BETA

53 Amendments of Kristina WINBERG related to 2016/0176(COD)

Kristina WINBERG

Proposal for a directive
Recital 4

(4) It is necessary to respond to the challenges identified in the implementation report on Directive 2009/50/EC. The Union should aim at establishing a more attractive and effective EU-wide scheme for highly skilled workers. The Union approach on attracting highly skilled workers should be further harmonised and the EU Blue Card should be made the primary tool in that regard with faster procedures, more flexible and inclusive admission criteria, and more extensive rights including more facilitated intra-EU mobility. As this would entail substantial changes to Directive 2009/50/EC, that Directive should therefore be repealed and replaced by a new Directive.deleted

2017/03/03
Committee: LIBE

Kristina WINBERG

Proposal for a directive
Recital 5

(5) ~~An EU-wide admission system to attract and retain highly skilled workers into the Union should be created.~~ Member States should issue an EU Blue Card instead of a national permit to all applicants falling within the scope of this Directive. Member States should retain the right to issue permits other than EU Blue Card for any purpose of employment to third-country nationals who fall outside of the scope of this Directive, subject to the limitations following from other directives in the area of labour migrationnational permit instead of an EU Blue Card.

2017/03/03
Committee: LIBE

Kristina WINBERG

Proposal for a directive
Recital 6

(6) The concept of highly skilled worker should not replace the concept of highly qualified worker in order to emphasise that both formal educational qualifications and equivalent professional experience should be taken equally into account as criteria for admission. According to a Council Recommendation of 20 December 201232 , the validation of learning outcomes, namely competences (knowledge, skills and attitudes)33 acquired through non-formal and informal learning can play an important role in enhancing employability and mobility. It recommends Member States to have in place, no later than 2018, arrangements for the validation of non- formal and informal learning. As mechanisms and arrangements for the evaluation and validation of professional experience are not readily available in all Member States, an additional transposition period of two years after the entry into force of this Directive should be provided for the provisions related to recognising professional experience in order to enable Member States, where necessary, to develop such mechanisms and arrangements. Member States’ National Contact Points on the EU Blue Card should be involved in effective cooperation with stakeholders and networks in the education, training, employment and youth sectors, as well as other relevant policy areas, for the purpose of recognising professional experience under this Directive. _________________ 32Council Recommendation of 20 December 2012 on the validation of non- formal and informal learning (2012/C 398/01) (OJ C 398, 22.12.2012, p. 1). 33 Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 on key competences for lifelong learning (OJ L 394, 30.12.2006, p. 10).

2017/03/03
Committee: LIBE

Kristina WINBERG

Proposal for a directive
Recital 8

(8) Beneficiaries of international protection as defined in Article 2(a) of Directive 2011/95/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council34 have a wide set of rights including labour market access in the Member State having granted them protection. In order to further promote social inclusion of these persons and enhance their labour market opportunities across the Union, those who are highly skilled should not be entitled to apply for an EU Blue Card. They should not be subject to the same rules as any other third- country national falling within the scope of this Directive, ~~while~~ holding the statuses of beneficiary of international protection and EU Blue Card ~~holder~~ in parallel. However, for reasons of legal clarity and coherence, the provisions on equal treatment and family reunification of this Directive should not apply to this group of EU Blue Card holders in the Member State which granted them international protection. Those rights should remain regulated under the asylum acquis and, where applicable, Council Directive 2003/86/EC35 . _________________ 34 Directive 2011/95/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on standards for the qualification of third-country nationals or stateless persons as beneficiaries of international protection, for a uniform status for refugees or for persons eligible for subsidiary protection, and for the content of the protection granted (recast) (OJ L 337, 20.12.2011, p. 9). 35Council Directive 2003/86/EC of 22 September 2003 on the right to family reunification (OJ L 251, 3.10.2003, p. 12) should not be granted.

2017/03/03
Committee: LIBE

Kristina WINBERG

Proposal for a directive
Recital 9

(9) The transfer of responsibility for protection of beneficiaries of international protection is outside the scope of this Directive~~: the protection status and the rights associated with it should not be transferred to another Member State on the basis of the issuance of an EU Blue Card~~.

2017/03/03
Committee: LIBE

Kristina WINBERG

Proposal for a directive
Recital 10

(10) In order to facilitate the independent intra-EU mobility and business activities of those highly skilled third-country nationals who are beneficiaries of the right to free movement, they should be given access to the EU Blue Card according to the same rules as any other third-country national falling within the scope of this Directive. This should apply regardless of whether or not the Union citizen of reference has exercised the fundamental right to move and reside freely under Article 21 TFEU and regardless of whether the third- country national concerned was first an EU Blue Card holder or a beneficiary of the right to free movement. The rights that these third-country nationals acquire as EU Blue Card holders should be without prejudice to rights they may enjoy under Directive 2004/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council36 . For reasons of legal clarity and coherence, in terms of family reunification and equal treatment the rules under Directive 2004/38/EC should prevail. All provisions regarding the beneficiaries of theThis Directive should not apply to third-country nationals who enjoy EU-long term resident status in a Member State and who exercise their right to free movement in this Directive should also apply where that right is derived from those third- country nationals who enjoy rights of free movement equivalent to those of Union citizens under agreements either between the Union and its Member States and third countries or between the Union and third countries. _________________ 36Directive 2004/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States (OJ L 158, 30.4.2004, p. 77)side in another Member State in order to carry out an economic activity in an employed or self-employed capacity.

2017/03/03
Committee: LIBE

Kristina WINBERG

Proposal for a directive
Recital 13

(13) It is necessary to provide for ~~a flexible~~ demand-driven admission system based on objective criteria, such as a work contract ~~or a binding job offer~~ of at least 612 months, a salary threshold adaptable by the Member States to the situation in its labour market and higher professional qualifications.

2017/03/03
Committee: LIBE

Kristina WINBERG

Proposal for a directive
Recital 15

(15) ~~In order to ensure a sufficient level of harmonisation in the admission conditions throughout the Union, both minimum and maximum factors for c~~Calculating the salary threshold should be determined. by the Member State~~s should fix their threshold in accordance with the situation and organisation of their respective labour markets and their general immigration policies~~ concerned.

2017/03/03
Committee: LIBE

Kristina WINBERG

Proposal for a directive
Recital 16

(16) A lower salary threshold should be laid down for specific professions where it is considered by the Member State concerned that there is a particular lack of available workforce and where such professions belong to major group 1 or 2 of the ISCO (“International Standard Classification of Occupation”) classification.deleted

2017/03/03
Committee: LIBE

Kristina WINBERG

Proposal for a directive
Recital 17

(17) A lower salary threshold should also be laid down to benefit third-country nationals during a certain period after their graduation. This period should be granted each time that the third-country national reaches a level of education relevant for the purposes of this Directive, namely levels 6, 7 or 8 of ISCED 2011, or levels 6, 7 or 8 of EQF, according to the national law of the Member State concerned. It should apply whenever the third-country national applies for an initial or renewed EU Blue Card within three years from the date of obtaining the qualifications and in addition, when that third-country national applies for a first renewal of the EU Blue Card and the initial EU Blue Card was issued for a period shorter than 24 months. After these grace periods – which may run in parallel – have elapsed the young professionals can be reasonably expected to have gained sufficient professional experience in order to fulfil the regular salary threshold.deleted

2017/03/03
Committee: LIBE

Kristina WINBERG

Proposal for a directive
Recital 19

(19) It should ~~not be necessa~~be mandatory for a third- country national to hold a travel document whose validity covers the whole duration of ~~the initial EU Blue Card. Third-country nationals should be allowed to renew their travel document while holding~~ an EU Blue Card.

2017/03/03
Committee: LIBE

Kristina WINBERG

Proposal for a directive
Recital 21

(21) Member States should be allowed to decide whether to grant, withdraw or refuse to renew an EU Blue Card where the EU Blue Card holder has either failed to comply with the conditions for mobility under this Directive or has repetitively exercised the mobility rights in an abusive manner, for example by applying for EU Blue Cards in second Member States and beginning employment immediately while it is clear that the conditions will not be fulfilled and the application will be refused.

2017/03/03
Committee: LIBE

Kristina WINBERG

Proposal for a directive
Recital 22

(22) Any decision to reject an application for an EU Blue Card or to withdraw or refuse to renew an EU Blue Card should take into consideration the specific circumstances of the case and respect the principle of proportionality. In particular, where the ground for rejection is related to the activity of the employer, a minor misconduct should not in any case constitute the sole ground for rejecting an application or withdrawing or refusing to renew the permit.deleted

2017/03/03
Committee: LIBE

Kristina WINBERG

Proposal for a directive
Recital 27

(27) Since EU Blue Card holders are highly skilled workers contributing to addressing labour and skills shortages in key sectors, the principle of access to the labour market should be the general rule. However, iIn circumstances where the domestic labour market undergoes serious disturbances such as a high level of unemployment in a given occupation or sector, which may be limited to particular regions or other parts of the territory, a Member State should be able to take into account the situation of its labour market before issuing an EU Blue Card.

2017/03/03
Committee: LIBE

Kristina WINBERG

Proposal for a directive
Recital 28

(28) In case Member States decide to make use of this possibility for a given occupation or sector, possibly in a particular part of their territory, they should send a notification to the Commission hereof, explaining the economic, social and other reasons justifying the decision to introduce such labour market test for the next 12 months and do so again for every subsequent 12 month period. Member States may involve social partners in the assessment of the circumstances related to the domestic labourt is within the exclusive competence of the Member State to decide to market. This verification should not be possible when an EU Blue Card is renewed in the first Member State. For EU Blue Cards in a second Member State, taking into account the situation of the labour market should only be possible if that Member State has also introduced checks for first applications for third- country nationals coming from third countries and after a separate justified notification. In case Member States decide to make use of this possibility, they should communicate this in a clear, accessible and transparent way to applicants and employers, including onlin use of this possibility for any sector and for any period of time.

2017/03/03
Committee: LIBE

Kristina WINBERG

Proposal for a directive
Recital 34

(34) Professional qualifications acquired by a third-country national in another Member State should be recognised in the same way as those of Union citizens. Qualifications acquired in a third country should be taken into account in accordance with Directive 2005/36/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council42 . Where a third- country national is applying for an EU Blue Card to practice an unregulated profession, Member States should avoid excessive formal requirements and full recognition procedures regarding qualifications, wherever sufficient evidence can be otherwise obtained. _________________ 42Directive 2005/36/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 September 2005 on the recognition of professional qualifications (OJ L 255, 30.9.2005, p. 22).deleted

2017/03/03
Committee: LIBE

Kristina WINBERG

Proposal for a directive
Recital 35

(35) The rights acquired by a beneficiary of international protection as an EU Blue Card holder should be without prejudice to rights enjoyed by the person concerned under Directive 2011/95/EU and under the Geneva Convention in the Member State which granted the protection status. In that Member State, in order to avoid situations of conflicting rules, the provisions on equal treatment and family reunification of this Directive should not apply. Persons who are beneficiaries of international protection in one Member State and EU Blue Card holders in another should enjoy the same rights including equality of treatment with nationals of the Member State of residence as any other EU Blue Card holders in the latter Member State.Deleted

2017/03/03
Committee: LIBE

Kristina WINBERG

(36) Favourable conditions for family reunification and unhindered access to work for spouses should be a fundamental element of this Directive in order to facilitate the attraction of highly skilled workers. Specific derogations from Council Directive 2003/86/EC should be provided for in order to reach this aim. Conditions related to integration or waiting periods should not be applied before allowing family reunification, as highly skilled workers and their families are likely to have favourable starting point regarding integration in the host community. With the aim of facilitating the swift entry of highly skilled workers, residence permits to their family members should be issued at the same time as the EU Blue Card, where the relevant conditions are fulfilled and the applications were lodged simultaneously.deleted

2017/03/03
Committee: LIBE

Kristina WINBERG

Proposal for a directive
Recital 37

(37) In order to attract highly skilled workers and encourage their continuous stay in the Union, while enabling mobility within the Union as well as circular migration, derogations from Council Directive 2003/109/EC43 should be provided for in order to give EU Blue Card holders an easier access to EU long- term resident status. _________________ 43Council Directive 2003/109/EC of 25 November 2003 on the status of third- country nationals who are long-term residents (OJ L 16, 23.1.2004, p. 44).deleted

2017/03/03
Committee: LIBE

Kristina WINBERG

Proposal for a directive
Recital 38

(38) In order to foster the mobility of highly skilled workers between the Union and their countries of origin, derogations from Directive 2003/109/EC should be provided for in order to allow longer periods of absence than those provided for in that Directive after highly skilled third- country workers have acquired the EU long-term resident statusdeleted

2017/03/03
Committee: LIBE

Kristina WINBERG

Proposal for a directive
Recital 39

(39) The occupational and geographical mobility of third-country highly skilled workers should be recognised as an important contributor to improving labour market efficiency across the Union, addressing skills shortages and offsetting regional imbalances. Mobility within the Union should be facilitadeleted.

2017/03/03
Committee: LIBE

Kristina WINBERG

Proposal for a directive
Recital 40

(40) Existing legal uncertainty surrounding business trips of highly skilled workers should be addressed by defining this notion and setting a list of activities that in any case should be considered as business activities in all Member States. Second Member States should not be allowed to require from EU Blue Card holders engaging in business activities a work permit or any other authorisation than the EU Blue Card issued by the first Member State. Where the EU Blue Card is issued by a Member State not applying the Schengen acquis in full, its holder should be entitled to enter and stay in one or several second Member States for the purpose of business activity for up to 90 days in any 180-day period based on the EU Blue Card.deleted

2017/03/03
Committee: LIBE

Kristina WINBERG

Proposal for a directive
Recital 42

(42) While some special rules are provided in this Directive regarding entry and stay in a second Member State for the purpose of business activity, as well as moving to a second Member State to apply for a new EU Blue Card in its territory, all the other rules governing the movement of persons across borders as laid down in the relevant provisions of the Schengen acquis apply.deleted

2017/03/03
Committee: LIBE

Kristina WINBERG

Proposal for a directive
Recital 43

(43) Where the EU Blue Card is issued by a Member State not applying the Schengen acquis in full and the EU Blue Card holder, in the mobility situations provided for in this Directive, crosses an external border within the meaning of Regulation (EU) 2016/399 of the European Parliament and of the Council44 , a Member State should be entitled to require evidence that the EU Blue Card holder is entering its territory either for the purpose of business activities or in order to apply for a new EU Blue Card based on a work contract or binding job offer. In the case of mobility for carrying out business activities, that Member State should be able to require evidence of the business purpose of the stay, such as invitations, entry tickets, or documents describing the business activities of the company and the position of the EU Blue Card holder in the company. _________________ 44Regulation (EU) 2016/399 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2016 on a Union Code on the rules governing the movement of persons across borders (Schengen Borders Code) (OJ L 77, 23 03 2016, p. 1).deleted

2017/03/03
Committee: LIBE

Kristina WINBERG

Proposal for a directive
Recital 45

(45) ~~For the purpose of residence of b~~Beneficiaries of international protection across Member States, it is necessary to ensure that Member States other than the one which issued international protection are informed of the protection background of the persons concerned in order to enable Member States to comply with their obligations regarding the principle of non-refoulementmust remain in the Member State which issued international protection.

2017/03/03
Committee: LIBE

Kristina WINBERG

Proposal for a directive
Recital 46

(46) Where a Member State intends to expel a person who has acquired an EU Blue Card in that Member State and who is a beneficiary of international protection in another Member State, that person should enjoy the protection against expulsion guaranteed under Directive 2011/95/EU and under Article 33 of the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees of 28 July 1951, as amended by the Protocol signed in New York on 31 January 1967 (the Geneva Convention).deleted

2017/03/03
Committee: LIBE

Kristina WINBERG

Proposal for a directive
Recital 49

(49) ~~Since the objectives of this Directive, namely the establishment of a special a~~Admission procedure and the adoption of conditions of entry and residence, and the rights, applicable to third-country nationals for the purpose of highly ~~skill~~qualified employment and their family members, cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States, especially – to better exploit the EU’s overall attractiveness – as regards ensuring their mobility between Member States and offering a clear and single set of admission criteria across the Member States, and can therefore be better achieved at Union level, the Union may adopt measures, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU). In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Directive does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve those objectiv should remain fully within the competence of Member States.

2017/03/03
Committee: LIBE

Kristina WINBERG

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

(a) the conditions of entry and residence for more than three months in the territory of the Member States, and the rights, of third-country nationals for the purpose of highly ~~skill~~qualified employment, and of their family members;

2017/03/03
Committee: LIBE

Kristina WINBERG

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1

1. This Directive shall apply to third- country nationals who apply to be admitted or who have been admitted to the territory of a Member State for the purpose of highly ~~skill~~qualified employment.

2017/03/03
Committee: LIBE

Kristina WINBERG

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 4

4. Member States ~~shall not issue any other~~may issue a permit other than an EU Blue Card to third- country nationals for the purpose of highly ~~skill~~qualified employment.

2017/03/03
Committee: LIBE

Kristina WINBERG

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

(a) present a valid work contract or, as provided for in national law, ~~a binding job offer~~ for highly ~~skill~~qualified employment, of at least ~~six~~12 months in the Member State concerned;

2017/03/03
Committee: LIBE

Kristina WINBERG

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2

2. In addition to the conditions laid down in paragraph 1, the gross annual salary resulting from the monthly or annual salary specified in the work contract or binding job offer shall not be inferior to the salary threshold set and published for that purpose by the Member States. The salary threshold set by the Member States shall be at least 1.0 times but not higher than 1.4 times the average gross annual salary in the Member State concerned.deleted

2017/03/03
Committee: LIBE

Kristina WINBERG

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 4

4. Without prejudice to paragraph 1, any decision to withdraw or refuse to renew an EU Blue Card shall ~~take account of the specific circumstances of the case and~~ respect the principle of proportionality.

2017/03/03
Committee: LIBE

Kristina WINBERG

Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 2

2. Member States shall set a standard period of validity for the EU Blue Card, which shall be at least 24 months. If the work contract covers a shorter period, the EU Blue Card shall be issued at least for the duration of the work contract plus three months. Where an EU Blue Card is renewed, its period of validity shall be at least 24 monthsissued at least for the duration of the work contract.

2017/03/03
Committee: LIBE

Kristina WINBERG

Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 4

4. Where a Member State issues an EU Blue Card to a third-country national to whom it has granted international protection, it shall enter the following remark in that third-country national’s EU Blue Card, under the heading “Remarks”: “International protection granted by [name of the Member State] on [date]”. Where that Member State withdraws the international protection enjoyed by the EU Blue Card holder, it shall, where appropriate, issue a new EU Blue Card not containing that remark.deleted

2017/03/03
Committee: LIBE

Kristina WINBERG

Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1

Where an EU Blue Card is issued by a Member State to a third-country national who is a beneficiary of international protection in another Member State, the Member State issuing the EU Blue Card shall enter the remark “International protection granted by [name of the Member State] on [date]” in the EU Blue Card.deleted

2017/03/03
Committee: LIBE

Kristina WINBERG

Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2

Before the Member State enters that remark, it shall notify the Member State to be mentioned in that remark of the issuance of the EU Blue Card and request that Member State to provide information as to whether the EU Blue Card holder is still a beneficiary of international protection. The Member State mentioned in the remark shall reply no later than one month after receiving the request for information. Where international protection has been withdrawn by a final decision, the Member State issuing the EU Blue Card shall not enter that remark.deleted

2017/03/03
Committee: LIBE

Kristina WINBERG

Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 3

Where, in accordance with the relevant international instruments or national law, responsibility for the international protection of the EU Blue Card holder was transferred to the Member State after it issued an EU Blue Card in accordance with the first subparagraph, that Member State shall amend the remark accordingly within three months after the transfer.deleted

2017/03/03
Committee: LIBE

Kristina WINBERG

Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 6 – point b

~~(b) enjoy the rights recognised in this Directive.~~deleted

2017/03/03
Committee: LIBE

Kristina WINBERG

Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 2

2. The application shall be considered and examined ~~either~~ when the high qualified third- country national concerned is residing outside the territory of the Member ~~State to which he or she wishes to be admitted, or when he or she is already legally present in the territory of that Member~~ State.

2017/03/03
Committee: LIBE

Kristina WINBERG

Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 6

6. ~~Where the validity of the EU Blue Card permit expires during the procedure for renewal, Member States shall allow~~It is for the Member State concerned to decide if the third-country national is allow to stay on their territory until the competent authorities have taken a decision on the application.

2017/03/03
Committee: LIBE

Kristina WINBERG

Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

EU Blue Card holders shall have ~~full~~ access to highly ~~skill~~qualified employment in the Member State concerned. Member States may require that a change of employer and changes affecting the fulfilment of the criteria for admission as set out in Article 5 are communicated in accordance with procedures laid down by national law.

2017/03/03
Committee: LIBE

Kristina WINBERG

Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 1

1. Unemployment in itself shall ~~not~~ constitute a reason for withdrawing an EU Blue ~~Card, unless the period of unemployment exceeds three consecutive months, or where the unemployment occurs more than once during the period of validity of an EU Blue~~ Card.

2017/03/03
Committee: LIBE

Kristina WINBERG

Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 2

~~2. During the period referred to in paragraph 1, the EU Blue Card holder shall be allowed to seek and take up employment in accordance with the conditions set out in Article 13.~~deleted

2017/03/03
Committee: LIBE

Kristina WINBERG

Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 3

3. The EU Blue Card holder shall communicate ~~the beginning and, where appropriate, the end of the period~~immediately in the case of unemployment to the competent authorities of the Member State of residence, in accordance with the relevant national procedures.

2017/03/03
Committee: LIBE

Kristina WINBERG

Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 10

10. This Article shall apply to EU Blue Card holders who are beneficiaries of international protection only when they reside in a Member State other than the Member State which granted them international protection.deleted

2017/03/03
Committee: LIBE

Kristina WINBERG

Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1

By way of derogation from Article 4(1) of Directive 2003/109/EC, Member States shall grant EU long-term resident status to third-country nationals who have legally and continuously resided as EU Blue Card holders within their territory for t~~hree~~ en years immediately prior to the submission of the relevant application.

2017/03/03
Committee: LIBE

Kristina WINBERG

Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3 – point b

~~(b) is in duly recorded involuntary unemployment and has registered as job- seeker with the relevant employment office;~~deleted

2017/03/03
Committee: LIBE

Kristina WINBERG

Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3 – point c

~~(c) begins vocational training which, unless the third-country national concerned is involuntarily unemployed, shall be related to the previous employment.~~deleted

2017/03/03
Committee: LIBE

Kristina WINBERG

Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 3 – point a

(a) ~~five~~ten years of legal and continuous residence within the territory of the Member States; and

2017/03/03
Committee: LIBE

Kristina WINBERG

Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 3 – point b

(b) twoen years of legal and continuous residence as an EU Blue Card holder immediately prior to the submission of the relevant application within the territory of the Member State where the application for the EU long-term resident status is submitted.

2017/03/03
Committee: LIBE

Kristina WINBERG

Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 4

4. For the purpose of calculating the five years period of legal and continuous residence in the Union referred to in point (a) of paragraph 3 and by way of derogation from the first subparagraph of Article 4(3) of Directive 2003/109/EC, periods of absence from the territory of the Member States shall not interrupt the five years period if those periods of absence are shorter than twelve consecutive months and do not exceed in total eighteen months within the five years period of legal and continuous residence.deleted

2017/03/03
Committee: LIBE

Kristina WINBERG

Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 5

5. By way of derogation from Article 9(1)(c) of Directive 2003/109/EC, Member States shall extend to 24 consecutive months the period of absence from the territory of the Member States which is allowed to an EU long-term resident holder of a long-term residence permit with the remark referred to in Article 18(2) of this Directive and of his family members having been granted the EU long-term resident status.deleted

2017/03/03
Committee: LIBE