 #
2015/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7b. Stresses that, according to the Annual Report, take up of the September and December TLTRO operations was around half of potential and 754 of the 1223 credit institutions reached by the operation did not even have the qualifying loans to non-financial on their books and the TLTROs benefits to the real economy has been minimal despite the significant beneficial effect on cost and maturity of funding to those institutions;
Amendment 124 #
2015/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 c (new)
Paragraph 7 c (new)
7c. Points out that, while the effects on the real economy has been very limited, banks have been able to access funding at virtually no cost which has directly subsidised their balance sheets; deplores the fact that the size of this subsidy, despite representing a clear fiscal spill- over effect of monetary, is not monitored and published and that it is free from strict conditionality in terms of how it is invested; insists that any extraordinary measures of this kind should be accompanied by measures to mitigate distortions to markets and the economy;
Amendment 125 #
2015/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 d (new)
Paragraph 7 d (new)
7d. Warns that prolonged non- conventional monetary policy actions can have significant distributional effects between the wealthy and poor, young and old, and also between regions with different financial structures. e.g. by decreasing savings and pension accumulation rates while propping up the value of financial assets of existing holders and that these could lead to increasing inequality; Urges the ECB to monitor the side effects of its monetary policy measures and its impact on inequality.
Amendment 126 #
2015/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 e (new)
Paragraph 7 e (new)
7e. Asks the Commission to come forward with proposals to improve macroprudential oversight and the policy tools available for mitigating the risks in shadow banking, in the light of the warning by the ECB in the Annual report that, given the steady expansion over the last decade, to 22 trillion euro in assets, of non-bank credit intermediation, further initiatives are needed to monitor and assess vulnerabilities in the growing shadow banking sector;
Amendment 127 #
2015/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 f (new)
Paragraph 7 f (new)
7f. Urges the ECB together with other relevant Union bodies and in the light of the requirement under TFEU 127.1 that the ESCB shall support the general economic policies in the Union to consider the possibility of using its APP strategically, by encouraging the development of safe and simple marketable asset classes, suitable for the Program, that are linked to the achievement of key EU targets particularly the transition to a sustainable and just economy and to consider drawing up a range of green and social projects for which credit created through quantitative easing could be used as direct financing;
Amendment 137 #
2015/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Notes that, according to the ECJ judgment of 16 June 2015 in Case C-62/14, when the ECB purchases government bonds on secondary markets it is exposed to a significant risk of losses as well as to the risk of a debt cut;, stating that such risk is inherent in a purchase of bonds on the secondary market, an operation which the Court reminds was authorised by the authors in the Treaties, without conditional upon the ECB having privileged creditor status; Stresses that a de facto risk mutualisation through the ECB balance sheet is far inferior to an explicit mechanism for joint liability such as Eurobonds or a "redemption fund"
Amendment 146 #
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, in addition to the as yet unresolved structural weaknesses in the banking sector, 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;
Amendment 148 #
2015/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Deplores the fact that the response to the crisis has resulted in structural reforms being imposed on MS but not banks;
Amendment 163 #
2015/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Believes that the only effective solution to the excessive level of public debt in some member states is a conference aimed to agree on a definitive solution for the part of that debt that is unsustainable;
Amendment 171 #
2015/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Insists that, in a properly functioning EMU, the counterpart to strong ECB independence with respect to its pursuit of monetary policy is to have strictly separated mechanisms for i) Union level coordination of fiscal policy, ii) financial supervision policy and iii) monetary policy subject to a high degree of democratic accountability; points out that, in addition to this institutional balance, it is essential to have a mechanism for resolving the inevitable conflicts between monetary, fiscal and prudential objectives in an equally democratically accountable manner;
Amendment 192 #
2015/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Welcomes the step forward taken by the ECB in publishing the minutes of its meetings, and look forward to the announcement of further steps to improve the transparency of its communication channels; recalls its request that the annual ECB report should include a feedback to the inputs provided in the annual European Parliament report; Deems that it would be useful if along with its assessment of monetary and financial conditions the ECB could provide in its statement following the monthly ECB Council of Governors meeting its assessment of extent of the output gaps across the eurozone; (null)
Amendment 193 #
2015/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Asks the ECB to disclose to the European Parliament the secret 'Agreements on Net Financial Assets' between the National central banks and the ECB regarding inter alia the amounts of different classes of assets, including government bonds that an Euro area central bank can hold in its balance sheet;
Amendment 201 #
2015/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Stresses that the ECB’s supervisory role and its monetary policy function must not be confused and should not generate any conflict of interest in its execution of its principal functions; Further stresses the importance of exploring future institutional independence of these two functions with a democratically accountable mechanism for resolving conflicts between them;
Amendment 206 #
2015/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19a. Supports the ECB's assertion in its Annual Report that the current CRR/CRD IV package lacks certain measures which could also effectively address specific types of systemic risk - such as (i) various asset-side measures, such as the application of limits to loan-to-value, loan-to income or debt service-to-income ratios, and (ii) the introduction of various exposure limits falling outside the current definition of large exposures - and urges the Commission to examine the need for legislative proposals in this regard.
Amendment 211 #
2015/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Deplores the fact that the ECB has exceeded even a broad interpretation of its Treaty-based mandate, inter alia in its role in the Troika and Quadriga; urges the ECB to take a step backwards and reinforce its independence from political decisions, abiding by the necessary preconditions for Treaty-compatible OMT as set out in ECJ judgment in Case C- 62/14 of 16 June 2015, especially its paragraph 102, as well as the opinion expressed by Advocate-General Cruz Villalón in the same case, especially its paragraphs 227 and 263;
Amendment 22 #
2015/2058(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Calls for the introduction of a mandatory consolidated common tax base for corporation tax in order to standardise tax returns; Calls for a minimum corporate tax rate;
Amendment 27 #
2015/2058(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Calls for the establishment of a globally accepted definition of tax havens, of penalties for operators making use of them and of a blacklist of countries that do not combat tax evasion or accept a blacklist to be drawn up of such tax havens and countries distorting competition with favourable tax conditions, including those in the EU, by end of 2015; the definition of tax havens should include but should not be limited to the following: "Provision for tax measures which entail no or nominal taxes, a lack of effective exchange of information with foreign tax authorities and a lack of transparency in legislative, legal or administrative provisions, or where advantages are granted even without any real economic activit,y as has already been called for previouslynd substantial economic presence within country offering such tax advantages";
Amendment 57 #
2015/2058(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on the OSCE and the G20 to abide by their pledges and adopt the latest BEPS measures in 2015Asks the Commission to fully cooperate with the OECD, the G20 and developing countries to address BEPS and to report regularly to Parliament and the Council on the progress made; welcomes the upcoming revised Commission Action Plan in 2015 on tax evasion and tax avoidance and calls on the Commission to come forward with an EU anti-BEPS Directive;
Amendment 62 #
2015/2058(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Calls for a review of existing double taxation agreements in order to allow for a 'fair share' of the tax base to be taxed in developing countries;
Amendment 63 #
2015/2058(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7b. Furthermore, calls on the Commission to propose changes to EU company law to effectively ban shell companies and similar entities by introducing for example substance requirements, limitation of multiple directorships etc.
Amendment 91 #
2015/2058(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Calls on the EU and the Member States to enforce the recommendations of theprinciple that multinational companies must adopt country-by-country reporting as standard, requiring them to publish as part of their annual report on a country-by-country basis for each territory in which they operate the names of all subsidiaries, their financial performance, relevant tax information, assets and number of employees, and to ensure that this information is publicly available; Calls for CbC reportsing to be implemented for multinational companies in all sectors and in all countries.;
Amendment 95 #
2015/2058(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Calls for a swift implementation of the Anti-Money Laundering Directive (AMLD) and the Transfer of Funds Regulation (ToFR); considers, however, that room for improvement remains and urges MSs to use the available flexibility, provided for in particular in the AMLD, towards the use of unrestricted public registers with access to beneficial ownership information for companies, trusts, foundations and other legal entities;
Amendment 37 #
2015/2012(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Stresses that in order to create substantial savings the need for a road map to a single seat of the Parliament must be addressed;
Amendment 8 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the revelations showed that tax advisors have helped multinational companies to obtain at least 548 tax rulings in Luxembourg between 2002 and 2010; whereas those secret deals feature complex financial structures designed to create substantial tax reductions; whereas the tax rulings provide written assurance that multinational companies’ tax-saving plans would be viewed favourably by Luxembourg authorities, such a revelation would not have been possible without the brave actions of Antoine Deltour, now on trial in Luxembourg;
Amendment 25 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas the investigations carried out under the TAXE Committee revealed that the practice of tax rulings does not exclusively take place in Luxembourg but is common across the Union, such as in the Ireland, Netherlands, United Kingdom and many overseas dependencies; whereas the practice of tax rulings can be used legitimately to provide legal certainty for business, but is nevertheless open to potential abuse; whereas regard is had to the report from the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) published on 12 February 2013 entitled ‘Addressing Base Erosion and Profit Shifting’ proposed new international standards to combat base erosion and profit shifting (BEPS); whereas regard is also had to the Communiqué issued following the Meeting of Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors of the G20 which took place on [to be inserted];
Amendment 57 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital N
Recital N
N. whereas the Union has been a pioneer in the global fight against aggressive tax planning, notably in promoting progress at OECD level on the BEPS project ; whereas the Union should continue to play a pioneering role as the BEPS project develops;, including ensuring action on the BEPS and beyond BEPS issues of significance to developing countries such as those detailed in the report to the G20 Development Working Group in 20141 a; __________________ 1a http://www.oecd.org/tax/tax- global/report-to-g20-dwg-on-the-impact- of-beps-in-low-income-countries.pdf
Amendment 90 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital T – point i
Recital T – point i
(i) whereas increased transparency regarding the activities of large multinational companies, and in particular regarding profits made, taxes on profit paid, subsidies received and tax returns, is essential for ensuring that tax administrations tackle BEPS efficiently; whereas one vital form for this transparency to take is country-by-country reporting; whereas anythe Union proposals forshould go further than the OECD guidelines, by introducing mandatory and public country- by- country reporting should in the first instance be based on the OECD guidelines; whereas it is possible for the Union to go further than the OECD guidelinefor Union- based multinational companies of all economic sectors, and the European Parliament voted in favour of full public country-by-country reporting in its amendments adopted on 8 July 20154 on the proposal for a revised Shareholder Rights Directive; whereas the European Commission conducted a consultation on this subject between 17 June and 9 September 2015 in order to explore different options for the implementation of country-by-country reporting5 ; whereas the tax information of multinational companies cannot be considered a business or commercial secret as defined by the OECD and can therefore be automatically exchanged, or in the case of country-by-country reporting, be made publicly available without leading to serious damage for the multinational companies concerned; __________________ 4 Texts adopted of 8.7.2015, P8_TA(2015)0257. 5 http://ec.europa.eu/finance/consultations/2 015/further-corporate-tax- transparency/index_en.htm.
Amendment 108 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital T – point iv
Recital T – point iv
(iv) whereas there is evidence that Member States do not communicate sufficiently between themselves about the possible impact that their tax arrangements with certain companies might have on tax collection in other Member States; whereas national tax authorities should automatically exchange all tax rulings without delay after they have been issued; whereas tax rulings signed up to by tax authorities should be subject to greater transparency, providing that confidential information and business sensitive information is preserved and should be made public for instance by means of a central Union register;
Amendment 124 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital T – point vii
Recital T – point vii
(vii) whereas the current Union-wide legal framework to protect whistleblowers is insufficient, and there exists significant variation between the ways in which different Member States provide protection for whistleblowers; whereas in the absence of such protection, those employees who hold vital information will understandably be reluctant to come forward and therefore that information will not be made available, particularly given the case of Antoine Deltour, on trial in Luxembourg; whereas since whistleblowers helped to mobilise public attention on the issue of unfair taxation, Member States should consider measures that will protect such activity; whereas it would therefore be appropriate to offer Union-wide protection for whistleblowers who report suspected misconduct, wrongdoing, fraud or illegal activity to national regulators or, in cases of persistently unaddressed illegal activity that could affect the public interest, to the public as a whole; whereas such protection should be coherent with the overall legal system;
Amendment 126 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital T – point vii a (new)
Recital T – point vii a (new)
(viia) whereas the four biggest accounting firms (PricewaterhouseCoopers, Ernst & Young, Deloitte and KPMG) have a crucial role in the design and marketing of rulings and tax avoidance schemes exploiting mismatches between national legislations; whereas those firms, which seem to derive a considerable amount of their revenue from tax services, to dominate most Member States' auditing markets and to prevail in the global tax advising services, constitute a narrow oligopoly; whereas the existence of conflict of interest resulting from the juxtaposition, within the same firms, of tax advice and consulting activities intended, on the one hand, for tax administrations and, on the other, for MNCs' tax planning services, which exploit the weaknesses of national tax laws; whereas the effectiveness of any corporate code of conduct in tackling this issue is questionable; whereas tax rulings and settlement agreements have become, in the Union and worldwide, a common business practice, not only to obtain legal certainty or advantageous tax deals, but also in cases where legislative provisions do not allow any room for interpretation;
Amendment 141 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital U – point i
Recital U – point i
(i) whereas a mandatory Union-wide Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base (CCCTB) would be a major step towards solving those problems associated with aggressive tax planning within the Union; whereas the ultimate goal should remain a full, mandatory CCCTB with possible exemptions for small- and medium-sized enterprises (not subsidiaries of multinational corporations) and companies with no cross-border activity; whereas until a full CCCTB is in place, the Commission is considering temporary measures to counteract profit shifting opportunities; whereas it is necessary to ensure that those measures, including the offsetting of cross- border losses, do not increase the risk of BEPS;
Amendment 149 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital U – point ii
Recital U – point ii
(ii) whereas despite the work of the Code of Conduct Group on harmful corporate taxation, aggressive tax planning measures continue to exist throughout the Union; whereas therefore the functioning of the Group needs to be improved and made more transparent; through the publishing of minutes, and annual reports; whereas the Code of Conduct Group has lost momentum for more than a decade now and is used as a reason to prevent further legislative proposals by the Commission; whereas some of the more than 100 measures which have been rolled back as a result of its activity have been replaced in Member States by tax measures with similar harmful effects; whereas that tax authorities have countered the Group's recommendations by creating new structures with the same harmful effects as those rolled back by the Group; whereas past attempts to strengthen its governance and mandate, and to adjust and broaden the working methods and criteria set in the Code, with the aim of combating new forms of harmful tax practices within the current economic environment, have not been successful; whereas Group's activities are characterised by a general lack of transparency and accountability;
Amendment 152 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital U – point iii
Recital U – point iii
(iii) whereas the overall principle of corporate taxation in the Union should be that taxes are paid in the countries where a company's actual economic activity and value creation takes place; whereas criteria should be developed to ensure that this occurthe most effective criteria to ensure that this occurs is to replace the arm's length method with a formula apportionment method based on an objective variable such as giving high weight to companies' sales; whereas this method is already effectively applied in the United States; whereas the Union should promote at global level actions towards a Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base project to tax global profits of non-Union multinationals; whereas any use of 'patent box' or other preferential tax regimes must also ensure that taxes are paid in the place where value is generated;
Amendment 160 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital U – point vii
Recital U – point vii
(vii) whereas the Commission decided to prolong the mandate of the Platform for Tax Good Governance - which was due to expire in 2016 - as well as expand its scope and enhance its working methods; whereas the Platform can help deliver on the new Action Plan to strengthen the fight against tax fraud and tax evasion, facilitate discussions on Member States' tax rulings in light of the proposed new information exchange rules, and provide feedback on new anti-avoidance initiatives; whereas however the Commission needs to boost the profile, broaden the membership, expel Member States guilty of aggressive tax planning operations, and increase the effectiveness of the Platform for Tax Good Governance;
Amendment 180 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital V – point i
Recital V – point i
(i) whereas aggressive tax planning practices may sometimes arise from the cumulative benefits of double taxation treaties concluded by different Member States, perversely resulting in double non- taxation instead; whereas the proliferation of double tax treaties signed up to by individual Member States with third countries may lead to opportunities for new loopholes; whereas, in line with Action 15 of the OECD/G20 BEPS project, there is a need to develop a multilateral instrument for amending bilateral tax treaties; whereas, in line with the Union approach on trade agreements with developing countries, there is a need for Member States to agree principles and practices for a common approach to (re)negotiating double taxation treaties with developing countries which put developing countries first and benefit them, not exploit them;
Amendment 182 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital V – point ii
Recital V – point ii
(ii) whereas the Union should have its own up to date list of 'tax havens' based on a common Union definition; whereas the OECD 1998 report which launched this project defined a tax haven as a jurisdiction which has: (a) no or only nominal taxes (generally or in special circumstances) and offers itself, or is perceived to offer itself, as a place to be used by non-residents to escape tax in their country of residence; (b) laws or administrative practices which prevent the effective exchange of relevant information with other governments on taxpayers benefiting from the low or no tax jurisdiction; (c) lack of transparency, and (d) the absence of a requirement that the activity be substantial, since it would suggest that a jurisdiction may be attempting to attract investment or transactions that are purely tax driven (transactions may be booked there without the requirement of adding value so that there is little real activity, i.e. these jurisdictions are essentially "booking centres"); whereas the proliferation of harmful tax practices to attract investment or transaction that are purely tax driven have proliferated also within the Union; whereas in light of the existence of such harmful tax practices the Union should also have its own definition of harmful preferential tax regimes;
Amendment 186 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital V – point iii
Recital V – point iii
(iii) whereas the Union should apply counter measures towards companies who make use of such tax havens; whereas this has already been called for in the European Parliament's Report on the Annual Tax Report 20148 , which asked for the 'introduction of strong sanctions to prevent companies breaching or dodging tax standards, by refraining from granting EU funding and access to state aid or to public procurement to fraudulent companies or companies located in tax havens or countries distorting competition with favourable tax conditions; urges MSs to recover all types of public support given to companies if they are involved in breaching EU tax standards'; whereas EU countries should also be subject to counter-measures in case they refuse to act to modify their harmful preferential tax regimes undermining the existence of a level-playing field in the EU; __________________ 8 http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDo c.do?pubRef=-//EP//TEXT+REPORT+A8- 2015-0040+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN
Amendment 216 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Requests the Commission to submit to Parliament by June 2016 one or morea set of legislative proposals, following the detailed recommendations in the Annex hereto;
Amendment 224 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 1 – introductory part
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 1 – introductory part
The European Parliament calls once again on the European Commission to bring forward a legislative proposal by Junethe first quarter of 2016 to introduce public country-by-country reporting (CBC-R) for multinational companies in all sectors.
Amendment 229 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 1 – indent 1
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 1 – indent 1
This proposal should be developed on the basis oftake into account the requirements put forward by the OECD in its CBC-R data template published in September 2014 (Action 13 of the OECD/G20 BEPS project), while also envisaging public CBC-R applying to all ‘large’ undertakings in in all sectors in accordance with the Union’s definition included in the Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council1a and Directive 2013/50/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council1b, including detailed disclosure requirements such as (turnover, staffing levels, investment, profits, taxes paid, taxes deferred) to be part of companies’ annual financial statement and allow the public to have access to this information, for instance by creating a central Union register. _________________ 1aDirective 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). 1b Directive 2013/50/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2013 amending Directive 2004/109/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the harmonisation of transparency requirements in relation to information about issuers whose securities are admitted to trading on a regulated market, Directive 2003/71/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the prospectus to be published when securities are offered to the public or admitted to trading and Commission Directive 2007/14/EC laying down detailed rules for the implementation of certain provisions of Directive 2004/109/EC (OJ L 294, 6.11.2013, p. 13).
Amendment 236 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 1 – indent 2 a (new)
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 1 – indent 2 a (new)
The Commission should ensure in its future country-by-country proposal that accounting firms have to confirm in the Group Audit Report that the figures in respect of taxes, turnovers, number of employees and profit made are also in line with the ‘true and fair view’ particularly allocated/shown per country;
Amendment 244 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 3 – introductory part
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 3 – introductory part
The European Parliament calls on the European Commission to bring forward a proposal as soon as possible on a new mechanism whereby Member States are compelled to inform other Member States (initially via the Code of Conduct Group) if they intend to introduce a new allowance, relief, exception, incentive or similar measure that could have a material impact on the effective tax rate in the Member State or on the tax base of another Member State. and to reform the Code of Conduct Group;
Amendment 256 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 3 – indent 2 a (new)
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 3 – indent 2 a (new)
An infringement procedure of the rule of the internal market should be envisaged with respect to Member States which fail to comply with such reporting requirements.
Amendment 258 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 3 – indent 3 a (new)
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 3 – indent 3 a (new)
The European Parliament should receive regular update about the notifications and the assessment conducted by the European Commission.
Amendment 263 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 4 – title
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 4 – title
Recommendation A4. Automatic exchange of information on tax rulings to be extended to all tax rulings and to a certain extent made publicbe made public, transparency on offshore banking statistics and company structure
Amendment 269 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 4 – indent 2 – introductory part
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 4 – indent 2 – introductory part
Amendment 275 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 4 – indent 2 – point 1
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 4 – indent 2 – point 1
Amendment 276 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 4 – indent 2 – point 2
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 4 – indent 2 – point 2
Amendment 283 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 4 – indent 3 a (new)
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 4 – indent 3 a (new)
Create, on the basis of data to be collected by financial institutions and provided to revenue authorities as part of Automatic Exchange of Information requirements, annual statistics to show the extent of each Member State offshore banking, including value and number of accounts by country of residency of account holders.
Amendment 284 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 4 – indent 3 b (new)
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 4 – indent 3 b (new)
Calls on the Commission to create an obligation for large undertakings to publish they corporate ownership structure, in order to better understand where they have activities and who manages subsidiaries of these undertakings;
Amendment 286 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 5 – title
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 5 – title
Recommendation A5. Transparency ofCompetition distortion caused by customs-free ports
Amendment 290 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 6 – indent 1
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 6 – indent 1
Create, on the basis of best practices currently used by Member States, a harmonised methodology, which should be made public, that can be used to estimate the size of the direct and indirect corporate tax gaps - the difference between corporate taxes owed and corporate taxes paid - in all Member States, and across the Union as a whole.
Amendment 302 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 7 – indent 1
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 7 – indent 1
Amendment 303 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 7 – indent 1 a (new)
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 7 – indent 1 a (new)
Setup a European whistleblower common fund, financed by recovered money, to ensure whistleblowers receive an adequate financial assistance for public- interest secret disclosed;
Amendment 304 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 7 – indent 1 b (new)
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 7 – indent 1 b (new)
Consider a range of tools to ensure such protection against unjustified legal prosecutions, economic sanctions and discriminations;
Amendment 310 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 7 – indent 4 a (new)
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 7 – indent 4 a (new)
Such a legislative proposal must incorporate the definition of the term ‘whistleblower’ as provided by the Council of Europe, which has agreed that: ‘“whistleblower” means any person who reports or discloses information on a threat or harm to the public interest in the context of their work-based relationship, whether it be in the public or private sector’1a. __________________ 1ahttps://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=218 8855&Site=CM
Amendment 311 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 7 – indent 5
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 7 – indent 5
Amendment 314 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 7 a (new)
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 7 a (new)
Amendment 318 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 1 – title
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 1 – title
Recommendation B1. Introduction of a Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base
Amendment 320 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 1 – introductory part
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 1 – introductory part
The European Parliament calls on the European Commission to bring forward as soon as possible a legislative proposal for the introduction of a common consolidated corporate tax base:
Amendment 325 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 1 – paragraph 1
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 1 – paragraph 1
Amendment 329 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 1 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 1 – paragraph 1 a (new)
• The CCCTB should be based on a formula apportionment method based for instance on Company sales in each Member State in order to reflect the real economic activities of companies and does not unduly advantage certain Member States.
Amendment 331 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 1 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 1 – paragraph 1 b (new)
• The introduction of a CCCTB should be coupled with the introduction of a minimum tax rate.
Amendment 333 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 1 – paragraph 2
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 1 – paragraph 2
Amendment 343 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 1 – paragraph 3
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 1 – paragraph 3
• During the interim period betweenprior to the introduction of mandatory CCTB and that of full CCCTB, a set of measures to reduce profit shifting (mainly via transfer pricing) including a Union anti-BEPS legislative proposal. These measures should include a temporary cross-border loss offset regime only if the Commission can guarantee that it will be transparent and will not create the possibility of misuse for aggressive tax planningshould be introduced including as a minimum a Union-wide anti-BEPS legislative proposal.
Amendment 349 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 1 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 1 – paragraph 4 a (new)
• The Commission should promote, in global forum where it participates, actions towards a Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base project to tax global profits of non-Union multinational companies;
Amendment 360 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 3 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 3 – paragraph 1 a (new)
The Commission should bring forward proposals for common European standards and definitions on what qualifies as R&D promotion, and what does not, and for harmonising the use of patent and innovation boxes including advancing to 30 June 2017 the abolition of the old regime by shortening the timing of grandfathering rules;
Amendment 361 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 4 – indent 1
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 4 – indent 1
To coordinateprovide a framework for national Controlled Foreign Corporation rules, in order to ensure that profits parked in low or no tax countries are effectively taxed and to prevent the diversity of national CFC rules within the EU from distorting the functioning of the internal market. This shall not prevent individual Member State from introducing stricter rules.
Amendment 362 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 4 – indent 1 a (new)
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 4 – indent 1 a (new)
To revise Union legislation on controlled foreign companies and its application according to the Cadbury Schweppes judgment of the European Court of Justice (C-196/04) in order to ensure full use of controlled foreign companies beyond situations of wholly artificial arrangements in order to ensure that profits parked in low or no tax countries are effectively taxed.
Amendment 363 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 5 – title
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 5 – title
Recommendation B5. Improving EU and Member States’ coordination on tax audits and ensuring adequate staffing of tax authorities
Amendment 364 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 5 – indent -1 (new)
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 5 – indent -1 (new)
Create a Union-wide tax authority, similarly to OLAF, in charge of investigations of the 250 biggest companies operating in Europe and their subsidiaries.
Amendment 365 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 5 – indent 2 – introductory part
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 5 – indent 2 – introductory part
Ensure that a parent company and its subsidiaries located in the Union are audited by their respective tax authorities at the same period of time, under the leadershipcoordination and the support of the Union tax authorities of the parent company, in order to ensure efficient cooperation and flows of information between tax authorities. As part of this:
Amendment 366 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 5 – indent 2 – point 1
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 5 – indent 2 – point 1
Tax authorities should regularly report to the Union tax authority and exchange information on their investigations in order to ensure that groups do not benefit from mismatches or loopholes in the combination of various national tax systems.
Amendment 368 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 5 – indent 2 a (new)
Annex – title 2 – subtitle 5 – indent 2 a (new)
Monitoring that national tax administrations are endowed with proper funding and staff in line with the recommendation already provided with respect to National Competition Authorities in the framework of the European Semester.
Amendment 378 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 1 – indent 3 a (new)
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 1 – indent 3 a (new)
The Commission should develop a Union approach for tax treaties, according to the UN guidelines, for discussion with developing countries.
Amendment 379 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 1 – indent 3 b (new)
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 1 – indent 3 b (new)
The Commission and Member States should support a greater role for the United Nations in future international tax discussions, for instance by supporting the creation of a global tax body under the auspices of the United Nations.
Amendment 380 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 2 – title
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 2 – title
Recommendation C2. Create a common definition of ‘tax havens’ and of harmful preferential tax regimes
Amendment 382 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 2 – introductory part
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 2 – introductory part
The European Parliament calls on the European Commission to bring forward a proposal to establish, in cooperation with the OECD and the UN among others, criteria to define ‘tax havens’. and harmful preferential tax regimes:
Amendment 385 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 2 – indent 1 a (new)
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 2 – indent 1 a (new)
• A definition of harmful preferential tax regimes characterised by: ° No or very low nominal tax on the relevant income; ° Negotiable tax rate or tax bases; Artificial definition of tax bases; ° Unfair legal provisions and practices aimed at favouring the establishment of shell companies, disconnection of legal and beneficial ownership, attracting real investment; ° Well-established financial links with offshore jurisdictions ° Private wealth management;
Amendment 395 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 4 – title
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 4 – title
Recommendation C4. Permanent EstablishmentUnion anti-BEPs legislation
Amendment 396 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 4 – introductory part
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 4 – introductory part
The European Parliament calls on to the European Commission to bring forward a legislative proposal to introduce a comprehensive Union anti BEPS legislation to:
Amendment 397 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 4 – indent -1 (new) – introductory part
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 4 – indent -1 (new) – introductory part
review the concept of Permanent Establishment so as:
Amendment 400 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 4 – indent 2
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 4 – indent 2
Amendment 410 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 7 – indent 2 a (new)
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 7 – indent 2 a (new)
Allowing Member States legislation to include provisions take into account companies’ tax policies and behaviour as a relevant factor in public procurement contracts;
Amendment 411 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 7 – indent 2 b (new)
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 7 – indent 2 b (new)
Assessing the possibility of modifying the existing rules in order to allow the amounts recovered following an infringement of Union state aid rules to be allocated preferably to the Union budget or returned to the Member States which have suffered from an erosion of their tax bases, and not to the Member State which granted the illegal tax-related aid, as is currently the case;
Amendment 412 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 7 – introductory part a (new)
Annex – title 3 – subtitle 7 – introductory part a (new)
The European Parliament calls on the Commission to: • Modify the existing rules to ensure punitive sanctions can be adopted against the relevant countries and companies in case of breach of state aid rules; • Urgently enact changes to its horizontal rules for expert groups with a view to ensure policy making in the public interest by effectively shielding law making processes from the influence of specific private interests;
Amendment 430 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 4 – subtitle 1 – indent 5 a (new)
Annex – title 4 – subtitle 1 – indent 5 a (new)
a comprehensive revision of Directive 90/435/EEC and Directive 2003/49/EC to plug all loopholes facilitating corporate tax dodging and to introduce effective minimum tax rates as called for by previous European Parliament resolutions
Amendment 442 #
2015/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19a. Expresses its concern, in this regard, about the degradation of Tibet's environment, as the Tibetan plateau, often referred to as the 'world's third pole', is warming twice as fast as the rest of the world due to China's policies of fast-track development in the region since the beginning of its Western Development Strategy in 1999, which focuses on increased urbanization and infrastructural development, such as the Qinghai-Tibet railway; is concerned about the fact that one of the most direct consequences of such policies is the melting of Tibet's estimated 46,000 glaciers, which feed most of the biggest Asian rivers;
Amendment 456 #
2015/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 b (new)
Paragraph 19 b (new)
19b. Regrets that the Chinese government continues to impose hard-line policies in Tibet and rejects the Dalai Lama's "Middle Way Approach" aimed at the achievement of genuine autonomy for the Tibetan people within the borders of the People's Republic of China, considering it as a way to split China and achieve independence, as outlined in its White Paper on Tibet of April 2015; is concerned about the fact that the definition of "terrorist" included in China's draft law on counter-terrorism, if not substantially revised, may apply to Tibetans advocating for a different policy approach or carrying out religious activities outside state-controlled institutions, and that the conflation of "terrorism" with religious "extremism" in the law gives scope for the penalization of almost any peaceful expression of Tibetan culture, religion or identity that may differ from those of the state;
Amendment 463 #
2015/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 c (new)
Paragraph 19 c (new)
19c. Deplores the fact that the environment to practice Buddhism in Tibet worsened significantly after the Tibetan protests of March 2008, as the Chinese government adopted a more pervasive approach to "patriotic education", including measures to micromanage Tibetan Buddhist monastic affairs, for instance through unelected Management Committees installed in every monastery; "legal education" programs for monks and nuns to ensure that they "do not take part in activities of splitting up the motherland and disturbing social order"; and a ban on images of the Dalai Lama; is concerned about the China's Criminal Law being used to prosecute individuals, whose religious activities are equated with "separatism", leading to the fact that monks and nuns make up approximately 44% of the political prisoner population in Tibet;
Amendment 467 #
2015/2003(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 d (new)
Paragraph 19 d (new)
19d. Expresses its deep concern at the fact that over 140 Tibetans have resorted to self-immolations to protest against the lack of freedom and stringent crackdown in Tibet, and rejects the conflation of self- immolations with terrorism, as no Chinese citizen has ever been injured by the acts of self-immolators; deplores the recently passed criminalisation measures of self-immolations aimed at punishing those allegedly associated with self- immolators, including friends, families and even entire communities, leading to charges of up to "intentional homicide", representing a violation of international law, which prohibits collective punishment; calls on China to resume the currently stalled Sino-Tibetan dialogue in order to achieve a mutual solution for the current instability in Tibet; stresses that measures to improve the situation in Tibet should be addressed as a matter of urgency, as the current tension may lead to increased instability in the near future;
Amendment 113 #
2015/0226(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) In the Investment Plan for Europe presented on 26 November 2014, the Commission announced its intention to restart high quality securitisation markets, without repeating the mistakes made before the 2008 financial crisis. The development of a simple, transparent and standardised securitisation market constitutes a building block of the Capital Markets Union (CMU) and contributes to the Commission's priority objective to support job creation and a return to sustainable growth.
Amendment 118 #
2015/0226(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) Securitisation is an important element of well-functioning financial markets. Soundly structured securitisation is an important channel for diversifying funding sources and allocating risk more efficientwidely within the Union financial system. It allows for a broader distribution of financial sector risk and can help to free up originator's balance sheets to allow for further lending to the economy. Overall, it can improve efficiencies in the financial system and provide additional investment opportunities. Securitisation can create a bridge between credit institutions and capital markets with an indirect benefit for businesses and citizens (through, for example, less expensive loans and business financing, credits for immovable property and credit cards).
Amendment 135 #
2015/0226(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) It is important that the interests of originators, sponsors and original lenders that transform exposures into tradable securities and investors are aligned. To achieve this, the originator, sponsor or original lender should retain a significant interest in the underlying exposures of the securitisation, that exposures included in securitisations are not qualitatively different to those retained on the originators’ balance sheet and that, prior to being included in a securitisation, the exposures have been on the originators balance’ sheet for a significant proportion of their contractual tenor. It is therefore important for the originators or the sponsors to retain a material net economic exposure to the underlying risks in question both for a significant period prior to securitisation and following securitisation. More generally, securitisation transactions should not be structured in such a way so as to avoid the application of the retention requirement. That requirement should be applicable in all situations where the economic substance of a securitisation is applicable, whatever legal structures or instruments are used. There is no need for multiple applications of the retention requirement. For any given securitisation, it suffices that only the originator, the sponsor or the original lender is subject to the requirement. Similarly, where securitisation transactions contain other securitisations positions as underlying exposures, the retention requirement should be applied only to the securitisation which is subject to the investment. The STS notification indicate to investors that originators aThe STS notification should indicate to investors that originators have previously retained and will in the future retaining a material net economic exposure to the underlying risks. Certain exceptions should be made for cases when securitised exposures are fully, unconditionally and irrevocably guaranteed by in particular public authorities. In case support from public resources provided in the form of guarantees or by other means, any provisions in this Regulation are without prejudice to State aid rules.
Amendment 212 #
2015/0226(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 a (new)
Article 2 a (new)
Article 2 a Eligible parties to Securitisation 1. Investors in securitisation shall be institutional investors. 2. In a securitisation, the originator, sponsor or original lender shall be a regulated entity as defined in Article 2(4) of Directive 2002/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Amendment 213 #
2015/0226(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 b (new)
Article 2 b (new)
Article 2 b Prohibition on re-securitisation The exposures underlying a securitisation shall not include securitisations.
Amendment 229 #
2015/0226(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – point a
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – point a
(a) establish written procedures commensurate with the risk profile of the securitisation position, and appropriate to their trading and non-trading book where relevant, to monitor compliance with paragraphs 1 and 2 and the performance of the securitisation position and the underlying exposures on an ongoing basis.. Where appropriate, those written procedures shall include monitoring of the exposure type, the percentage of loans more than 30, 60 and 90 days past due, default rates, prepayment rates, loans in foreclosure, recovery rates, repurchases, loan modifications, payment holidays, collateral type and occupancy, and frequency distribution of credit scores or other measures of credit worthiness across underlying exposures, industry and geographical diversification, frequency distribution of loan to value ratios with band widths that facilitate adequate sensitivity analysis. Where the underlying exposures are themselves securitisations, institutional investors shall also monitor the exposures underlying those securitisations;
Amendment 236 #
2015/0226(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
The originator, sponsor or the original lender of a securitisation shall retain on an ongoing basis a material net economic interest in the securitisation of not less than 25 %. Where the originator, sponsor or the original lender have not agreed between them who will retain the material net economic interest, the originator shall retain the material net economic interest. There shall be no multiple applications of the retention requirements for any given securitisation. The material net economic interest shall be measured at the origination and shall be determined by the notional value for off-balance sheet items. The material net economic interest shall not be split amongst different types of retainers and not be subject to any credit risk mitigation or hedging.
Amendment 243 #
2015/0226(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
1a. By way of derogation to the previous subparagraph, the risk retention percentage may be lowered to 10% where the originator of the underlying exposures has retained all those exposures on its balance sheet for more than half of their original maturity. Where the minimum retention on the originators balance sheet (MRBS) of such exposures is less than half of their original maturity the risk retention requirement will be proportionate in the following manner: risk retention percentage = 25 % - 2 * MRBS * 15 %
Amendment 247 #
2015/0226(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. Only the following shall qualify as a retention of a material net economic interest of not less than 5% within the meaning ofthe percentage determined in accordance with paragraph 1:
Amendment 251 #
2015/0226(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) the retention of no less than 5%the percentage determined in accordance with paragraph 1 of the nominal value of each of the tranches sold or transferred to investors;
Amendment 255 #
2015/0226(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) in the case of revolving securitisations or securitisations of revolving exposures, the retention of the originator's interest of no less than 5%the percentage determined in accordance with paragraph 1 of the nominal value of each of the securitised exposures;
Amendment 259 #
2015/0226(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) the retention of randomly selected exposures, equivalent to no less than 5%the percentage determined in accordance with paragraph 1 of the nominal value of the securitised exposures, where such non- securitised exposures would otherwise have been securitised in the securitisation, provided that the number of potentially securitised exposures is no less than 100 at origination;
Amendment 263 #
2015/0226(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point d
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point d
(d) the retention of the first loss tranche and, where such retention does not amount to 5%the percentage determined in accordance with paragraph 1 of the nominal value of the securitised exposures, if necessary, other tranches having the same or a more severe risk profile than those transferred or sold to investors and not maturing any earlier than those transferred or sold to investors, so that the retention equals in total no less than 5% of the nominal value of the securitised exposures;
Amendment 264 #
2015/0226(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point e
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point e
Amendment 274 #
2015/0226(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 6 – point b
Article 4 – paragraph 6 – point b
(b) the measurement of the level of retention and MRBS referred to in paragraph 1;
Amendment 277 #
2015/0226(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – title
Article 5 – title
Transparency requirements for originators, sponsors and, SSPE's and investors
Amendment 286 #
2015/0226(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b – point vi a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b – point vi a (new)
(vi a) information about the credit scoring process followed for the underlying assets in the securitisation, whether the originator, if a credit institution, uses the standardised, IRB or AIRB approaches for calculating credit capital requirements and the historical evolution of non-performing loans underwritten by the originator;
Amendment 287 #
2015/0226(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c – point ii
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c – point ii
(ii) details regarding the exposure characteristics, cash flows, loss waterfall, credit enhancement and liquidity support features;
Amendment 292 #
2015/0226(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point e – point iii a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point e – point iii a (new)
(iii a) information on the investors in the securitisation, including their country of establishment, sector and that of their ultimate beneficial owner, the size of their investment and to which tranche of the securitisation it relates;
Amendment 333 #
2015/0226(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 4
Article 8 – paragraph 4
4. The securitisation shall be backed by a pool of underlying exposures that are homogeneous in terms of asset type. The underlying exposures shall be contractually binding and enforceable obligations with full recourse to debtors, with defined periodic payment streams relating to rental, principal, interest payments, or related to any other right to receive income from assets warranting such payments. Where the underlying exposures are mortgages, the ratio of outstanding principal to the current value of the properties shall not exceed 75 % at the time of securitisation. The underlying exposures shall not include transferable securities, as defined in Directive 2014/65/EU.
Amendment 334 #
2015/0226(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. The securitisation shall involve no more than three tranches.
Amendment 335 #
2015/0226(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. A synthetic securitisation shall not be considered to be STS securitisation.
Amendment 336 #
2015/0226(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 6
Article 8 – paragraph 6
6. The underlying exposures shall be originated in the ordinary course of the originator’s or the original lender's business pursuant to underwriting standards that are no less stringent than those that the originator or the original lender applies to origination of similar exposures that are not securitised and shall be comparable in terms of economic substance and creditor classes to exposures originated in the ordinary course of the originator's or the original lender's business that are not securitised. Material changes in underwriting standards shall be fully disclosed to potential investors. In the case of securitisations where the underlying exposures are residential loans, the pool of loans shall not include any loan that was marketed and underwritten on the premise that the loan applicant or, where applicable intermediaries, were made aware that the information provided might not be verified by the lender. The assessment of the borrower's creditworthiness shall meet the requirements set out in paragraphs 1 to 4, 5(a), and 6 of Article 18 of Directive 2014/17/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council or of Article 8 of Directive 2008/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council or equivalent requirements in third countries. The originator or original lender shall have expertise in originating exposures of a similar nature to those securitised.
Amendment 346 #
2015/0226(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 8
Article 8 – paragraph 8
Amendment 350 #
2015/0226(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 9 a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. ESMA, in close cooperation with EBA and EIOPA, shall develop draft regulatory technical standards further specifying the criteria for determining that a pool of exposures is homogeneous for the purpose of paragraph 4 of this article and Article 12 paragraph 2. ESMA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by … [twelve months after entry into force of this Regulation]. Power is delegated to the Commission to adopt the regulatory technical standards referred to in this paragraph in accordance with the procedure laid down in Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010.
Amendment 360 #
2015/0226(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3
Article 10 – paragraph 3
3. The originator or sponsor shall provide a clearly documented liability cash flow model to investors, both before the pricing of the securitisation and on an ongoing basis, which precisely represents the contractual relationship between the performance of the underlying exposures and the payments flowing between the originator, sponsor, investors, other third parties and the SSPE.
Amendment 436 #
2015/0226(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. The competent authority shall monitor, including through regular spot checks, new issuance, in particular of securitisations of which the market has little experience, in order to detect breaches as referred to in Article 17(1) or features for which there is no apparent justification other than to circumvent provisions of this Regulation.
Amendment 454 #
2015/0226(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – point g
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – point g
(g) maximum administrative fines of at least twicehree times the amount of the benefit derived from the infringement where that benefit can be determined, even if that exceeds the maximum amounts in points (e) and (f).
Amendment 455 #
2015/0226(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – point g a (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – point g a (new)
(ga) minimum administrative fines of at least the amount of the benefit derived from the infringement where that benefit can be determined, even if that exceeds the maximum amounts in points (e) and (f).
Amendment 476 #
2015/0226(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 29 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. By ... [two years after entry into force of this Regulation] ESMA, in close cooperation with EBA and EIOPA, shall publish a report on the feasibility of a regulatory framework, complementing the new framework on securitisation established in this Regulation, establishing a system of limited licensed banks, performing the functions of SSPEs and having the exclusive right to purchase exposures from originators and sell claims backed by the purchased exposures to investors. The report shall examine in detail the advantages and disadvantages, from a public policy and real economy perspective, of having clearly designated entities subject to a specific supervisory and insolvency regime covering the essential intermediation activities between originators and investors compared to the current highly heterogeneous situation.
Amendment 67 #
2015/0225(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) As pointed out by the European Banking Authority (the "EBA") in its "Report on Qualifying Securitisations" of June 201510 , empirical evidence on defaults and losses shows that STS securitisations exhibited better performance than other securitisations during the financial crisis, reflecting the use of simple and transparent structures and robust execution practices in STS securitisation which deliver lower credit, operational and agency risks. It is therefore appropriate to amend Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 to provide for an appropriately risk-sensitive calibration for STS securitisations in the manner recommended by the EBA in its Report which involves, in particular, a lower risk weight floor of 10% for senior positions. However, in the case of securitisations of exposures originated by credit institutions, the risk weight floor should be 15 % to reflect the likelihood of higher correlation between the risk of the underlying exposures and the balance sheets of the investing banks than between such exposures and non- banks. _________________ 10 See https://www.eba.europa.eu/documents/101 80/950548/EBA+report+on+qualifying+se curitisation.pdf
Amendment 69 #
2015/0225(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) The definition of STS securitisations for regulatory capital purposes under Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 should be limited to securitisations where the ownership of the underlying exposures is transferred to the Special Purpose Entity ("traditional securitisations"). However, institutions retaining senior positions in synthetic securitisations backed by an underlying pool of loans to small and medium-size enterprises ("SMEs") should be allowed to apply to these positions the lower capital requirements available for STS securitisations where such transactions are regarded as of high quality in accordance with certain strict criteria. In particular, where such subset of synthetic securitisations benefits from the guarantee or counterguarantee by the central government or central bank of a Member State, the preferential regulatory capital treatment that would be available to them under Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 is without prejudice to compliance with the State Aid rules.
Amendment 124 #
2015/0225(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 254 – paragraph 1
Article 254 – paragraph 1
(1) Institutions shall use one of the methods set out in Subsection 3 to calculate risk-weighted exposure amounts in relation to all the positions they hold in a securitisation that is not an STS securitisation.
Amendment 125 #
2015/0225(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
(1a) Institutions shall us the SEC-SA method set out in Article 264 to calculate risk-weighted exposure amounts in relation to all the positions they hold in an STS securitisation.
Amendment 158 #
2015/0225(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 260
Article 260
Amendment 165 #
2015/0225(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 262
Article 262
Amendment 174 #
2015/0225(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 264 – Title
Article 264 – Title
Article 264 Article 264 Treatment of STS securitisations underSEC-SA
Amendment 175 #
2015/0225(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 264 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 264 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Amendment 176 #
2015/0225(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 264 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 264 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Amendment 187 #
2015/0225(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Amendment 32 #
2015/0068(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) The challenge posed by cross-border tax avoidance, aggressive tax planning and harmful tax competition has increased considerably and has become a major focus of concern within the Union and at global level. Tax base erosion is considerably reducing national tax revenues, which hinders Member States in applying growth- friendly tax policies. In particular, rulings concerning tax-driven structures lead to a low level of taxation of artificially high amounts of income in the country giving the advance ruling and may leave artificially low amounts of income to be taxed in any other countries involved. An increase in transparency is therefore urgently required. The tools and mechanisms established by Council Directive 2011/16/EU13 need to be enhanced in order to achieve this, and need to take account of the wide definition of tax rulings as passed by the Parliament in an amendment to the Shareholder Rights Directive, which complements the definition included therein. __________________ 13 Council Directive 2011/16/EU of 15 February 2011 on administrative cooperation in the field of taxation and repealing Directive 77/799/EEC (OJ L 64 of 11.3.2011, p. 1).
Amendment 34 #
2015/0068(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 1 a (new)
Recital 1 a (new)
(1a) Tax rulings have been used by Member States to attract companies to their territories, by negotiating individual arrangements with multinational corporations, some of which have led to very low tax liabilities for corporations, and have put a downward pressure on rates of corporation tax in Member States. At present Europe is facing several crises, and there is a strain on public finances. Member States should agree a common minimum rate of corporation tax and a common consolidated corporate tax base, instead of engaging in tax competition.
Amendment 40 #
2015/0068(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) The possibility that the provision of information may be refused where it would lead to the disclosure of a commercial, industrial or professional secret or of a commercial process, or of information whose disclosure would be contrary to public policy should not apply to provisions of mandatory automatic exchange of information on advance cross-border rulings and advance pricing arrangements in order not to reduce the effectiveness of these exchanges. The limited nature of the information that is required to be shared with all Member States srulings and advance pricing arrangements and therefore all such rulings and arrangements should be made public, by the issuing authorities. The Commission shall be empowered to set out, by means of delegated acts in accordance with Article 27(2a), (2b) and (2c) of the Sharehould ensure sufficient protection of those commercial interestser Rights Directive, the format and content of publication.
Amendment 45 #
2015/0068(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5 a (new)
Recital 5 a (new)
(5a) Multinational companies are using tax rules and their close relationships with governments to control markets and undermine the competition that allows business to thrive. It is crucial that companies compete on innovation and efficiency, not on tax policy. Making information on rulings public will make this diversion of energy away from the central purpose of the firm evident.
Amendment 49 #
2015/0068(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) In order to reap the benefits of the mandatory automatic exchange of advance cross-border rulings and advance pricing arrangementsransparency, the information should be communicated and published promptly after they are issued and therefore regular intervals for the communication of the information should be established.
Amendment 56 #
2015/0068(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) Member States should exchange the basic information to be communicated also with the Commission. This would enable the Commission at any point in time to monitor and evaluate the effective application of the automatic exchange of information on advance cross-border rulings and advance pricing arrangements. The Commission will then publish the central directory. Such communication will not discharge a Member State from its obligations to notify any state aid to the Commission.
Amendment 68 #
2015/0068(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) In order to enhance the efficient use of resources, facilitate the exchange of information and avoid the need for Member States each to make similar developments to their systems to store information, specific provision should be made for the establishment of a public central directory accessible to all Member States and, the Commission and European citizens, where Member States would upload and store information instead of exchanging it by email. The practical arrangements necessary for the establishment of such a public directory should be adopted by the Commission in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 26(2) of Directive 2011/16/EU.
Amendment 74 #
2015/0068(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) In the spirit of the incremental approach advocated in Directive 2011/16/EU, it is appropriate to adapt the time limits for the existing mandatory automatic exchange of information provided for in Article 8(1) of Directive 2011/16/EU in order to ensure that the available information on the categories is communicated within ninesix months after the end of the tax year to which it relates.
Amendment 103 #
2015/0068(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 8a – title
Article 8a – title
Scope and conditions of mandatory automatic exchange of information on advance cross-borderand publication of advance rulings and advance pricing arrangements
Amendment 106 #
2015/0068(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 8a – paragraph 1
Article 8a – paragraph 1
1. The competent authority of a Member State issuing or amending an advance cross-border ruling or an advance pricing arrangement after the date of entry into force of this Directive shall, by automatic exchange, communicate information thereon to the competent authorities of all other Member States as well as to the European Commission. The competent authority of each Member State shall also publicly disclose advance rulings and advance pricing arrangements in an online public centralised register. The rulings shall be made public within one year of being signed.
Amendment 109 #
2015/0068(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
2. The competent authority of a Member State shall also communicate information to the competent authorities of all other Member States as well as to the European Commission on all advance cross-border rulings and advance pricing arrangements issued within a period beginning ten years before the entry into force but still valid on the date of entry into force of this Directive;
Amendment 125 #
2015/0068(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 8a – paragraph 5 – introductory part
Article 8a – paragraph 5 – introductory part
5. The information to be communicated and published by a Member State pursuant to this Article shall as a minimum include the following information:
Amendment 137 #
2015/0068(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 8a – paragraph 6
Article 8a – paragraph 6
6. To facilitate the exchange and publication the Commission shall adopt any measures and practical arrangements necessary for the implementation of this Article, including measures to standardise the communication of the information set out in paragraph 5 of this Article, as part of the procedure for establishing the standard form provided in Article 20(5) and the creation of a public central database where all rulings would be stored and available.
Amendment 149 #
2015/0068(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 14 – paragraph 3
Article 14 – paragraph 3
3. Where a Member State makes use of any information communicated by another Member State in accordance with Article 8a, it shall send feedback thereon to the Commission and competent authority which provided the information as soon as possible, and no later than three months after the outcome of the use of the requested information is known, except if feedback has already been provided pursuant to paragraph 1 of this Article. The Commission shall determine the practical arrangements in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 26(2).
Amendment 160 #
2015/0068(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 21 – paragraph 5
Article 21 – paragraph 5
5. The Commission shall develop a securepublic central directory where information to be communicated in the framework of Article 8a of this Directive mayshall be recorded in order to satisfy the automatic exchange provided for in paragraphs 1 and 2 of Article 8a and will be made available to the public. The Commission shall have access to the information recorded in this directory. The necessary practical arrangements shall be adopted by the Commission in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 26(2).
Amendment 169 #
2015/0068(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 23a – paragraph 1
Article 23a – paragraph 1
1. Information communicated to the Commission pursuant to this Directive shall be kept confidential by the Commissmade public by the Commission and by the Member States communicating the information in accordance with the provisions applicable to Union authorities, at the latest one year after the ruling has been issued.
Amendment 23 #
2014/2234(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas farmers respecting the common rules of CAP and EU environment policy provide public goods such as landscapes, farmland biodiversity and climate stability, which are of intrinsic value to society and the environment;
Amendment 24 #
2014/2234(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital C b (new)
Recital C b (new)
Cb. whereas controls on environmental performance are a means to guarantee the continuation of the public goods provided by agriculture, recognizing their value by linking them to payments, reflecting the ‘public money for public goods’ principle;
Amendment 25 #
2014/2234(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital C c (new)
Recital C c (new)
Cc. whereas cross-compliance and greening measures provide a sound baseline for sustainability of EU agriculture;
Amendment 26 #
2014/2234(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital C d (new)
Recital C d (new)
Cd. whereas controls on effective implementation of these rules allow to minimise the costs externalised to other areas of public spending due to environmental damage or dangers to public health;
Amendment 100 #
2014/2234(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Favours the increased use of e- Government technology by the Member States in order to forestall errors in the application process; recalls that the reliable implementation of e-Government technologies requires Member States to develop, finance or co-finance such technology.
Amendment 106 #
2014/2234(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Calls on the Commission and European Court of Auditors to develop a supportive audit regime which encourages not only proper achievement but surpassing of the objectives of CAP regulation.
Amendment 108 #
2014/2234(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 b (new)
Paragraph 8 b (new)
8b. Insists that in any risk-based audit strategy, the scope of risk be extended to include risk to the environment and to public health and their associated costs, in addition to the risk to public funds in the EU budget.
Amendment 110 #
2014/2234(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 c (new)
Paragraph 8 c (new)
8c. Calls on the Commission to improve its guidelines on inspections, so as to ensure consistency of checks.
Amendment 111 #
2014/2234(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 d (new)
Paragraph 8 d (new)
8d. Recalls the European Court of Auditors recommendation to turn cross- compliance measures into verifiable standards, with expected impacts defined beforehand and then measured.
Amendment 112 #
2014/2234(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 e (new)
Paragraph 8 e (new)
8e. Recalls that the cost of ensuring cross- compliance and greening is far lower than the cost of their weak implementation, whereby extra costs would be incurred to clean up environmental pollution and solve public health crises.
Amendment 113 #
2014/2234(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 f (new)
Paragraph 8 f (new)
8f. Stresses that efforts to reduce the burden of controls should pay particular attention to the needs of smaller-scale and family farms in the auditing process, aiming to minimise the number of inspections as far as possible, whilst ensuring sound spending of EU funds and correct implementation of relevant EU legislation.
Amendment 114 #
2014/2234(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 g (new)
Paragraph 8 g (new)
8g. Recalls that, under Article 4.1(h) of the Regulation No 1307/2013 on direct payments, ‘permanent grassland and permanent pasture’ can include land used to grow ligneous forage species, which can be grazed and which forms part of established local practices where grasses and other herbaceous forage are traditionally not predominant in grazing areas; calls on Member States to ensure that farmers grazing in upland conditions are not discriminated against in eligibility rules for permanent grassland and permanent pasture or the value of entitlements.
Amendment 115 #
2014/2234(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 h (new)
Paragraph 8 h (new)
8h. Demands greater clarity in the delegated act defining ‘active farmers’, ensuring that smaller-scale farmers and family farms are recognized as such.
Amendment 116 #
2014/2234(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 i (new)
Paragraph 8 i (new)
8i. Argues for a better integration of the polluter pays principle as concerns penalties for non-compliance.
Amendment 117 #
2014/2234(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 j (new)
Paragraph 8 j (new)
8j. Recalls that the Water Framework Directive and Sustainable Use of Pesticides Directive shall be part of cross compliance measures as soon as the last Member State has implemented the farmer relevant aspects.
Amendment 118 #
2014/2234(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 k (new)
Paragraph 8 k (new)
8k. Argues for the setting up of specific thresholds for pesticides, taking into account the different problems facing individual river basins and ecologically sensitive regions.
Amendment 119 #
2014/2234(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 l (new)
Paragraph 8 l (new)
8l. Calls for the Commission to submit to the European Parliament and to the Council a report on the information communicated by the Member States in relation to the National Action Plans for the Sustainable Use of Pesticides, as requested in article 4.3 of Directive 2009/128/EC1 a ; recalls that this report shall contain methods used and the implications concerning the establishment of different types of targets to reduce the risks and use of pesticides. ___________ 1a Sustainable Use of Pesticides
Amendment 120 #
2014/2234(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 m (new)
Paragraph 8 m (new)
8m. Stresses that much administrative burden, on both farmers and administrators, could be reduced simply by improving the interoperability of databases in IACS (integrated administration and control system) as currently already applied in some Member States; notes that all Member States should ensure adequate investment in such systems and their hardware and software components, whether through independent financing or co-financing alongside EU funds.
Amendment 121 #
2014/2234(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 n (new)
Paragraph 8 n (new)
8n. Requests that the Commission encourage the exchange of best practices, to ensure the smoothest controls and least disturbance for the farmers.
Amendment 1 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A
Recital A
Amendment 10 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas the European Commission has given assurances that respect for food safety and human and animal health standards shall be an uncompromisable tenet of the negotiations as regards European agriculture;
Amendment 15 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A b (new)
Recital A b (new)
Ab. whereas there are major differences in the regulatory systems of the US and the EU with regard to plant protection products: -whereas 82 active substances are banned in the EU, but allowed in the US, -whereas moreover, the EU deliberately adopted hazard-based cut-off criteria to phase out the use of active substances that are carcinogenic, or mutagenic, or toxic to reproduction, or persistent and toxic and bioaccumulative, or endocrine disrupters in Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 ; whereas the US insists on a risk-based approach, based on numerous assumptions and extrapolations, thus tolerating the use of such substances of very high concern, -whereas there is a general pattern of lower amounts of pesticide residues allowed on food in the EU as compared to the US;
Amendment 17 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A c (new)
Recital A c (new)
Ac. whereas the draft EU negotiation text of the EU on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures tabled for the round of 29 September - 3 October suggests obliging Parties to apply tolerances and maximum residue levels by the Codex Alimentarius Commission within 12 months after their adoption, unless the importing Party had signalled a reservation in the Codex Alimentarius Commission; whereas there is a significant degree of disagreement by EFSA with the Codex standards, signalled by EFSA’s filing of reservations in 31- 57% of all cases, alongside a general pattern of lower amounts of pesticide residues allowed on food in the EU as compared to the Codex Alimentarius Commission; whereas it is very questionable whether EFSA will be allowed politically to continue to express reservations once the TTIP has been adopted, given that the draft text intends to commit the EU and the US to collaborate in the international standard setting bodies ‘with a view to reaching mutually satisfactory outcomes’, which could discourage EFSA from filing reservations to the Codex Alimentarius Commission in the future and thus lead to weaker standards in the EU;
Amendment 18 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A d (new)
Recital A d (new)
Ad. whereas the US TBT report of 2014 refers to the concerns of the US chemical and crop protection industry with regard to the hazard-based cut-off criteria to be developed for endocrine disrupters, and stated that the US raised concerns with DG Environment’s proposal bilaterally as well as in WTO TBT and SPS Committees; whereas the Commission decided to launch an impact assessment on the development of criteria for endocrine disrupters in July 2013; whereas this decision is the main reason for the Commission’s failure to adopt criteria by the 4-year deadline of December 2013; while the US welcomed the Commission’s decision, both Council and the European Parliament decided to support Sweden in its court action to challenge the Commission’s failure, illustrating fundamentally different views as to the nature of regulatory provisions in EU law;
Amendment 19 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A e (new)
Recital A e (new)
Ae. whereas the EU approach with regard to food safety is based on the precautionary principle, allowing for protective action in case of scientific uncertainty, and requires risk managers to take into account other legitimate factors when weighing policy alternatives; whereas the US approach requires the regulator to produce scientific evidence of harmful effects before regulatory action is taken and does not acknowledge other legitimate factors;
Amendment 20 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A f (new)
Recital A f (new)
Af. whereas the EU and US legislators have taken a very different approach as regards the regulation of genetically modified organisms (GMOs): while in the EU, GMOs need to pass a risk analysis process prior to authorisation, regulators in the US allow them on the market without a distinct regulatory regime;
Amendment 21 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A g (new)
Recital A g (new)
Ag. whereas the EU and US legislators have taken a very different approach as regards pathogen reduction treatments for meat and poultry: while a number of different pathogen reduction treatments are allowed in the US, EU regulation requires all operators along the food chain to follow good farm to fork hygiene practices in order to ensure pathogenic microbes are not present in foods of animal origin, and does not allow decontamination treatments to substitute good hygiene practices;
Amendment 22 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A h (new)
Recital A h (new)
Ah. whereas the US federal law on animal welfare is well below the level of EU regulation, including the lack of legislation on welfare standards for farmed animals before the point of slaughter; whereas animal welfare is not considered by the Commission to be a trade concern in the same way as food safety or animal health for the purposes of import requirements;
Amendment 23 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A i (new)
Recital A i (new)
Ai. whereas the EU is in the process of defining specific rules on food from clones animals and their offspring, while the US have decided not to require pre-market approval or labelling for such products;
Amendment 24 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A j (new)
Recital A j (new)
Aj. whereas the regulatory freeze is an indirect effect of TTIP which limits the ambitions of legislation and regulation of both parties in fields of food safety, public health, environmental standards, as has been observed with regards to EU legislation on endocrine disrupting chemicals;
Amendment 39 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas respect forthe European Commission has committed itself to holding food safety and human and animal health standards will be as fundamental tenets of the negotiations foras regards European agriculture;
Amendment 50 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas civil society and public opinion in both the EU and the US have been critical of and are concerned by the prospect of eroding regulatory standards in guise of harmonisation;
Amendment 55 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital C b (new)
Recital C b (new)
Cb. whereas the claims regarding the jobs and growth that TTIP could bring do not take into account the expected environmental and social impact and associated costs; whereas similar previous claims regarding trade agreements have been subsequently revealed as overestimations;
Amendment 58 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital C c (new)
Recital C c (new)
Cc. whereas the drive for competitiveness has been shown to have negative impacts upon the health, safety and labour rights of food sector workers, particularly in the processing industry;
Amendment 68 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point iv a (new)
Paragraph 1 – point iv a (new)
(iv a) to ensure an explicit exclusion of public services as referred to in Article 14 TFEU from the scope of application of TTIP, in order to ensure that national and local authorities have the freedom to introduce, adopt, maintain or repeal any measure with regard to the commissioning, organisation, funding and provision of public services, as provided in Article 168 TFEU (public health) and in Protocol 26 (Services of General Interest) of the EU Treaties;
Amendment 74 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point v
Paragraph 1 – point v
(v) to take immediate steps to safeguard the right of EU governments to legislate, organise, set quality and safety standards for, manage and regulate public services by not committing public service sectors to further market access liberalization and by filing general Annex-II reservations in the National Treatment schedules regarding all health services in the widest sense communication services, educational services, environmental services, financial services, social services, transport services, and energy services;
Amendment 76 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point -a (new)
Paragraph 1 – point -a (new)
-a. end negotiations on the establishment of a free-trade area between the EU and the United States;
Amendment 78 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point a
Paragraph 1 – point a
Amendment 83 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point a
Paragraph 1 – point a
a. prioritise an ambitious and balancedensure that the EU market access offers in the different areas of industrial goods, agricultural products, services and public procurement are treated each in its own merits and not as a cross-bargained package; prioritise a result of the negotiations for agriculture, the three main componentsat takes into full account the sensitivity of wthich (market access, geographical indications and sanitary and phytosanitary measures) should be tackled early and in parallels sector, as well as respecting the sanitary and phytosanitary EU standards and the full protection of EU geographical indications; ensure that chapters affecting agriculture are tackled early in the negotiation process, in order to give Parliament enough time to discuss and evaluate thisese chapters with stakeholders and European citizens; ,
Amendment 91 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
Paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
aa. stop negotiations on the TTIP agreement, as it constitutes trade for trade’s sake, in particular in the agricultural sector, where it diverts efforts from local food production and shorter supply chains towards unnecessary and duplicatory trading;
Amendment 93 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point a b (new)
Paragraph 1 – point a b (new)
ab. stop negotiations on the TTIP agreement, as it constitutes an attack on the right to regulate in the public interest and lays the ground for regulatory chill;
Amendment 94 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point a c (new)
Paragraph 1 – point a c (new)
ac. ensure that TTIP’s provisions do not apply to or affect the agricultural sector and its regulation;
Amendment 95 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point a d (new)
Paragraph 1 – point a d (new)
ad. recognise that regulatory harmonisation is only appropriate where regulations are of equivalent strength; undertake negotiations only in clearly specified sectoral areas where the US and the EU have similar levels of protection;
Amendment 96 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point a e (new)
Paragraph 1 – point a e (new)
ae. Ensure that international regulatory cooperation and international instruments shall not restrain the setting of higher standards by either party; undertake the harmonisation of minimum acceptable standards only, and this to the higher of the two parties’ respective standards
Amendment 97 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point a f (new)
Paragraph 1 – point a f (new)
af. specify the sectors and subsectors to be excluded from the scope of regulatory cooperation within TTIP, including sensitive areas in which EU and US legislation differs significantly, including but not restricted to legislation on genetically modified organisms, clones and descendants of clones, chlorine bleach on chicken carcasses, growth hormones in meat and milk production, antibiotics in livestock rearing, agro- chemicals and plant protection products;
Amendment 98 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point a g (new)
Paragraph 1 – point a g (new)
ag. ensure an agreement that does not undermine EU regulation or subject future regulation to assessment vis-a-vis its potential impact on trade;
Amendment 99 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point a h (new)
Paragraph 1 – point a h (new)
ah. ensure that in the regulatory cooperation chapter, any negotiations on standards relating to sensitive issues such as food safety, environmental protection, consumer protection, climate, animal health and welfare, are based on a positive list, explicitly specifying which standards are of equivalent strength and thus appropriate for harmonisation;
Amendment 107 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point b
Paragraph 1 – point b
b. firmly commit to the strict preservation of standards on food safety and human and animal health, as defined under EU legislation, and ensure that fundamental values of the EU such as the precautionary principle are not undermined; ensure that EU standards are not subject to regulatory cooperation and mutual recognition of standards which creates a biased playing field for European agricultural producers due to higher and more costly standards in the EU;
Amendment 120 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
Paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
ba. ensure that market access is not granted for imports that do not conform to the EU’s standards, in particular as regards food quality and production practices, including standards of animal welfare;
Amendment 126 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point b b (new)
Paragraph 1 – point b b (new)
bb. ensure that the legislative powers of EU institutions and Member States’ local, regional and national authorities are not undermined, either by delegation of regulatory powers to new regulatory bodies within TTIP, such as the proposed Regulatory Cooperation Body, or by a primary focus of regulatory Impact Assessments on trade and investment impacts; ensure that such institutions retain their powers to adopt higher standards at local, regional, national and European level;
Amendment 128 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point b c (new)
Paragraph 1 – point b c (new)
bc. clarify explicitly that any provisions on regulatory cooperation in the TTIP do not set a procedural requirement for the adoption of the Union acts concerned by it nor do they give rise to enforceable rights in that regard; in particular reject the following provisions, which could de facto make it more difficult for the EU to go beyond the lowest common denominator of international instruments; -grant the US the right to enter into regulatory exchanges concerning the adoption of national legislation by Member States, including joint examination of possible means to promote regulatory compatibility; -grant the US formal rights with regards to implementing acts to be adopted pursuant to Article 291 TFEU, while the European Parliament has no right to scrutiny whatsoever with regard to implementing acts;
Amendment 129 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point b d (new)
Paragraph 1 – point b d (new)
bd. reserve the right of public bodies to specify their public procurement rules using criteria such as locality, environmental impact, social welfare effects, tax justice; recognize in this regard the importance of buy-local food programs in both the EU and the US;
Amendment 130 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point b e (new)
Paragraph 1 – point b e (new)
be. make explicit in the published draft EU textual proposal on SPS measures that the long term goal of aligning regulatory standards with regard to animal welfare should be to raise standards to the highest level rather than lowering them; strengthen the currently lacking enforcement mechanisms of animal welfare provisions; include animal welfare matters in the negotiations, provided that the Commission insists on explicit recognition of the need to harmonise standards to the highest level, and to include animal welfare production standards as a requirement for importing goods into the EU;
Amendment 132 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point c
Paragraph 1 – point c
Amendment 147 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
Paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
ca. consider European regulation as standards necessary to ensure public and animal health, food safety and environmental sustainability, amongst other legitimate factors; reject their categorization as ‘technical barriers to trade’;
Amendment 157 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point d
Paragraph 1 – point d
d. secure a level playing field, treating as sensitive those products for which direct competition would expose EU agricultural producers to excessive pressure, for example in cases where regulatory conditions and related costs of production in the EU diverge from those in the US;
Amendment 172 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
Paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
da. ensure that no TTIP agreement contains any investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) mechanism, as the given level of investment protection in the EU and in the US is fully sufficient to guarantee legal security;
Amendment 179 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point d b (new)
Paragraph 1 – point d b (new)
db. pay due account to 97% of citizens’ submissions during the Commission’s public consultation, which asked to exclude ISDS from TTIP; follow the example of countries such as Australia that have decided to no longer include ISDS provisions in its trade agreements;
Amendment 202 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
Paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
ea. ensure that all European food products which are protected by Protected Geographical Indications and Protected Designations of Origin are protected and promoted, and halt the use in the United States and the rest of the world of Designations and Indications linked to a particular area, such as Parmesan;
Amendment 204 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
Paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
ea. strengthen the guarantees and protection for the EU’s right to legislate on labelling and marking, considering it through the frame of traceability and consumer information, and not as a Technical Barrier to Trade1a ; ensure that TTIP shall in no way undermine the EU’s ability to provide traceability for food products and to inform consumers through regulation on country of origin labelling, labelling of production methods, or other forms of food labelling. __________________ 1a Article 8 of the EU&aposs Textual Proposal on ‘Technical Barriers to Trade,’ http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2015 /january/tradoc_153025.pdf
Amendment 212 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point f
Paragraph 1 – point f
f. engage in a fully transparent, timely and comprehensive manner with all agricultural stakeholders on all aspects of the negotiations.stakeholders in the sector including civil society groups and the public on all aspects of the negotiations; ensure the continued participation of relevant civil society groups and the public within any bodies created by TTIP;
Amendment 220 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point f a (new)
Paragraph 1 – point f a (new)
fa. ensure transparency in the negotiations throughout the entire process; fulfil its obligation, according to TFEU Art 218.10, which the ECJ in a recent ruling has confirmed as of statutory character, to keep Parliament fully informed on an immediate basis at all stages of the negotiations; work towards an agreement with the US Administration regarding the access of all Parliamentarians to the consolidated negotiation texts; ensure access for the public to relevant negotiation documents from all parties, with the exception of those which are to be classified with clear justification on a case-by-case basis, in line with Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents;
Amendment 227 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point f b (new)
Paragraph 1 – point f b (new)
fb. publish impact assessments on the relevant farming sectors, such as livestock, arable crops and vegetable production, within the next 6 months;
Amendment 240 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Calls on the Commission to safeguard the future of European public healthcare services by their explicit exclusion from the scope of application of TTIP, in the same way that there is already a carve-out in TTIP for the audio-visual sector and reflecting the existing carve-out of healthcare services from the Services Directive *; * see recital 22 and Article 2(f) of Directive 2006/123/EC
Amendment 18 #
2014/2223(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
A a. whereas agroforestry, defined as land use systems in which trees are grown in combination with agriculture on the same land unit, is a suite of land management systems that boost overall productivity, generate more biomass, maintain and restore soils and provide a number of valuable ecosystem services. These include a systemic reduction of inputs due to better nutrient cycling and more habitat for pest predators, more carbon sequestration to mitigate climate change, higher biodiversity, better quality and more efficient use of water, higher soil quality and better erosion protection, regulation of water cycles, increasing regional rainfall via improving microclimates and preventing downstream flooding; Whereas agro-forestry systems could be applied across 90 million ha across EU landscapes; whereas as the economic return for farmers using agro-forestry has been shown to increase, it represents a win- win-win for farmers, the environment and society.
Amendment 61 #
2014/2223(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)
Recital F a (new)
F a. Whereas the European Union has a role in ensuring that the forestry sector does not conflict with the existing environmental and climate legislation of the Union, such as the implementation of the Birds and Habitats Directives
Amendment 67 #
2014/2223(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F b (new)
Recital F b (new)
F b. Whereas Europe's forests offer citizens great support in their physical and psychological well-being, and, in this light, open access to forests should be encouraged and expanded to the fullest extent possible.
Amendment 115 #
2014/2223(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Acknowledges the importance of ownership and property rights and s, in particular the considerable extent of forests in public ownership across the Union, as well as the vital ecosystem services that both public and private forests provide as public goods; Supports all measures enabling stakeholder groups to participate in a dialogue on developing and implementing sustainable forest management and improveing the exchange of information;
Amendment 152 #
2014/2223(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Considers that forests should be viewed as a national and global resource rather than a private-property resource, and pressure on Member States to privatise their publicly owned forest should be resisted.
Amendment 179 #
2014/2223(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. Stresses that recognition should be given to the distinctiveness of mature, old- growth forests, and their particularly rich and developed ecosystems , and therefore rejects any attempts to use biodiversity offsetting to reduce the geographical extent of old-growth forests;
Amendment 192 #
2014/2223(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8 a. Stresses that, whilst wood is a potential source of renewable energy, it must be used in ways that maximise resource efficiency. Stresses that reducing our general energy consumption and boosting the development of wind and solar energy, as well as other less mature renewable technologies, must be actively pursued in order to reach the 2020 renewable energy target without compromising the health and conservation of forests;
Amendment 2 #
2014/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas, according to the Commission services’' spring 2014 forecast, GDP in the euro area fell by 0.4 % in 2013 after a decline of 0.7 % in 2012, and whereas the Commission services expect a reco; whereas according to Eurostat the euro area expanded only slightly over the three first quarters of 2014; whereas the Commission services' autumn 2014 forecasts foresee a very, with GDP rising by 1.2 % ineak return to growth for 20145 and by 1.7 % in 2015ll over the EMU with prevailing downside risks;
Amendment 12 #
2014/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas there are major disparities among the unemployment rates in different Member States, with figures varying between 5 % and 26 %; whereas percentages for youth unemployment are even higher, reaching around 50% in some Member States;
Amendment 14 #
2014/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas current projections put in evidence that nearly half of all Member States will not achieve their National EU2020 targets on education schemes and greenhouse gas reductions by 2020 and that trends regarding employment and poverty reduction are even worse moving away rather than towards the National EU2020 targets;
Amendment 16 #
2014/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas the consolidated financial statement of the Eurosystem reached EUR 2.285 trillion at the end of 2013, representing a decrease of approximately 25% over the course of 2013;
Amendment 17 #
2014/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D b (new)
Recital D b (new)
Db. whereas non-marketable assets represented the largest component of assets put forward as collateral to the Eurosystem in the course of 2013, amounting to around 25% of the total; whereas non-marketable securities, together with asset-backed securities, represent around 40 % of total assets put forward as collateral;
Amendment 24 #
2014/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas, according to the Commission services’ s' Spring 2014 forecast, the average inflation rate in the euro area was 1.3 % in 2013, down from 2.5 % in 2012; whereas inflation in the euro area has continued to be on a downward path since the beginning of 2014, reaching a low of 0.34 % in SeptembeOctober with core inflation stalled around 0.7% over the last year;
Amendment 30 #
2014/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas the level of public and private investment in the euro area has been stagnating at levels significantly below those registered before the start of the crisis; whereas the relative share of investments in GDP has been declining steadily even before the crisis;
Amendment 34 #
2014/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas credit to the private sector has moved further into negative territory, with an annual rate of change of -2.4% in December 2013, compared with -0.2% in December 2012; whereas the lack of credit affecting SMEs in some Member States is one of the main problems delaying the economic recovery; whereas the drop in lending to SMEs has been of around 35% between 2008 and 2013;
Amendment 46 #
2014/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital L
Recital L
L. whereas Article 282 TFEU states that the primary objective of the ECBuropean System of Central Banks (ESCB) is to maintain price stability; whereas article 127 TFEU states that without prejudice to such primary objective, the ESCB shall support the general economic policies in the Union; whereas Article 123 TFEU and Article 21 of the Statute of the European System of Central Banks and of the ECB prohibit the monetary financing of governmentdirect purchase of debt instruments issued by EU or National public authorities or bodies;
Amendment 50 #
2014/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. WelcomAcknowledges the swift reaction of the ECB in the face of a very challenging environment, and the fact that monetary policy has succeeded in reducing the level of stress in financial markets of the euro area, and in restoring investors’' confidence in the soundness of the single currencyingle currency; welcomes the readiness of the ECB to do whatever it takes to save the Euro; underlines and welcomes the fact that the ECB Governing Council considers explicitly that its mandate allows it to fight excessive borrowing costs for Euro area Member States; notes that this was reflected in the general reduction of long- term domestic yields – notably in the most indebted countries of the euro area – to unprecedented levels since the beginning of the crisis;
Amendment 54 #
2014/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Points out however that the announcement 'to do whatever it takes' to save the euro was overdue and that should such announcement be made earlier it would have alleviated substantially taxpayers costs in Member States experiencing financial difficulties;
Amendment 55 #
2014/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Notes that the recourse to the main refinancing operations, the medium and long-term refinancing operations with full allotment at fixed rates, the recourse to the marginal lending facility, the ELAs and the deposit facility remained all at significantly high levels throughout 2013 signalling an ongoing impairment of the monetary transmission mechanism and the Eurozone interbank lending market, albeit the situation improved significantly in comparison with the previous years as put in evidence by the stabilization of spreads a gradual normalization in interbank markets and the reduction of TARGET II imbalances;
Amendment 56 #
2014/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 c (new)
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1c. Is encouraged by the stabilization of the levels of TARGET II imbalances all over 2013 underlines that the TARGET II settlement system has played a crucial role for safeguarding the integrity of the euro area financial system;
Amendment 57 #
2014/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 d (new)
Paragraph 1 d (new)
1d. Is of the opinion that the ECB readiness to do whatever it takes to save the euro should ultimately lead the ECB to assume a role of lender of last resort for Member States with an implied need for real common economic and financial policy that may require Treaty change;
Amendment 60 #
2014/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Remains deeply concerned by the fact that economic activity remains sluggish, with the euro area posting negative GDP growth in 2013, for the second year in a row, with GDP growth being extremely weak over the first three quarters of 2014 and with high unemployment rates in many euro-area Member States reaching levels that threaten the stability of the eurozone;
Amendment 61 #
2014/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Remains deeply concerned by the fact that economic activity remains sluggish, with the euro area posting negative GDP growth in 2013, for the second year in a row, with economic activity being extremely weak over the first three quarters of 2014 and with high unemployment rates in many euro-area Member States reaching levels that threaten the stability of the eurozone;
Amendment 62 #
2014/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses its deep concern regarding the continuous fall in the inflation rate in the euro area since 2011; stresses that the important gap observed today, with between the ECB’'s aimexplicit target of keeping inflation rates below but close to 2% in the medium term, could lead to a disanchoring in medium- to longer-term inflation expectation and the current inflation rates which are close to zero and even below zero in several euro area Member States; is worried, as acknowledged by the ECB President that current deflationary trends have led in practice to a disanchoring in medium- to longer-term inflation expectations as put in evidence in expectations embedded in 5y5y swap rates which do not foresee inflation in the euro area to reach rates below but close to 2% over the next 10 years;
Amendment 65 #
2014/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Warns against the risk of deflation estimated by the IMF as being currently of around 30%; recalls that an inflation rate of close to zero in the euro area hampers the effectiveness of monetary policy; understands that the ECB attributes the reason for a very low inflation to short-term effects, and that it is confident that the medium-term objective will be met without a deflationary phase, worsen the deleveraging burden and makes adjustment more difficult in crisis hit countries; understands that the ECB expects that the package of measures it has announced in combination with a greater role played by fiscal policy should help to achieve the medium-term objective without a deflationary phase; welcomes the ECB President acknowledgement that there is a lack of aggregate demand in the euro area and that the ECB stands ready to adjust its policy stance further, including the purchase of assets, should activity and inflation indicators warrant so;
Amendment 70 #
2014/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Points out that in the perspective of further accommodative policies such as quantitative easing and having in mind the current legal challenges regarding the OMT programme it is crucial to have legal clarity and certainty for allowing these instruments to be effectively implemented;
Amendment 76 #
2014/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Points out that the ECB forecasts published in 2013 had not anticipated the actual conjunction of a flat growth and a very low inflation; calls, against this background, for the current forecasts of stronger economic growth and higher inflation in 2015 and 2016 to be read with caution; recommends in that perspective the ECB to proceed to a thorough and independent assessment of the robustness and fitness of its models and theoretical background and to publish such assessment in its next annual report; stresses the need to avoid devising fiscal and monetary policy under overoptimistic assumptions and scenarios which may result in self-defeating and pro-cyclical effects;
Amendment 85 #
2014/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. UnderlinesTakes note that Mario Draghi, in his speech at the annual central bank symposium in Jackson Hole on 22 August 2014, stated that we need action on both sides of the economy, noting that: aggregate demand policies have to be accompanied by national structural reforms and policies; on the demand side, monetary policy can and should play a central role, which currently means an accommodative monetary policy for an extended period of time; there is scope for fiscal policy to play a greater role alongside monetary policy; and no amount of fiscal or monetary accommodation can compensate for the necessary action on the supply side through structural reforms in the euro area;
Amendment 90 #
2014/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. NotesWelcomes cautiously that in addition to the lowering of its key interest rates and the increase in its refinancing operations, the ECB has adopted innovative instruments such as forward guidance and the targeted longer- term refinancing operations (TLTROs);
Amendment 98 #
2014/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Welcomes the measures announced by the ECB in June 2014 aimed at enhancing the functioning of the monetary policy transmission mechanism; acknowledges that the TLTRO introduces, for the first time, a link between loans to the non- financial private sector granted by banks and the amount of refinancing the banks can claim; regrets that such 'funding for lending' link was not made earlier as requested by the European Parliament in particular at the occasion of the LTRO operations of December 2011 and February 2012;
Amendment 102 #
2014/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Is in that perspective of the opinion that the conditionality dimension of the TLTROs should be strengthened as the current TLTRO setting allow banks to benefit from new long term cheap liquidity provision even if some of these do not increase their credit provision to the real economy already in the first year of eligibility to the programme; Recalls its position on the CRD IV negotiation process to impose additional conditions to institutions having benefited from ECB liquidity support;
Amendment 105 #
2014/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Notes that the ECB has announced that it will purchase asset-backed securities (ABS) and covered bonds in order to empower the credit-easing impact of the TLTROs; stresses that such interventions on ABS market must be conducted in a transparent manner that does not create excessive risks for the ECB’s balance sheetwhile limiting to the maximum extent possible risks transfers to the ECB's balance sheet as these would amount to implicit subsidies for the originators of the ABSs; is of the opinion that any ABS purchase should be strictly limited to the most senior tranches of the most simple and transparent products and that purchases of mezzanine tranches should be avoided while originators should retain at least retain 20% of original risks;
Amendment 120 #
2014/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Underlines that, with the measures announced in June 2014, the ECB balance sheet is expected to move towards the size it used to have at the beginning of 2012; notes that this projected increase requires strong vigilance by the ECB with respect to the credit risks it ultimately bears; asks in that perspective the Commission and the ECB itself to assess the amount of implicit subsidies that has been provided since the beginning of the crisis to the banking sector in the form of funding advantage including inter alia carry-trade operations in comparison with what would have been required by the markets or by means of potential mispricing of assets that the ESCB has accepted as collateral;
Amendment 124 #
2014/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Is of the opinion that the overall amount of implicit subsidies provided so far should be gradually recovered for the benefit of taxpayers once normal economic conditions return;
Amendment 127 #
2014/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Welcomes the fact that the ECB has repeatedly stated its readiness to use additional unconventional instruments within its mandate, and to alter the size or composition of its interventions, in the event of an excessively lengthy period of low inflation; underlines that the overall price stability objective in the Euro area is not undermined by non-conventional policies implemented by the ECB given that an expansion of reserves in excess of compulsory requirement does not give banks more resources to expand lending nor represent idle resources but merely changes the composition of liquid assets of the banking system;
Amendment 129 #
2014/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Deems that it would be useful if along with its assessment of monetary and financial conditions the ECB could provide in its statement following the monthly ECB Council of Governors meeting its assessment of the output gap extent;
Amendment 133 #
2014/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Stresses that the impact of the unconventional monetary policy measures currently in use on the real economy should not be overestimated; stresses that such measures are transitory in nature and that their main advantage is that they can give Member States time to conso and that the value of implicit subsidies that such measures provide to the banking sector should not be underestimated; stresses that such measures are transitory in nature and that their claimed purpose is to facilidtate their fiscal situation and implement structural reforms that management of the debt overhang as wiell as create some of the necessary conditions for economic activity to rebound;
Amendment 139 #
2014/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Notes that conducting non-standard monetary policies for an extended period of time createsmight exacerbate the distortions on the capital market; asks the ECB to strike the right balance between the risksevere risks and costs of exiting its accommodative monetary policy prematurely and the risks associated with further delaying such a departurend costs resulting from the distortions that such policies might carry; asks therefore the ECB to calibrate non- standard policies so as to limit such distortions;
Amendment 141 #
2014/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16a. Points out as illustrated by the leaked discussions of the ECB Council of Governors on the solvency of Cypriot banks that the concept of 'insolvency' underpinning the provision of central bank liquidity to institutions in the Euro area lacks a sufficient level of clarity as the concept refers both to a situation arising in a bank after a judicial determination of insolvency or alternatively as the situation where competent supervisory authorities determine that an institution does not comply with minimum requirements defined in the CRD/CRR framework; underlines that such a lack of clarity needs to be addressed so as to guarantee legal certainty and foster financial stability;
Amendment 145 #
2014/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Recalls that monetary policy alone cannot stimulate aggregate demand unless it is complemented by adequate fiscal and structural national reforms and policiesin a liquidity trap environment;
Amendment 153 #
2014/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Stresses as illustrated by the experience in the years ahead of the crisis that stable inflation rates, in line with the medium term rate objective defined by the ECB, might be associated with unsustainable private debt dynamics, underlying the importance to manage asset bubbles and the growth of credit even when price stability is guaranteed;
Amendment 154 #
2014/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 b (new)
Paragraph 17 b (new)
17b. Is concerned by the persistent inflation differentials within the Euro area; recommends that the ECB follow a proactive macroprudential approach associated with its monetary policy instruments so as to deal with regional asset bubbles and imbalances; asks the ECB to explore whether regional fine- tuning regarding collateral, haircut and reserve requirements may be appropriate for coping with asymmetric shocks, thereby enhancing financial stability within the monetary union while preserving price stability;
Amendment 163 #
2014/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18a. Stresses that a clear separation between monetary and fiscal policy implies that the monetary authority should not provide subsidies to institutions benefiting from liquidity provision as such subsidy provision amounts to fiscal policy;
Amendment 164 #
2014/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 b (new)
Paragraph 18 b (new)
18b. Underlines in the same rationale that a proper separation between fiscal and monetary policy implies that the fiscal authority is not supposed to interfere with the specific decisions taken by monetary authority and conversely that the monetary authority should in principle refrain from commenting on fiscal policy and requesting any specific reform or fiscal stance as counterparty to its own policy as was unfortunately the case with the letters sent by the former ECB President to the Spanish, Italian and Irish government;
Amendment 165 #
2014/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 c (new)
Paragraph 18 c (new)
18c. Deplores the fact that the ECB has exceeded its Treaty based mandate as illustrated in the aforementioned letters;
Amendment 172 #
2014/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19a. Asks the ECB to disclose to the European Parliament the secret 'Agreements on Net Financial Assets' between the National central banks and the ECB regarding inter alia the amounts of different classes of assets, including government bonds that an Euro area central bank can hold in its balance sheet;
Amendment 173 #
2014/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 b (new)
Paragraph 19 b (new)
19b. Welcomes the decision by the Council of Governors to publish its minutes from 2015 onwards; believes that such disclosure will increase the accountability and transparency of the ECB modus operandi; recalls its request that the annual ECB report should include a feedback to the inputs provided in the annual European Parliament report;
Amendment 174 #
2014/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 c (new)
Paragraph 19 c (new)
19c. Recalls its request to improve the gender balance within the institution as well as to diversify the theoretical background of its staff; welcome the gender-quota system that has been introduced; believes that the ongoing crisis has highlighted the need to increase theoretical diversity within central banks; requests the ECB to report in its next annual report on how it intends to proceed in order to diversify the analytical background of its staff;
Amendment 188 #
2014/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Emphasises that the SSM should contributes to ensurincreasing confidence in the euro area banking sector, and thus to financial stability; recalls that democratic accountability of the new SSM towards Parliament is crucial to ensuring the credibility of the new supervisory regime; stresses, therefore, the importance of the Interinstitutional Agreement between Parliament and the ECB, concluded in November 2013, on the practical modalities of the exercise of democratic accountability over the SSM, and of its full implementation;
Amendment 192 #
2014/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21a. Is of the opinion that placing the SSM under the aegis of the ECB is clearly a second best solution, largely due to the current EU treaties constraints; underlines that such solution has led to an undesirable concentration of powers in the ECB, with the potential for conflicts of interest; points out moreover that conglomerates of large insurance companies and banks cannot be effectively supervised by the ECB for legal reasons;
Amendment 193 #
2014/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 b (new)
Paragraph 21 b (new)
21b. Is of the opinion that a Treaty change is required for enabling the creation of a truly independent authority for common banking supervision;
Amendment 194 #
2014/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 c (new)
Paragraph 21 c (new)
21c. Is of the opinion that the latest stress tests deliver a clear cut illustration of the limits of the current interinstitutional setting as a scenario of deflation was not contemplated in the stress tests even though such deflation risks are far from being anecdotal;
Amendment 196 #
2014/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Notes that, despite relatively low profitability, euro area banks have steadily continued to strengthen their capital positions through a combination of capital increases and reductions in risk-weighted assets and also public support;
Amendment 197 #
2014/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Is concerned by the remaining dependence on central bank funding and public recapitalization in many banks of the euro area;
Amendment 201 #
2014/2157(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Points out that activity on government securities continues to be a major source of profit for banks of the euro area, even though credit to the non-financial private sector remains sluggish; underlines that several banks used LTRO lines for carry trade operations while reducing their credit provision to the real economy which amounts to facilitating recapitalization of the banking sector with taxpayer resources;
Amendment 3 #
2014/2144(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 38 a (new)
Citation 38 a (new)
- having regard to its resolution on 5 February 2014 on A 2030 framework for climate and energy policies,
Amendment 13 #
2014/2144(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas although it has been widely recognised that a well-balanced, growth- orientedprogressive tax system is crucial for generating sustainable growtheconomic development, sufficient concrete action has not yet been undertaken;
Amendment 18 #
2014/2144(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas many businesses, in particular multinationals, commonly structure their global tax position in a way that allows profit shifting towards lower tax jurisdictions or seek to secure preferential treatment to reduce their tax payments; whereas many Member States have actively encouraged this type of aggressive tax planning;
Amendment 35 #
2014/2144(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)
Recital F a (new)
Fa. whereas an EU-wide energy tax linked to the calorific content of fuels and their carbon output would be a powerful incentive to make the transition beyond a fossil-based economy and reduce CO2 pollution; whereas if the revenue from such a tax were invested in public services and welfare services it could effect a significant transfer of wealth towards those citizens who have a higher propensity to consume;
Amendment 44 #
2014/2144(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the agreement on the Automatic Exchange of Information and the prospects for a swift implementation thereof; calls for tax agreements to be concluded alsoon Luxembourg and Austria to fully end banking secrecy as of January 2015; calls for tax agreements currently negotiated with third countries to be concluded before 31 December 2014 and to open negotiations with other third countries, such as Singapore;
Amendment 82 #
2014/2144(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Condemns unfettered tax competition and the massive damage it causes to the internal market;
Amendment 85 #
2014/2144(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Is extremely concerned that EUR 177 billion22 in VAT revenues was lost due to non-compliance or non-collection in 2012; is also concerned that the complexity of VAT rules across the Union can create an undue burden for SMEs; __________________ 22 http://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/resou rces/documents/common/publications/studi es/vat_gap2012.pdf
Amendment 89 #
2014/2144(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls on the Commission to put forward concrete proposals to tackle the VAT gap, taking into account the recent proposals as adopted by the Council, and to evaluate proposals on a definite VAT system by Spring 2015, including an exemption for all businesses with a turnover of less than €100,000;
Amendment 99 #
2014/2144(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Takes noteRegrets the lack of ambition of the joint statement of 6 May 2014 by 10 MSs on enhanced cooperation on the FTT and the progress of its implementation; calls on participating MSs to reach an agreement on the FTT with a broad base, including derivative transactions by the end of 2014; calls on other MS to consider joining the FTT;
Amendment 117 #
2014/2144(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Calls on MSs to agree to a compulsory CCCTB for cross border companies as a comprehensive and long-term solution to tackle company tax obstacles in the Single Market; welcomes statements made by Vestager and Moscovici on making this a political priority;
Amendment 126 #
2014/2144(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Calls for an EU-wide minimum tax rate to help complete the single market;
Amendment 132 #
2014/2144(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Welcomes the courage of the whistleblowers at the origins of Luxleaks, without which the serious discussion on how to clamp down on corporate tax dodging of industrial scale would not be taking place; calls for more insiders to transmit information such as revealed through Luxleaks to the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists; calls for stronger protection of whistleblowers and for the establishment of a legal aid fund;
Amendment 137 #
2014/2144(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Calls on the Commission to develop further initiatives to promote good governance in tax matters in third countries, to tackle aggressive tax planning and to address double taxation gaps; double taxation agreements between EU Member States with third party countries must be based on common standards; in general, no double taxation agreements should be entered into with tax havens;
Amendment 158 #
2014/2144(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Welcomes country-by-country (CbC) reporting for banks as defined in CRD; calls on the Commission to introduce as a next step CbC reporting for cross-border companies in all sectors and in all the countries in which they operate through an immediate revision of the accounting directive;
Amendment 162 #
2014/2144(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Strongly regrets the opposition of most Member States and the Commission to make easily and publically accessible sufficiently clear information on the beneficial ownership of companies, trusts, foundations and other legal entities; calls on Member States to ensure full transparency and accessibility when implementing the Anti-Money Laundering directive;
Amendment 166 #
2014/2144(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Requests that information exchange is extended to cross-border tax rulings to ensure that all companies operating in the EU fulfil their obligations in all MSs and enhance transparencyCalls on the Commission to propose an amendment to the accounting directive obliging companies to notify tax rulings granted by one Member States to all Member States in which they operate, and publish essential elements of these rulings in their annual reports;
Amendment 179 #
2014/2144(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Regrets that national reforms in the public sector have resulted in inadequate staffing and resource allocation to national tax administrations and tax audit authorities; regrets that priority is often given to tax avoidance on a small scale, rather than large multinationals; recommends to MS to increase their staffing of tax administrations, as any costs spent in extra staffing would be outweighed by the additional tax revenues;
Amendment 192 #
2014/2144(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Calls on the Commission to propose, and on MSs to agree on, a common EU position and a set of criteria for the definition of tax havens; recalls the call for appropriate measures, including a public European blacklist of tax havens, by 31 December 2014; the definition should include but should not be limited to the following: "Provision for tax measures which entail no or nominal taxes, a lack of effective exchange of information with foreign tax authorities and a lack of transparency in legislative, legal or administrative provisions, or where advantages are granted even without any real economic activity and substantial economic presence within country offering such tax advantages";
Amendment 212 #
2014/2144(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18a. Strongly condemns Member States that have allowed or even encouraged their tax authorities to issue tax rulings that have led to the disconnecting of taxation and economic activity, and that as a consequence significantly contributed to the erosion of public finances;
Amendment 218 #
2014/2144(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Calls upon the Commission to intensify its use of EU state aid rules against aggressive tax planning as embodied by tax rulings and other measures; regrets that the Commission in this respect appears to have failed for over 20 years in its duty set out in article 108 TFEU to keep under constant review all systems of aid existing in Member States, and that a tax ruling such as the one for Apple in Ireland from the early 1990s is only being investigated in 201; highlights that it is hence the Commission obligation to speedily assess thousands of tax rulings issued in the past decades;
Amendment 224 #
2014/2144(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19a. Underlines that if it is established that individual tax deals constitute illegal state aid, the sums must be recouped by member states concerned; argues that as the damage of such practices impacts on the entire EU, that the recovered funds should go directly towards the funding of the €300 billion investment plan for Europe, proposed by Commission president Juncker;
Amendment 226 #
2014/2144(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 b (new)
Paragraph 19 b (new)
19b. Calls for a Parliamentary inquiry committee to- investigate alleged contraventions or maladministration in the application of Article 107(1) TFEU regarding a very high number of tax rulings issued in Member States at least since the early 1990s; - assess the Commission's breach of its duty set out in article 108 TFEU to keep under constant review all systems of aid existing in Member States, to propose to the Member States appropriate measures required by the progressive development or by the functioning of the internal market, to check, whether the aid granted by a State or through State resources is compatible with the internal market and not misused, to decide that the State concerned shall abolish or alter such aid within a certain period of time and refer the matter to the Court of Justice , if the State concerned does not comply; - investigate possible contraventions of obligations set out in Council Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 of 22 March 1999 laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, as subsequently amended, regarding the obligation to cooperate and provide all necessary documents; - assess possible breach by some Member States of the sincere cooperation principles enshrined in Article 4(3) TEU, such as the obligations to facilitate the achievement of the Union's task and to refrain from any measure which could jeopardise the attainment of the Union's objectives, given the alleged large scale of aggressive tax planning facilitated by Member States, and the likely significant consequences this has had on public finances of and in the EU; - make any proposals that it deems necessary in this matter;
Amendment 229 #
2014/2144(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 c (new)
Paragraph 19 c (new)
19c. Highlights that should there be any suspicion that these massive tax deals had a material impact on the financial contributions of member states to the EU budget, an investigation by the EU's anti- fraud arm OLAF might also be warranted;
Amendment 250 #
2014/2144(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Calls on MSs to shift the tax burden away from labour to other forms of sustainable and indirect taxation in order to promote growth and job creaand towards resources, including land, which are in short supply and whose exploitation or extraction is environmentally damaging, and especially resources whose extraction or use contributes to climate change; calls on MSs to create appropriate economic incentives consistent with the 2030 vision by enhancing taxes on pollution, especially climate-related pollution;
Amendment 290 #
2014/2144(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Underlines the fact that MSs’ taxation policy on environmental taxes should be aligned with the EU 2030 strategy; recognises that an increase in environmental taxes has the potential to generate revenues and jobs; calls on the Commission not to scrap the Energy Taxation Directive but instead to revive discussions and to come forward with appropriate complementary legislative proposals;
Amendment 296 #
2014/2144(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)
Paragraph 26 a (new)
26a. Calls for the ending of tax advantages and exemptions granted to the aviation industry; calls for the ending of the distorting impact of lower fuel duty for diesel which adds to air pollution;
Amendment 297 #
2014/2144(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)
Paragraph 26 a (new)
26a. Calls on the Commission to systematically issue country specific recommendations to phase out fossil subsidies and to shift taxes away from labour towards environmentally harmful activities;
Amendment 299 #
2014/2144(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 b (new)
Paragraph 26 b (new)
26b. Proposes an EU wide energy tax linked to the calorific content of fuels and their carbon output, where fees are charged at the point of extraction; proposes that revenues from such a system are redistributed towards investment in public services and welfare spending; underlines that this could bring about significant redistribution of wealth from those who have higher energy use towards the more vulnerable members of our societies;
Amendment 5 #
2014/2078(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas the Court of Auditors Report adopted on 11.07.2014 states that the potential saving for the EU Budget would be about 114 million euro a year if the European Parliament centralised its activities;
Amendment 48 #
2014/2078(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 c (new)
Paragraph 33 c (new)
33c. Stresses that the Parliament and the Council, in order to create long term savings in the Union budget, must address the need for a roadmap to a single seat, as stated by the Parliament in several previous resolutions;
Amendment 40 #
2014/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7 a (new)
Recital 7 a (new)
(7a) This regulation aims at ensuring a high level of protection of both animal and human health while securing the protection of the environment. The precautionary principle should be applied and this Regulation should ensure that industry demonstrates that pharmaceutical substances or veterinary medicinal products produced or placed on the market have no unacceptably harmful effects on human or animal health or any unacceptable effects on the environment.
Amendment 47 #
2014/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27
Recital 27
(27) It is recognised that the potential effect of a product on the environment may depend on the volume used and the resulting amount of the pharmaceutical substance that may reach the environment. Therefore, where there is evidence that a constituent of a medicinal product for which a generic application for a marketing authorisation is submitted is a hazard for the environment, it is appropriate to require data on the potential effect on the environment in order to safeguard the environment. In such cases applicants should endeavour to join efforts in generating such data in order to reduce costs and to reduce testing on vertebrate animals. The system as it stood until now has led to duplicate testing, wasting resources, and lack of harmonisation of environmental risk assessments. The Pharmacovigilance system has to date not been able to compensate for the effects of this poor harmonisation. This particularly applies to veterinary medicinal products authorised before the environmental risk assessment requirement came into force. Therefore, the Commission should establish a substance-based review system for the environmental risk assessment of these veterinary medicinal products. The results of the review system would be published in so-called ‘monographs'.
Amendment 49 #
2014/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30
Recital 30
Amendment 50 #
2014/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30 a (new)
Recital 30 a (new)
(30a) In the interest of safety and public, animal and environmental health, the approval period for pharmaceutical substances and veterinary medicinal products should be limited in time. At the time of subsequent approvals, any developments in science and technology should be taken into account when any decision regarding the renewal of an approval is taken. The renewal of the approval should be for a period not exceeding 15 years.
Amendment 69 #
2014/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 49
Recital 49
(49) It is necessary, in specific cases, orn specific cases it is necessary, from a public health and, animal health or environmental perspective, to complement the safety and efficacy data available at the time of authorisation with additional information following the placing of the product on the market. Therefore the obligation to conduct post-authorisation studies should be imposed on the marketing authorisation holder.
Amendment 82 #
2014/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 65
Recital 65
(65) The verification of compliance with the legal requirements through controls is of fundamental importance to ensure that the objectives of the Regulation are effectively achieved across the Union. Therefore the competent authorities of the Member States should have the power to perform inspections at all stages of production, distribution and use of veterinary medicinal products and should publish annual control reports. In order to preserve the effectiveness of the inspections, authorities should have the possibility to perform unannounced inspectionsperform a certain percentage of unannounced inspections, to be determined by a delegated act.
Amendment 83 #
2014/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 67
Recital 67
(67) In certain cases failures in Member States’ control system can substantially hinder the achievement of the objectives of this Regulation and may lead to the emergence of risks to public and animal health and the environment. Tohe Commission should ensure a harmonised approach to inspections throughout the Union, the Commissionand should be able to carry out audits in the Member States to verify the functioning of national control systems.
Amendment 120 #
2014/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2
Article 5 – paragraph 2
2. An initial marketing authorisation for a veterinary medicinal product shall be valid for an unlimited period of timefive years.
Amendment 122 #
2014/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. After the first period of five years the marketing authorisation shall be limited to a period not exceeding 15 years. After that period the applicant may apply for another 15 years authorisation. The renewal assessment shall be based on the current state of scientific knowledge and techniques and must take into account adverse effects reported under Article 76.
Amendment 125 #
2014/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) documentation on the direct or indirect risks to public or animal health or the environment of use of the antimicrobial veterinary medicinal product in animals,
Amendment 127 #
2014/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) information about risk mitigation measures to limit antimicrobial resistance development related to the use of veterinary medicinal product, including specifications that the product is not to be used as a routine prophylactic or metaphylactic measure in food producing animals, and is not to be used in prophylactic group treatments where there has been no diagnosis of disease.
Amendment 130 #
2014/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. When applying for renewal, publicly available, peer-reviewed scientific literature on the active pharmaceutical substance and its relevant metabolites dealing with side-effects on human health, the environment and non-target species and published within the last 10 years before the date of submission of the dossier shall be added by the applicant to the dossier.
Amendment 156 #
2014/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 6
Article 16 – paragraph 6
6. AThe applicant shall submit to the competent authority or the Agency may require the applicant to provide safety data concerning the potential risks posed by the generic veterinary medicinal product to the environment in case the marketing authorisation for the reference veterinary medicinal product was granted before 20 July 2000 or in case the second phase environmental risk assessment was required for the reference veterinary medicinal product.
Amendment 169 #
2014/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 3
Article 28 – paragraph 3
3. Where the application concerns an antimicrobial veterinary medicinal product, the competent authority or the Commission mayshall require the marketing authorisation holder to conduct post-authorisation studies in order to ensure that the benefit- risk balance remains positive with a view to the possible development of antimicrobial resistance.
Amendment 178 #
2014/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 1 – point c – point xiii
Article 30 – paragraph 1 – point c – point xiii
(xiii) special conditions for use, including restrictions on the use of antimicrobials in order to limit the risk of development of antimicrobial resistance, and specifying that the product is not to be used as a routine preventative measure in food producing animals, or in prophylactic group treatments where there has been no diagnosis of disease,
Amendment 184 #
2014/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 1 – point j a (new)
Article 30 – paragraph 1 – point j a (new)
(ja) Information from the environmental risk assessment of the product, in particular environmental endpoints and risk characterisation data, including ecotoxicological information on effects on non-target species and persistence of active substances and active metabolites in soil and water.
Amendment 185 #
2014/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 1 – point j b (new)
Article 30 – paragraph 1 – point j b (new)
(jb) ecotoxicological information including effects on non-target species and persistence of active substances and active metabolites in soil and water.
Amendment 187 #
2014/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 31 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Where two products have the same therapeutic effect, comparative assessments may be carried out. Products that are hazardous to the environment or to the treated animals shall be substituted by less hazardous products.
Amendment 190 #
2014/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 32 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) the product is an antimicrobial veterinary medicinal product presented for use as performance enhancer in order to promote the growth of treated animals, or to increase yields from treated animals, or as a routine prophylactic in food producing animals, or to be added to feed or water for mass medication when no disease has been diagnosed in any of the animals ;
Amendment 193 #
2014/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 1 – point g a (new)
Article 32 – paragraph 1 – point g a (new)
(ga) the product is a substance of high concern;
Amendment 194 #
2014/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 1 – point g b (new)
Article 32 – paragraph 1 – point g b (new)
(gb) active substances within the product which meet the criteria for being persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic (PBT) or very persistent and very bioaccumulative (vPvB) according to EMA guidelines, or are considered as having endocrine-disrupting properties that risk causing adverse effects in the environment;
Amendment 195 #
2014/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 1 – point h a (new)
Article 32 – paragraph 1 – point h a (new)
(ha) unacceptable side effects or secondary effects on the treated animal;
Amendment 264 #
2014/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 51 a (new)
Article 51 a (new)
Article 51a Feasibility study for monograph review system By the 1st June 2018, the Commission shall present a report to the European Parliament and the Council on establishing a substance-based review system (monographs) for the environmental risk assessment of veterinary medicinal products, to be accompanied by a legislative proposal if appropriate.
Amendment 265 #
2014/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 52 – paragraph 3
Article 52 – paragraph 3
3. The general public shall have access to information in the product database as regards the list of the authorised veterinary medicinal products, their summaries of product characteristics and package leaflets.
Amendment 266 #
2014/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 52 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 52 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Commercial sensitivity must not be used as an excuse to deny citizens access to information about chemicals affecting their bodies and those of other non-target species in the wider environment. Maximal transparency shall be ensured while protecting the most commercially sensitive information.
Amendment 267 #
2014/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 – title
Article 54 – title
Collection of data on the sales and use of antimicrobial veterinary medicinal products
Amendment 269 #
2014/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 – paragraph 1
Article 54 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall collect relevant and comparable data on the volume of sales and the use of veterinary antimicrobial medicinal products. These data shall include: (a) volume of sales in terms of weight and monetary value for each antimicrobial type; (b) use of antimicrobials including species treated, disease or infection being treated, and method of treatment.
Amendment 272 #
2014/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 54 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. These data should provide detail at least by species and by antibiotic class and on a per-farm level.
Amendment 277 #
2014/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 54 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Member States shall collect relevant and comparable data on the volume of sales and the use of anti-parasitic and hormonal veterinary medicinal products, and make these available to the Agency.
Amendment 306 #
2014/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 70 – paragraph 3
Article 70 – paragraph 3
3. By way of derogation from Article 69, veterinary medicinal products authorised before 20 July 2000 as well as veterinary medicinal products authorised after that date but which were identified as potentially harmful to the environment in the course of the environmental risk assessment shall be reassessed, or have no environmental risk assessments or incomplete ones, shall be reassessed in line with Annex II before a harmonised summary of the product characteristics is prepared.
Amendment 311 #
2014/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 73 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 73 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) any environmental incidents observedadverse or unintended reaction observed in non-target species in the wider environment following administration of a veterinary medicinal product to an animal;
Amendment 319 #
2014/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 74 – paragraph 2
Article 74 – paragraph 2
2. The Agency shall, in collaboration with the Member States and the Commission, draw up the functional specifications for the pharmacovigilance database. These shall include environmental monitoring data which would report undesirable effects on non-target species in the ecosystem, and extend sources of inputs to the pharmacovigilance system to include observation and monitoring by specialists who are not necessarily veterinarians.
Amendment 323 #
2014/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 76 – paragraph 3
Article 76 – paragraph 3
3. Competent authorities mayshall, on their own initiative or on request from the Agency, request the marketing authorisation holder to collect specific pharmacovigilance data, in particular regarding the use of a veterinary medicinal product in specified animal species, in the context of public and animal health, safety of the persons administering the product, and the protection of the environment. The authority shall state in detail the reasons for the request and inform other competent authorities and the Agency thereof.
Amendment 374 #
2014/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 110 – paragraph 1 – point f a (new)
Article 110 – paragraph 1 – point f a (new)
(fa) the condition which is being treated;
Amendment 383 #
2014/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 110 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 110 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. In the case of antimicrobials critically important for human use, the prescribed medication may only be used for the animals examined by the person who issued the prescription. The prescribed medication may only be used for the diagnosed disease.
Amendment 385 #
2014/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 111 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 111 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Antimicrobials may only be issued under prescription by a vet or a suitably qualified animal health professional to food producing animals after all the preventive measures listed under Annex 3a have been fulfilled. Preventative or prophylactic mass medication in drink or water when no disease has been diagnosed shall be prohibited. No antimicrobial group treatments should be permitted, except for where disease has been diagnosed in some of the animals.
Amendment 402 #
2014/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 116 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 116 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. By way of derogation from Article 111, where there is no authorised veterinary medicinal product in a Member State for a condition affecting a food-producing animal of a non-aquatic species, the veterinarian responsible may, under his direct personal responsibility and in particular to avoid causing unacceptable suffering, exceptionally treat the animal concerned with any of the following, with the exception of antimicrobial products used prophylactically in an individual or a group where there is no diagnosis of disease in any of the animals:
Amendment 419 #
2014/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 116 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Article 116 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
The Commission may, by means of implementing acts, establish a list of veterinary medicinal products authorised in the Union for use in terrestrial animals which can be used for treatment of food- producing animals of an aquatic species in accordance with paragraph 1. This provision is strictly limited to closed aquatic systems with specific waste water treatment facilities. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 145(2).
Amendment 421 #
2014/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 116 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2 – point a
Article 116 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2 – point a
(a) risks to the environment if aquatic animals are treated with these medicinal products, in line with Annex II ;
Amendment 425 #
2014/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 118 – paragraph 1
Article 118 – paragraph 1
1. Antimicrobial medicinal products shall only be used in accordance with Articles 115 and 116 to treat conditions for which there is no other treatment available, and the use of which would not present a risk to public or animal health. once the applicable conditions outlined in Annex 3a have been fulfilled, and the use of which would not present a risk to public or animal health, and specifically is not for routine prophylactic use or a prophylactic group treatment where there is no diagnosis of disease.
Amendment 430 #
2014/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 118 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – point a
Article 118 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – point a
(a) risks to public health if the antimicrobial product is used in accordance with paragraph 1;, including the risks involved in using antimicrobials critical to human health in food producing animals.
Amendment 438 #
2014/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 125 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 125 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. The Commission shall ensure a harmonised approach to inspections and controls of veterinary medicines throughout the Union.
Amendment 441 #
2014/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 125 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Article 125 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 443 #
2014/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 125 – paragraph 6
Article 125 – paragraph 6
6. Inspection reports shall be uploaded to the appropriate database, with continuous access for all competent authorities. Final inspection results shall be made public.
Amendment 445 #
2014/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 128 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 128 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. The Agency and the Commission shall ensure a harmonised approach to veterinary medicine inspections.
Amendment 454 #
2014/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 141 – paragraph 1 – point h a (new)
Article 141 – paragraph 1 – point h a (new)
(ha) tackle the contribution of farming practices to the development of antimicrobial resistance, by building on the existing action plans of the Commission and Member States, specifically by developing and implementing strategies to: – reduce overall use, – reduce the use of antimicrobials that are critically important for human use, and – end routine prophylactic use. This work shall be laid out in a plan submitted to the Commission no later than two years from adoption of this Regulation. The plan shall contain targets for the reductions in use and a timetable for achieving reductions.
Amendment 460 #
2014/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex 3 a (new)
Annex 3 a (new)
Amendment 23 #
2014/0256(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10 a (new)
Regulation (EC) No 726/2004
Article 57 – paragraph 1 – points u, v and w (new)
Article 57 – paragraph 1 – points u, v and w (new)
(10a) In Article 57(1) the following points are added: "(u) co-ordination of the provision of information on active substances of veterinary medicinal products authorised under Union procedures, for the purpose of implementing a review system (Monograph system); (v) assisting Member States in providing information on active substances of veterinary medicinal products authorised under procedures other than the Union procedures, for the purpose of implementing a review system (Monograph System); (w) setting up a free of charge public database that lists information on active substances of veterinary medicinal products according to the review system (Monograph System), and updating on a regular basis. The respective information shall be presented in an easily understandable manner.".
Amendment 25 #
2014/0256(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11 a (new)
Regulation (EC) No 726/2004
Article 57 – paragraph 3 (new)
Article 57 – paragraph 3 (new)
(11a) In Article 57, the following paragraph is added: '(3) The database according to point (w) paragraph 1 of this Article, shall contain data on physico-chemical, ecotoxicological and behavioural properties of the active substance and its respective metabolites. The database shall list information on all veterinary medicines marketed in the Union. The Agency shall prepare a list of all veterinary medicines and active substances marketed in the Union in accordance with Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No .../... of the European Parliament and of the Council of ... on veterinary medicinal products (2014/0257(COD)).'.
Amendment 63 #
2014/0121(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Title
Title
Proposal for a DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL amending Directive 2007/36/EC as regards the encouragement of long-term shareholder engagement and, Directive 2013/34/EU and Directive 2004/109/EC as regards certain elements of the corporate governance statementreporting (Text with EEA relevance)
Amendment 64 #
2014/0121(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) The financial crisis has revealed that shareholders in many cases supported managers' excessive short-term risk taking. Moreover, there is clear evidence that the current level of ‘monitoring’ of investee companies and engagement by institutional investors and asset managers is inadequate, which may lead to suboptimal corporate governance and performance of listed companies. This specific proposal should have a broad focus to increase transparency and to respect and ensure active engagement from effected stakeholders, hence other actors such as employees, consumers and local communities are highly relevant in the overall context of stakeholder involvement.
Amendment 66 #
2014/0121(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) In the Action Plan on European company law and corporate governance16 the Commission announced a number of actions in the area of corporate governance, in particular to encourage long-term shareholder engagement and to enhance transparency between companies and investors. Additional steps could be envisaged, including further assessing the way asset managers' incentives are structured to take better account of long- term considerations and requiring more transparency from asset managers on the fulfilment of their fiduciary duties. Ideas have also been advanced to encourage greater long-term shareholder engagement, which could be subject to further consideration, such as analysing the possibility of options around granting increased voting rights or dividends to long-term investors. __________________ 16 COM/2012/0740 final.
Amendment 68 #
2014/0121(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) In order to further facilitate the exercise of shareholder rights and engagement between listed companies and shareholders, listed companies should have the possibility to have their shareholders identified and directly communicate with them. Therefore, this Directive should provide for a framework to ensure that shareholders can be identified to secure transparency and improve dialogue.
Amendment 72 #
2014/0121(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 11 a (new)
Recital 11 a (new)
(11a) To extend the idea of shareholder engagement companies should consider the creation of representative shareholder bodies (shareholder panels) to monitor the activities of fund managers. Such panels would consist of members elected by individual investors or current or future recipients of pensions managed by the asset manager of the company.
Amendment 74 #
2014/0121(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) Institutional investors should annually disclose to the public how their equity investment strategy is aligned with the profile and duration of their liabilities and how it contributes to the medium to long- term performance of their assets. Where they make use of asset managers, either through discretionary mandates involving the management of assets on an individual basis or through pooled funds, they should disclose to the public the main elements of the arrangement with the asset manager with regard to a number of issues, such as whether it incentivises the asset manager to align its investment strategy and decisions with the profile and duration of the liabilities of the institutional investor, whether it incentivises the asset manager to make investment decisions based on medium to long-term company performance and to engage with companies, how it evaluates the asset managers performance, the structure of the consideration for the asset management services and the targeted portfolio turnover. This would contribute to a proper alignment of interests between the final beneficiaries of institutional investors, the asset managers and the investee companies and potentially to the development of longer-term investment strategies and longer-term relationships with investee companies involving shareholder engagement. hereby encouraging cooperative models of enterprise to align ownership and employment incentives by ensuring employees representation on boards as mandatory and to set up an stakeholder body to ensure dialogue between corporate management and shareholders on the investment strategy and how to secure the shareholder engagement plan.
Amendment 77 #
2014/0121(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) Asset managers should be required to disclose to institutional investorsthe public how their investment strategy and the implementation thereof is in accordance with the asset management arrangement and how the investment strategy and decisions contributes to medium to long- term performance of the assets of the institutional investor. Moreover, they should disclose whether they make investment decisions on the basis of judgements about medium-to long- term performance of the investee company, how their portfolio was composed and the portfolio turnover, actual or potential conflicts of interest and whether the asset manager uses proxy advisors for the purpose of their engagement activities. This information would allow the institutional investoraffected stakeholders to better monitor the asset manager, provide incentives for a proper alignment of interests and for shareholder engagement.
Amendment 78 #
2014/0121(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) In order to improve the information in the equity investment chain Member States should impose a fiduciary duty on non- executive directors, accountants and external auditors and ensure that proxy advisors adopt and implement adequate measures to guarantee that their voting recommendations are accurate and reliable, reliable and in the best interest of the affected stakeholders, based on a thorough analysis of all the information that is available to them and are not affected by any existing or potential conflict of interest or business relationship. They should disclose certain key information related to the preparation of their voting recommendations and avoid any actual or potential conflict of interest or business relationships that may influence the preparation of the voting recommendations.
Amendment 79 #
2014/0121(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) Since remuneration is one of the key instruments for companies to align their interests and those of their directors and in view of the crucial role of directors in companies, it is important that the remuneration policy of companies is determined in an appropriate manner. Without prejudice to the provisions on remuneration of Directive 2013/36/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council17 listed companies and their shareholders should have the possibility to define the remuneration policy of the directors of their company and disclose in public the pay ratio and gender pay ratio between directors and employees in the company. __________________ 17 Directive 2013/36/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on access to the activity of credit institutions and the prudential supervision of credit institutions and investment firms OJ L 176, 27.6.2013, p. 338..
Amendment 84 #
2014/0121(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) In order to ensure that shareholders have an effective say on the remuneration policy, they should be granted the right to approve the remuneration policy, on the basis of a clear, understandable and comprehensive overview of the company's remuneration policy, which should be aligned with the business strategy, objectives, values and long-term interests of the company and should incorporate measures to avoid conflicts of interest. Companies should only pay remuneration to their directors in accordance with a remuneration policy that has been approved by shareholders. The approved remuneration policy and pay ratio should be publicly disclosed without delay.
Amendment 87 #
2014/0121(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) To ensure that the implementation of the remuneration policy is in line with the approved policy, shareholders should be granted the right to vote on the company’s remuneration report in the general meeting. In order to ensure accountability of directors the remuneration report should be clear and understandable and should provide a comprehensive overview of the remuneration granted to individual directors in the last financial year viewed in a clear table the pay ratio and gender pay ratio between directors and employees . Where the shareholders vote against the remuneration report, the company should explain in the nextneed to adjust the remuneration policy and report how the vote of the shareholders has been taken into account and incorporated into the company's remuneration policy in the next remuneration report to the next general assembly.
Amendment 88 #
2014/0121(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 17 a (new)
Recital 17 a (new)
(17a) Increased transparency regarding the activities of large companies, and in particular regarding profits made, taxes on profit paid and subsidies received, is essential for ensuring the trust of shareholders and other EU citizens in companies. Mandatory reporting in this area can therefore be seen as an important element of the corporate responsibility of companies to shareholders and society.
Amendment 93 #
2014/0121(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) Transactions with related parties may cause prejudice to companies and their shareholders, as they may give the related party the opportunity to appropriate value belonging to the company. Thus, adequate safeguards for the protection of shareholders’ interests are of importance. For this reason Member States should ensure that related party transactions representing more than 5 %, depending on national conditions and practices, should decide whether the requirement to hold a shareholder vote is proportionate for all related party transactions of 5% or more or whether it should apply only to transactions which are not concluded on market terms of the companies’ assets or transactions which can have a significant impact on profits or turnover should be submitted to a vote by the shareholders in a general meeting. Where the related party transaction involves a shareholder, this shareholder should be excluded from that vote. The company should not be allowed to conclude the transaction before the shareholders’ approval of the transaction. For transactions with related parties that represent more than 10.25 % of their assets companies should publicly announce such transactions at the time of the conclusion of the transaction, and accompany the announcement by a report from an independent third party assessing whether the transaction is on market terms and confirming that the transaction is fair and reasonable from the perspective of the shareholders, including minority shareholders. Member States should be allowed to exclude transactions entered into between the company and its wholly owned subsidiaries. Member States should also be able to allow companies to request the advance approval by shareholders for certain clearly defined types of recurrent transactions above 5 percent of the assets, and to request from shareholders an advance exemption from the obligation to produce an independent third party report for recurrent transactions above 1 percent of the assets, under certain conditions, in order to facilitate the conclusion of such transactions by companies.
Amendment 97 #
2014/0121(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) In order to ensure that the requirements set out in this Directive or the measures implementing this Directive are applied in practice, any infringement of those requirements should be subject to penaltiea harsher penalty regime by including the introduction of individual sanctions, individual fines and directors disqualifications against the company's executive directors and proxy advisors. To that end, penalties should be sufficiently dissuasive and proportionate.
Amendment 102 #
2014/0121(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b
Directive 2007/36/EC
Article 1 – paragraph 4
Article 1 – paragraph 4
4. Chapter Ib shall apply to proxy advisors, institutional investors and to asset managers to the extent that they invest, directly or through a collective investment undertaking, on behalf of institutional investors, in so far they invest in shares.
Amendment 104 #
2014/0121(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive 2007/36/EC
Article 2 – point h
Article 2 – point h
(h) ”shareholder engagement’ means the monitoring by a shareholder alone or together with other shareholders in a shareholder panel, of companies on matters such as strategy, performance, risk, capital structure and corporate governance, having a dialogue with companies on these matters and voting at the general meeting.
Amendment 105 #
2014/0121(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive 2007/36/EC
Article 2 – point j a (new)
Article 2 – point j a (new)
(ja) "stakeholder" means a person, group or local community that has interest or concerns or is directly affected by the company's decisions or strategy.
Amendment 122 #
2014/0121(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Directive 2007/36/EC
Chapter IB – article 3f – paragraph 2 – point a
Chapter IB – article 3f – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) the proxy advisor, the institutional investor or the asset manager, or other companies affiliated to them, offer financial products to or have other commercial relationships with the investee company;
Amendment 123 #
2014/0121(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Directive 2007/36/EC
Chapter IB – article 3f – paragraph 2 – point b
Chapter IB – article 3f – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) a director of the proxy advisor, the institutional investor or the asset manager is also a director of the investee company;
Amendment 124 #
2014/0121(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Directive 2007/36/EC
Chapter IB – article 3f – paragraph 2 – point c
Chapter IB – article 3f – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) a proxy advisor, an asset manager managing the assets of an institution for occupational retirement provision invests in a company that contributes to that institution;
Amendment 125 #
2014/0121(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Directive 2007/36/EC
Chapter IB – article 3f – paragraph 2 – point d
Chapter IB – article 3f – paragraph 2 – point d
(d) the proxy advisor, the institutional investor or asset manager is affiliated with a company for whose shares a takeover bid has been launched.
Amendment 127 #
2014/0121(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Directive 2007/36/EC
Chapter IB – article 3f – paragraph 3
Chapter IB – article 3f – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall ensure that proxy advisors, institutional investors and asset managers publicly disclose on an annual basis their engagement policy, how it has been implemented and the results thereof. The information referred to in the first sentence shall at leastlso be available on the company's website. IProxy advisors, institutional investors and asset managers shall, for each company in which they hold shares, disclose if and how they cast their votes in the general meetings of the companies concerned and provide an explanation for their voting behaviour. Where an asset manager casts votes on behalf of a proxy advisor or an institutional investor, the proxy advisor and the institutional investor shall make a reference as to where such voting information has been published by the asset manager.
Amendment 142 #
2014/0121(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Directive 2007/36/EC
Chapter IB – article 3i – paragraph 1
Chapter IB – article 3i – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that proxy advisors adopt and implement adequate measures to guarantee that their voting recommendations are accurate and reliable, reliable and in the best interest of this client, based on a thorough analysis of all the information that is available to them.
Amendment 145 #
2014/0121(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Directive 2007/36/EC
Chapter IB – article 3i – paragraph 2 – point d
Chapter IB – article 3i – paragraph 2 – point d
(d) whether they have dialogues with the companies which are the object of their voting recommendations, and, if so, the extent and nature thereof, but in no conflict of interests;
Amendment 146 #
2014/0121(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Directive 2007/36/EC
Chapter IB – article 3i – paragraph 2 – point f
Chapter IB – article 3i – paragraph 2 – point f
(f) the total number of voting recommendations and identification of stakeholders provided in the last year.
Amendment 147 #
2014/0121(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Directive 2007/36/EC
Chapter IB – article 3i – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Chapter IB – article 3i – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
That information shall be published on their website and remain available for at least threfive years from the day of publication.
Amendment 148 #
2014/0121(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Directive 2007/36/EC
Chapter IB – article 3i – paragraph 3
Chapter IB – article 3i – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall ensure that proxy advisors identify and disclosguarantee without undue delay to their clients and the company concerned anyno actual or potential conflict of interest or business relationships that may influence the preparation of the voting recommendations and the actions they have undertaken to eliminate or mitigate the actual or potential conflict of interest.“
Amendment 151 #
2014/0121(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Directive 2007/36/EC
Article 9a – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 9a – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that shareholders have the right to vote on the general meeting on the remuneration policy as regards directors and the pay ratio between directors and employees. Companies shall only pay remuneration to their directors in accordance with a remuneration policy that has been approved by shareholders at the general meeting. The policy shall be submitted for approval by the shareholders at any change in the ratio and at least every threesecond years.
Amendment 155 #
2014/0121(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Companies may, in case of recruitment of new board members, decide to pay remuneration to an individual director outside the approved policy, where the remuneration package of the individual director has received prior approval by shareholders on the basis of information on the matters referred to in paragraph 3. The remuneration may be awarded provisionally pending approval by the vote in the general meeting by shareholders.
Amendment 173 #
2014/0121(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Directive 2007/36/EC
Article 9b – paragraph 1 – point f
Article 9b – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) information on how the remuneration of directors was established in accordance to the published pay ratio between directors and employees and the gender pay ratio, including on the role of the remuneration committee.
Amendment 189 #
2014/0121(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Directive 2007/36/EC
Article 9c – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 9c – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
2. Member States shall ensure that transactions with related parties representing more than 5% of the companies’ assets or transactions which can have a significant impact on profits or turnover are submitted to a vote by the shareholders in a general meeting, depending on national conditions and practices, decide whether the requirement to hold a shareholder vote is proportionate for all transactions with related parties representing more than 5% of the companies’ assets or whether it should apply only to transactions which are not concluded on market terms. Where the related party transaction involves a shareholder, this shareholder shall be excluded from that vote. The company shall not conclude the transaction before the shareholders’ approval of the transaction. The company may however conclude the transaction under the condition of shareholder approval.
Amendment 196 #
2014/0121(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Directive 2007/36/EC
Chapter IIA – article 14b – paragraph 1
Chapter IIA – article 14b – paragraph 1
Member States shall lay down the rules on penalties applicable to infringements of the fiduciary duty of non-executive directors, accountants, external auditors and any proxy advisors in addition to infringements of national provisions adopted pursuant to this Directive and shall take all measures necessary to ensure that they are implemented. The penalties provided for must be effective, proportionate and dissuasive. Member States shall notify those provisions to the Commission by [[date for transposition at the latest and shall notify it without delay of any subsequent amendment affecting them.
Amendment 197 #
2014/0121(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph -1(new)
Article 2 – paragraph -1(new)
Directive 2013/34/EC
Article 18 a (new)
Article 18 a (new)
The following Article is inserted: “Article 18a Additional disclosure for large undertakings; In the notes to the financial statements, large undertakings shall, in addition to the information required under Articles 16, 17 18 and any other provisions of this Directive, disclose information in respect of the following matters, specifying by Member State and by third country in which it has a subsidiary: a) name(s), nature of activities and geographical location; b) turnover; c) number of employees and gender ratio on a full time equivalent basis; d) profit or loss before tax; e) tax on profit or loss; f) public subsidies received. g) the extent of stranded assets on the balance sheets of companies with whom they have made investments 2. Undertakings whose average number of employees on a consolidated basis during the financial year does not exceed 500 and, on their balance sheet dates, do not exceed on a consolidated basis either a balance sheet total of 86 million euros or a net turnover of 100 million euros shall be exempt from the obligation set out in paragraph 1 of this Article. 3. The obligation set out in paragraph 1 of this Article shall not apply to any undertaking governed by the law of a Member State whose parent undertaking is subject to the laws of a Member State and whose information is included in the information disclosed by that parent undertaking in accordance with paragraph 1 of this Article. 4. The information referred to in paragraph 1 shall be audited in accordance with Directive 2006/43/EC1a. 5. The Commission shall conduct a general assessment as regards potential economic consequences of the public disclosure of this type of information, including the impact on competitiveness and investment. The Commission shall submit its report to the Council and the European Parliament by 31 December 2015. __________________ 1a Directive2006/43/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 May 2006 on statutory audits of annual accounts and consolidated accounts, amending Council Directives 78/660/EEC and 83/349/EEC and repealing Council Directive 84/253/EEC (OJ L 157, 9.6.2006, p. 87).
Amendment 198 #
2014/0121(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 a (new)
Article 2 a (new)
Directive 2004/109/EC
Article 16 a (new)
Article 16 a (new)