475 Amendments of Pirkko RUOHONEN-LERNER
Amendment 90 #
2023/2811(RSP)
Paragraph 3
3. Calls on the Member States to design a national framework for data collection, monitoring and evaluation for their NAPs, involving participatory research methods; invites the Member States to create child poverty observatories to gather high-quality, disaggregated and internationally comparable data at national level;
Amendment 98 #
2023/2811(RSP)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Emphasizes the imperative for detailed and context-specific data on child poverty and stresses the importance of aligning chosen indicators with overarching policy objectives, ensuring an evidence-based approach to the European Child Guarantee;
Amendment 101 #
2023/2811(RSP)
Paragraph 5
5. UnderlinAcknowledges the call made by its cross-politicalfrom the Working Group on the Child Guarantee, which was established in April 2022, for the Commission and the national authorities to monitor the implementation of the NAPs and set up a solid, overarching EU-level monitoring and evaluation framework and an associated assessment methodolog and suggests that monitoring and evaluation efforts be conducted in a manner that respects the principle of subsidiarity and limiting centralized authority;
Amendment 102 #
2023/2811(RSP)
Paragraph 6
Amendment 170 #
2023/2811(RSP)
Paragraph 18
18. Reiterates its call for an urgent increase in funding for the European Child Guarantee, with a dedicated budget of at least EUR 20 billion for 2021-2027, and insists that this dedicated budget must be made part of the revised multiannual financial framework and reinforced ESF+; iInvites all Member States, not only those with a poverty rate below 5 %, to increase their financial efforts and show greater ambition to invest more in children, given that this is a valuable social investment;
Amendment 4 #
2023/2181(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Notes, additionally, the involvement of the SESAR to respond to the illegal and unjustified Russian aggression against Ukraine since some traffic flows were affected, requiring the reworking of ATC operations of the JU;
Amendment 15 #
2023/2178(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. UnderlineRegrets that the Court considered that the F4E’s senior management situation has remained unstable and in a significant state of transition at the end of 2022 with the departure of the director in June 2022, and the appointment of the head of the Broader Approach Department as ITER-IO Director-General in September 2022, resulting in personnel changes for four of the JU’s seven senior management positions;
Amendment 4 #
2023/2176(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Notes the EU-Rail's Master Plan and its adjustment to the Plan with the "Rail Strategic Research and Innovation Agenda" of the European Rail Research Advisory Council (ERRAC);
Amendment 1 #
2023/2164(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Executive Director of the European Union Agency for Asylum discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2022 / Postpones its decision on granting the Executive Director of the European Union Agency for Asylum discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2022;
Amendment 1 #
2023/2152(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Director of the European Institute for Gender Equality discharge in respect of the implementation of the Institute’s budget for the financial year 2022 / Postpones its decision on granting the Director of the European Institute for Gender Equality discharge in respect of the implementation of the Institute’s budget for the financial year 2022;
Amendment 2 #
2023/2129(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Commission discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2022 / Postpones its decision on granting the Commission discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2022;
Amendment 3 #
2023/2129(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 2
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Director of the European Climate, Infrastructure and Environment Executive Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2022 / Postpones its decision on granting the Director of the European Climate, Infrastructure and Environment Executive Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2022;
Amendment 4 #
2023/2129(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 3
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Acting Director of the European Education and Culture Executive Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2022 / Postpones its decision on granting the Acting Director of the European Education and Culture Executive Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2022;
Amendment 5 #
2023/2129(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 4
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Director of the European Innovation Council and SMEs Executive Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2022 / Postpones its decision on granting the Director of the European Innovation Council and SMEs Executive Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2022;
Amendment 6 #
2023/2129(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 5
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Director of the European Research Council Executive Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2022 / Postpones its decision on granting the Director of the European Research Council Executive Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2022;
Amendment 7 #
2023/2129(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 6
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Director of the European Health and Digital Executive Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2022 / Postpones its decision on granting the Director of the European Health and Digital Executive Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2022;
Amendment 8 #
2023/2129(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 7
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Director of the European Research Executive Agency discharge in relation to the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2022 / Postpones its decision on granting the Director of the European Research Executive Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2022;
Amendment 22 #
2023/2129(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Condemns the lack of transparency from the Commission and pharmaceutical companies in the development, purchase and distribution of COVID-19 vaccines;
Amendment 24 #
2023/2129(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5 b. Notes with concern that, to date, the Commission has not make available, not only to the public, but not even to the Members of the European Parliament, the non-redacted versions of the contracts signed with the producers of the COVID- 19 vaccine;
Amendment 358 #
2023/2129(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 171 – point i d (new)
Paragraph 171 – point i d (new)
(i d) immediately publish the non- redacted versions of the Purhase Agreements for the COVID-19 vaccines;
Amendment 364 #
2023/2129(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 171 a (new)
Paragraph 171 a (new)
171 a. be more proactive in publishing documents and statistics regarding how they handle document access requests, as such information would help with assessing the institutions’ proactive approach to document access; calls that an application for access to a document must be handled promptly;
Amendment 94 #
2023/2122(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Amendment 133 #
2023/2122(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Stresses that some politically committed non-governmental organisations receive funding both via the EU and at national level; emphasises that overlaps of this kind can lead to an uneven distribution of resources and give some operators an unfair advantage; considers it essential, therefore, that the EU Member States should develop harmonised and transparent practices for the allocation of funding; stresses that these practices must incorporate clear criteria and reporting requirements so as to ensure that funding is allocated fairly and that there is no overlap in funding; stresses that the Commission must play an active role in ensuring that this takes place by laying down strict reporting and publicity requirements that help identify and correct any abuses in connection with funding;
Amendment 284 #
2023/2122(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41 a (new)
Paragraph 41 a (new)
41a. Urges the Commission to ensure that only qualified persons are appointed to managerial positions in non- governmental organisations; proposes that the fulfilment of qualification requirements should be the main condition for granting funding for organisations; points out that this will also help guarantee that funding is allocated to accountable and capable operators, thereby promoting a more efficient use of funds from an economic perspective;
Amendment 29 #
2023/2116(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
B a. whereas the persistent challenges of the cost of living across all EU Member States, where nearly half of the population faces difficulties in meeting their expenses; whereas Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine has exacerbated existing inequalities within the EU, triggering humanitarian, energy, and economic crises; whereas we see the detrimental impact of wide income disparities on both economic growth and social unity; whereas the EU is still facing a surge in the cost of living and the rise in inflation, largely propelled by soaring prices of energy, fuel, food, and essential commodities, precipitating an economic and social crisis throughout Europe;
Amendment 46 #
2023/2116(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas with regard to the general escape clause under the Stability and Growth Pact, which expires at the end of 2023, fiscal policy needs to support monetary policy in reducing inflation and needs to safeguard fiscal sustainability, while providing sufficient space for additional investments, including investment in social infrastructure and servicand supporting long-term growth, acknowledging the importance of concentrating and coordinating the governance cycle to avoid overburdening it with too many diverse issues, thus maintaining a focus on the core areas of economic and social policy; whereas prioritising responsible budgetary management and ensuring prudent financial decisions are crucial to safeguarding the fiscal health of the economy, thereby fortifying its resilience against uncertainties and support foring long-term gprowthsperity;
Amendment 65 #
2023/2116(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas skilled workers that can respond to the demands of the labour market and education, training and lifelong learning are of key importance to ensure sustainable growth, increased innovation and competitiveness and the sustainable and just transition of the EU economy, recognising the unique challenges faced by recent graduates and young professionals in their first jobs, and emphasising the need for targeted support and opportunities to facilitate their successful integration into the workforce, thereby contributing to the dynamism and adaptability of the EU labour market;
Amendment 73 #
2023/2116(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H a (new)
Recital H a (new)
H a. whereas decreasing birth rates pose a challenge across EU Member States, contributing to an aging population and a decline in the workforce which can strain social security systems and negatively impact economic growth;
Amendment 101 #
2023/2116(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses that some of the aims of sustainable economic growth must be to ensure an inclusive socio-ecological and digital transformation of our economies to prevent social, economic, digital and environmental imbalances by fighting poverty, reducing inequalities and creating decent jobs with adequate wages and working conditions, while ensuring alignment with the Sustainable Development Goals and the EPSR, as well as to strengthen economic, social and territor and social cohesion;
Amendment 119 #
2023/2116(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses the need to invest significantly in people and to offer quality, inclusive and subsidised education and training in areas linked to skills and competences that are in demand in labour markets and future-oriented sectors according to local and regional needs; further stresses the need to address skills mismatches and labour market shortages; underlines the need to ensure that workers are ready for the green and digital transitions, that they can benefit from opportunities for new employment or career progression and that training and education programmes are aligned with the needs of the planetEU, the economy and society of the future;
Amendment 131 #
2023/2116(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Highlights the demographic aging across the Union, and urges Member States to enact policies aimed at safeguarding and boosting birth rates;
Amendment 133 #
2023/2116(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4 b. Recognises the potential benefits of reskilling programs for elderly individuals, enabling opportunities for reskilling the elderly populace could significantly contribute to the welfare system by allowing them to remain active in the job market, fostering a more fulfilling life, and mitigating the economic impacts associated with aging societies; stresses that this strategic approach not only supports a longer and more productive engagement in the workforce by older individuals but also contributes positively to social and economic well-being, thereby reinforcing the welfare system;
Amendment 146 #
2023/2116(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
Amendment 166 #
2023/2116(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Considers that EU fiscal rules should allow for the necessary public investment and financing of the juste importance of adhering to EU fiscal rules that enable essential public investment for the transition towards a zero-carbon economy, as well as for the proper implementation of the principles of the nd facilitate the implementation of the European Pillar of Social Rights (EPSR) and of social investments; stresses that, although there is a need toemphasises the necessity of reduceing public debt within a reasonable time frame, smaller or more indebted Member States need more flexible individual adjustment paths that allow them enough fiscal space to undertake the investments and reforms needed for socially fair green and digital transitions in a way that leaves no one behind; stresses that it is crucial to ensure that smaller or more indebted Member States are equipped with adequate fiscal measures that enable responsible budgeting; highlights that fiscal responsibility is necessary to support essential investments and reforms for equitable digital transition, prioritising social equity and inclusion without compromising fiscal stability;
Amendment 181 #
2023/2116(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Takes note of the Commission’s proposals for new regulations within the revision of the economic governance framework of April 2023 to strengthen debt sustainability and enhance sustainable and inclusive growth through investment and reforms, includingfiscal adjustment paths that allow for social investment; calls on the Commission to assess which expenditures and investments are necessary to achieve the long-term socioeconomic objectives required to comply with milestones in the national recovery and resilience plans; calls on the Commission to propose a new system for excessive deficit calculations based on this assessment in order to increase fairness during the green and digital transitions, social resilience and the implementation of the EPSR, while ensuring the sustainability of public finances in the Member States;
Amendment 190 #
2023/2116(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10 a. Strongly urges the Commission and Member States to implement robust and decisive measures in combating both tax avoidance and tax fraud; highlights that addressing these issues is paramount not only in diminishing economic disparities but also in bolstering the overall collection of tax revenue within the Member States; highlights that by prioritising these actions, we can significantly contribute to fostering greater economic equality and enhancing the integrity of tax systems across the Union;
Amendment 199 #
2023/2116(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
Amendment 211 #
2023/2116(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Reconfirms the role of social partners in strengthening social dialogue and considers that the revision of the European Semester process should promote further dialogue with the relevant stakeholders, in particular relevant social partners and civil society organisations, on the main policy issues where appropriate, in accordance with the provisions of the TFEU and national legal and political arrangements and emphasises the importance of transparency and dialogue in the process, and underlines that the needs of Member States should be better considered and integrated into this process;
Amendment 37 #
2023/0371(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9 a (new)
Recital 9 a (new)
(9 a) The Commission’s systematic monitoring of the specific requirements, which are based on Article 1 and were used to assess the appropriateness of granting visa liberalisation, should pay particular attention to the security dimension to ensure that countries in Annex II are upholding the initial requirements for law and immigration enforcement, passport security, counterterrorism and border control capabilities.
Amendment 54 #
2023/0371(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Regulation (EU) 2018/1806
Article 8a – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
Article 8a – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(b a) a substantial increase in the number of asylum applications from the nationals of a third country listed in Annex II;
Amendment 76 #
2023/0371(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Regulation (EU) 2018/1806
Article 8a – paragraph 2
Article 8a – paragraph 2
2. For the purposes of paragraph 1, points (a), (b) and (d)(i), of this Article a substantial increase shall mean an increase exceeding a threshold of 150%, unless the Commission in accordance with Article 8b(4) or Article 8c(2) concludes that a lower or higher increase is applicable in the particular case.
Amendment 84 #
2023/0371(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Regulation (EU) 2018/1806
Article 8a – paragraph 3
Article 8a – paragraph 3
3. For the purposes of paragraph 1, point (b), of this Article a low recognition rate shall mean a recognition rate of asylum applications of less than 435%, unless the Commission in accordance with Article 8b(4) or Article 8c(2) concludes that a higher recognition rate is applicable in the particular case.
Amendment 89 #
2023/0371(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Regulation (EU) 2018/1806
Article 8a – paragraph 5 – point a
Article 8a – paragraph 5 – point a
(a) refusing or failing to process readmission applications in due timewithin four weeks of the return decision;
Amendment 3 #
2023/0199(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) The EU industry has proven its inbuilt resilience but is being challenged. High inflation, labour shortages and mismatches, post- COVID supply chains disruptions, rising interest rates, and spikes in energy costs and input prices are weighing on the competitiveness of the EU industry. This is paired with strong, but not always and unfair, competition on the fragmented global market. The EU has already put forward several initiatives to support its industry, such as the Green Deal Industrial Plan,40 the Critical Raw Materials Act41 , the Net Zero Industry Act42 , the new Temporary Crisis and Transition Framework for State aid,43 and REPowerEU.44 While these solutions provide fast and targeted support, the EU needs a more structural answer to the investment needs of its industries and citizens, safeguarding cohesion and the level playing field in the Single Market and to reduce the EU’s strategic dependencies. __________________ 40 Communication on A Green Deal Industrial Plan for the Net-Zero Age, COM(2023) 62 final. 41 COM(2023) 160 final 42 COM(2023) 161 final 43 Communication on a Temporary Crisis and Transition Framework for State Aid measures (OJ C 101, 17.3.2023, p. 3). 44 Regulation (EU) 2023/435 as regards REPowerEU (OJ L 63, 28.2.2023, p. 1).
Amendment 6 #
2023/0199(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) The uptake and scaling up in the Union of deep and digital technologies, clean technologies, and biotechnologies will be essential to seize the opportunities and meet the objectives of the green and digital transitions, thus promoting the competitiveness of the European industry and its sustainability. Therefore, immediate action is required to support the development or manufacturing in the Union of such technologies, safeguarding and strengthening their value chains thereby reducing the Union’s strategic dependencies, and addressing existing labour and skills shortages in those sectors through trainings andeducation, including attractive vocational education and training, apprenticeships and trainings and the creation of attractive, quality jobs accessible to all.
Amendment 7 #
2023/0199(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) There is a need to support critical technologies in the following fields: deep and digital technologies, clean technologies, and biotechnologies (including the respective critical raw materials value chains), in particular projects, companies and sectors with a critical role for EU’s competitiveness and resilience and its value chains. By way of example, deep technologies and digital technologies should include microelectronics, high-performance computing, quantum technologies (i.e., computing, communication and sensing technologies), cloud computing, edge computing, and artificial intelligence, cybersecurity technologies, robotics, 5G and advanced connectivity and virtual realities, including actions related to deep and digital technologies for the development of defence and aerospace applications. Clean technologies should include, among others, renewable energy; electricity and heat storage; heat pumps; electricity grid; renewable fuels of non- biological origin; sustainable alternative fuels; electrolysers and fuel cells; carbon capture, utilisation and storage; energy efficiency; hydrogen and its related infrastructure; smart energy solutions; technologies vital to sustainability such as water purification and desalination; advanced materials such as nanomaterials, composites and future clean construction materials, and technologies for the sustainable extraction and processing of critical raw materials. Biotechnology should be considered to include technologies such as biomolecules and its applications, pharmaceuticals and medical technologies vital for health security, crop biotechnology, and industrial biotechnology, such as for waste disposal, and biomanufacturing. The Commission may issue guidance to further specify the scope of the technologies in these three fields considered to be critical in accordance with this Regulation, in order to promote a common interpretation of the projects, companies and sectors to be supported under the respective programmes in light of the common strategic objective. It is important to respect the principle of technological neutrality. Moreover, technologies in any of these three fields which are subjects of an Important Project of Common European Interest (IPCEI) approved by the Commission pursuant to Article 107(3), point (b) TFEU should be deemed to be critical, and individual projects within the scope of such an IPCEI should be eligible for funding, in accordance with the respective programme rules, to the extent that the identified funding gap and the eligible costs have not yet been completely covered.
Amendment 12 #
2023/0199(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) Strengthening the manufacturing capacity of key technologies in the Union will not be possible without a sizeable skilled workforce. However, labour and skills shortages have increased in all sectors including those considered key for the green and digital transition and endanger the rise of key technologies, also in the context of demographic change. Therefore, it is necessary to boost the activation of more people to the labour market relevant for strategic sectors, in particular through theA major problem of the economy is the mismatch between the competences possessed by employees and the requirements of the modern labour market. In order to overcome this gap, it is important to promote the participation of more people in the labour market by creation ofng jobs and apprenticeships for young, disadvantaged persons, in particular, young people not in emp, in particular for young people and disadvantaged people. This will help meet growing skills and labour market needs and ensure the develoypment, education or training of key technologies in the European Union. Such support will complement a number of other actions aimed at meetaddressing the skills needs stemmarising from the transition, outlined set out in the EU Skills Agenda.45 __________________ 45 Communication on a European Skills Agenda for sustainable competitiveness, social fairness and resilience, COM(2020) 274 final.
Amendment 19 #
2023/0199(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) The STEP should identify resources which should be implementused within the existing Union programmes and funds, the InvestEU, Horizon Europe, European Defence Fund and Innovation Fund. This should be accompanied by providing additional funding of EUR 10 billion. Of this, EUR 5 billion should be used to increase the endowment of the Innovation Fund46 and EUR 3 billion to increase the total amount of the EU guarantee available for the EU compartment under the InvestEU Regulation to EUR 7,5 billion,47 taking into account the relevant provisioning rate. EUR 0.5 billion should be made available to increase the financial envelope under the Horizon Europe Regulation,48 which should be amended accordingly; and EUR 1.5 billion to the European Defence Fund.49 __________________ 46 Directive 2003/87/EC establishing a scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading (OJ L 275, 25.10.2003, p. 32). 47 Regulation (EU) 2021/523 establishing the InvestEU Programme (OJ L 107, 26.3.2021, p. 30). 48 Regulation (EU) 2021/695 establishing Horizon Europe (OJ L 170, 12.5.2021, p. 1). 49 Regulation (EU) 2021/697 establishing the European Defense Fund (OJ L 170, 12.5.2021, p. 149.), together with other active employment measures.
Amendment 23 #
2023/0199(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) While tThe STEP relies on the reprogramming and reinforcement of existing programmes for supporting strategic investments, it is also an important element for testing the feasibility and preparation of new interventions as a step towards a European Sovereignty Fund. The evaluation in 2025 will assess the relevance of the actions undertaken and serve as basis for assessing the need for an upscaling of the support towards strategic sectorsparticularly the European Social Fund.
Amendment 24 #
2023/0199(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) Directive 2003/87/EC54 should be amended to allow for additional financing with a financial envelope for the period 2024-2027 of EUR 5 billion. The Innovation Fund supports investments in innovative low-carbon technologies, which is a scope that is to be covered by the STEP. The increase in volume of the Innovation Fund should therefore allow to provide financing responding to the objective of supporting the development or manufacturing in the Union of critical clean technologies. In line with the objectives of ensuring cohesion and promoting the Single Market, and in order to support the green transition and the development of clean technologies throughout the Union, the additional financial envelope should be made available through calls for proposals open to entities from Member States whose average GDP per capita is below the EU average of the EU-27 measured in purchasing power standards (PPS) and calculated on the basis of Union figures for the period 2015-2017implementation of the Innovation Fund in order to support social cohesion, social inclusion and the promotion of the Single Market. __________________ 54 Directive 2003/87/EC establishing a scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading (OJ L 275, 25.10.2003, p. 32).
Amendment 49 #
2023/0199(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3
Article 3
Amendment 59 #
2023/0199(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2
Article 8 – paragraph 2
2. The evaluation report shall, in particular, assess to which extent the objectives have been achieved, the efficiency of the use ofSTEP has contributed to the cresources and the European added value. It shall also consider the continued relevance of all objectives and actions, in view of their potential upscalingation of good quality jobs and more social cohesion.
Amendment 60 #
2023/0199(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Directive 2003/87/EC
Article 10 a (8)
Article 10 a (8)
Directive 2003/87/EC is amended as follows: (1) In Article 10a(8), the following sixth subparagraph is inserted: ‘InAny addition to theal allowances other than those referred to in the first to fifth subparagraphs of this paragraph, the Innovation Fund shall also implement a financial envelope for the period from 1 January 2024 to 31 December 2027 of EUR 5 000 000 000 in current prices for supporting investments contributing to the STEP objective referred to in Article 2, point (a)(ii) of Regulation .../...63 [STEP Regulation]. This financial envelope shall be made available to support investments only in Member States whose average GDP per capita is below the EU average of the EU- 27 measured in purchasing power standards (PPS) and calculated on the basis of Union figures for the period 2015-2017.’ __________________ 63 Regulation …/… of the European Parliament and of the Council … [insert full title and OJ reference]. will require approval by all Member States, in particular with regards to the use of social funds. ’
Amendment 34 #
2023/0156(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4 a (new)
Recital 4 a (new)
(4a) Due to the establishment of the new Authority, the costs incurred by the EU budget and the Member States for the collection of customs duties should be closely monitored. In particular, it is necessary to make preliminary estimates (and then detailed calculations) of how the establishment and functioning of the new Authority affects customs revenues and the costs of their collection.
Amendment 35 #
2023/0156(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4 b (new)
Recital 4 b (new)
(4 b) In order to achieve financial savings, the Authority should, where and when appropriate, cooperate closely with other Union institutions, agencies and bodies, especially those that have their seat in the same Member State. Furthermore, the geographical spread of EU institutions, bodies and agencies should be taken into consideration.
Amendment 65 #
2023/0156(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 6
Article 31 – paragraph 6
6. The European Public Prosecutor’s Office (‘EPPO’) may, upon request,shall have unrestricted access to data, including personal and commercially sensitive data, stored or otherwise available in the EU Customs Data Hub, exclusively and to the extent necessary for carrying out its tasks pursuant to. This access is granted for the fulfilment of EPPO's tasks as outlined in Article 4 of Council Regulation (EU) 2017/193966 , insofar as the conduct investigated by EPPO concerns customs and under the conditions determined in an implementing act adopted pursuantrrespective of the nature of the investigated conduct or its relation to customs. The conditions for EPPO's access shall be established solely by EPPO's discretion, without limitation, ensuring unimpeded access for EPPO to pcaragraph 14 of this Articlery out its investigative tasks. _________________ 66 Council Regulation (EU) 2017/1939 of 12 October 2017 implementing enhanced cooperation on the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (‘the EPPO’) (OJ L 283, 31.10.2017, p. 1).
Amendment 95 #
2023/0156(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 215 – paragraph 1 – point f
Article 215 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) adopt and make publicly available the rules for the prevention and management of conflicts of interests in respect of its members; and shall publish annually on its website the declaration of interests of the management board members;
Amendment 96 #
2023/0156(COD)
(h) adopt and make publicly available its rules of procedure;
Amendment 99 #
2023/0156(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 218 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 218 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
The Executive Director shall be appointed by the Management Board on grounds of merit and documented administrative and managerial skills, as well as relevant competence and experience, from a list of at least three candidates proposed by the Commission, following an open and transparent selection procedure detailed below.
Amendment 100 #
2023/0156(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 218 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point a (new)
Article 218 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point a (new)
(a) The Commission will create and publish a shortlist of candidates, inviting them to participate in a transparent selection process. Candidates will be required to present themselves to the European Parliament and the Council's competent committee and respond to inquiries.
Amendment 101 #
2023/0156(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 218 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point b (new)
Article 218 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point b (new)
(b) Following this, the European Parliament and the Council will express their opinions and preferences.
Amendment 102 #
2023/0156(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 218 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point c (new)
Article 218 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point c (new)
(c) The Management Board, in the process of appointing the Executive Director, will duly consider and take into account the opinions expressed by the European Parliament and the Council.
Amendment 103 #
2023/0156(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 218 – paragraph 3
Article 218 – paragraph 3
3. The Management Board, acting on a proposal from the Commission which takes into account the assessment referred to in paragraph 2, may extend the term of office of the Executive Director once for no more than 5 years. The Management Board shall inform the European Parliament and the Council about its intention to extend the Executive Director's mandate. Before the Management Board takes its decision to extend the mandate, the Executive Director may be asked to make a declaration before the competent committee of the European Parliament and answer questions.
Amendment 104 #
2023/0156(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 218 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 218 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. The European Parliament and the Council shall be informed of the reasons.
Amendment 105 #
2023/0156(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 219 – paragraph 3
Article 219 – paragraph 3
3. The Executive Director shall report to the European Parliament and the Council on the performance of his or her duties and the overall performance of the EU Customs Authority when invited to do so. The Executive Director may be called upon at any time by the European Parliament or by the Council to attend a hearing on any matter linked to the Agency's activities.
Amendment 107 #
2023/0156(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 236 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 236 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. The Authority's liability indicated in paragraph 3 also applies to damages resulting from the administration of data placed in the central database and exchanged - via the database or by the Authority - with other entities;
Amendment 108 #
2023/0156(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 237 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 237 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. All costs incurred by a Member State in ensuring the conditions set out in paragraphs 1 and 2 shall fall within the budget of the Authority and shall be financed by the EU budget, in accordance with Article 225, paragraph 3, point c.
Amendment 114 #
2023/0156(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 258 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point b a (new)
Article 258 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point b a (new)
(ba) an overview of the costs incurred by the Union on the one hand and the Member States on the other hand for the implementation of the Regulation including in comparison with the costs incurred at the date of entry into force of the Regulation;
Amendment 4 #
2023/0000(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Calls for a strong budgetary response by the Union in 2024 to the social and economic difficulties faced by Europeans as a consequence of inflation and the cost of living crisis, in the context of the war inRussia’s brutal war of aggression against Ukraine and post-pandemic challenges; is concerned in particular that high energy and food prices, and continued pressure on essential services and supplied chains are exacerbating social and economic inequalities, eroding the middle class, and worsening the living and working conditions and mental health of many workers and their families; stresses that the focus should be on well-calculated spending and minimizing unnecessary expenses to avoid further burden on taxpayers and national economies;
Amendment 7 #
2023/0000(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses that the budget should supportEmphasizes the importance of cost-effective policies and measures to facilitate the labour market transition, and create quality employment, further develop resilient; encourages the utilisation of existing resources and optimisation of social systems, to reduce poverty and increasefoster upward social convergence across the Union so that no one is left behind; notes in particular that investment in lifelong learning, reskilling and upskilling is essential to address the green and digital transition; welcomes in this context the 2023 Porto Social Forum conclusions highlighting – in the framework of the European Year of Skills – how robust policies on skills, education and training can create better employment, swifter integration in the labour market and foster social inclusion, and consequently boost the resilience and competitiveness of the EU´’s economy and society; calls for financial support to the creation of local strategies for skills and skills development hubs in cooperation with employment agencies of cities; insists on the importance of investing in social inclusion and measures for children and young people; recalls that the integration into the labour market of the most vulnerable groups, such as people in poverty, people with disabilities, young and elderly people, the unemployed, and people displaced as a result of the war inRussia’s unprovoked and unjustified war of aggression against Ukraine, is paramount;
Amendment 14 #
2023/0000(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Highlights the crucialAcknowledges the role of Union funds and financial instruments, including the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) and Repower EU to ensure an promoting economically and socially sustainable, just, inclusive and non-discriminatory recovery; recalls that the European Social Fund Plus (ESF+) is the key driver for strengthening the social dimension of the Union in line with the principles of the European Pillar of Social Rights; also points out the importance of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund for Displaced Workers (EGF), the Just Transition Fund (JTF), ReactEU with its additional resources for ESF+, the Youth Employment Initiative (YEI) and the Fund for European Aid to the Most Deprived (FEAD)ility; urges, however, a careful examination of the allocation of funds and proposes a thorough evaluation of the effectiveness and efficiency of each programme; calls for a leaner approach to avoid unnecessary duplication and wasteful spending;
Amendment 58 #
2023/0000(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Calls on the Commission to develop a proper strategy for the mainstreaming of social objectives in Union spending that also takes into account budgetary constraints; considers that a social mainstreaming methodology in the Union budget would be necessary in order to ensure that all Union-funded policies are compliant with the social standards defined in the European Pillar of Social Rights, and that all Union spending contributes to European social objectives or at least does not work contrary to those objectives.
Amendment 99 #
2022/0400(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) This Directive should apply to equality bodies’ action as regards the matters covered by Directives 2006/54/EC and 2010/41/EU. The standards should only concern the functioning of equality bodies and should not extend the material or personal scope of those Directives, taking account of the diversity of approaches that the Member States may apply in order to resolve questions related to discrimination.
Amendment 102 #
2022/0400(COD)
(13a) It is vitally important to avoid the introduction of rules that would disrupt the natural processes connected with work and care. The equality bodies should respect the individual choices that parents and carers make, without causing undue stress for employers or violating their right to make independent decisions.
Amendment 108 #
2022/0400(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 15 a (new)
Recital 15 a (new)
(15a) Equality bodies should be encouraged to act as sources of information and training rather than supervisory bodies. They should aim to promote understanding and open dialogue instead of becoming tools for driving certain ideologies. Their role should be advisory in nature, helping individuals and organisations to make valid choices.
Amendment 111 #
2022/0400(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) Equality bodies can only effectively play their role if they are able to act with complete independence without being subject to any external influence. For that purpose, Member States should take into account a number of criteria that contribute to the independence of equality bodies. Equality bodies should not be set up as part of a ministry or body taking instructions directly from the government. Any staff member or person holding a managerial position – for example as member of a board managing the equality body, head of the equality body, deputy or in case of interim – should be independent, qualified for their position, and selected through a transparent process. Equality bodies should be able to manage their own budget and resources, including by selecting and managing their own staff, and be able to set their own priorities. Equality bodies should be free of inappropriate political influence and external pressure. Their structure should ensure a clear separation of functions in order to avoid conflicts of interest.
Amendment 138 #
2022/0400(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) Equality bodies, alongside other actors, have a key role to play in the prevention of discrimination and the promotion of equality. . To address the structural aspects of discrimination and to contribute to social change, they should promote equality duties, good practices, positive action and equality mainstreaming among public and private entities, and provide them with relevant training, information, advice, guidance and support. They should communicate with public and private entities and groups at risks of discrimination and engage in public debate in order to combat stereotypes and raise awareness about diversity and its benefits, a key pillar of the Union’s equality strategies. Their role in promoting equality should be in balance with a recognition of the freedom of choice that individuals have. Public participation should promote open dialogue and understanding, without forcing certain points of view.
Amendment 143 #
2022/0400(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) Beyond prevention, a central task of equality bodies is to provide assistance to victims of discrimination. This assistance should always include the provision of key information to complainants and a preliminary assessment of their complaint, based on the initial information gathered from the parties on a voluntary basis. Member States should be in charge of defining the modalities under which the equality body would issue this assessment, such as the timeframe of the process or procedural safeguards against repetitive or abusive complaints. This process should remain voluntary, and there should be procedural safeguards in place to prevent abuse of the complaints procedure.
Amendment 172 #
2022/0400(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 34
Recital 34
(34) The provisions on the equality bodies’ right to act in court proceedings do not alter the rights of victims and of associations, organisations or other legal entities that enforce the rights of victims which have, in accordance with the criteria laid down by their national law, a legitimate interest in ensuring that Directives 2006/54/EC and 2010/41/EU are complied with, as laid down in those Directives. The role of equality bodies in court proceedings should be clearly defined so as to avoid needless overlap with the tasks of other bodies that monitor rights. In this way, a balanced approach to discrimination is assured and overlapping measures are avoided.
Amendment 198 #
2022/0400(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 40
Recital 40
(40) Equality data are crucial for raising awareness, sensitising people, quantifying discrimination, showing trends over time, proving the existence of discrimination, evaluating the implementation of equality legislation, demonstrating the need for positive action, and contributing to evidence- based policymaking75. Equality bodies have a role to play in contributing to the development of relevant equality data for those purposes, for example by organising regular roundtables gathering all relevant entities. They should also collect and analyse data on their own activities or conduct surveys and should be able to access and make use of statistical information collected by other public or private entities – such as the national statistical offices, national courts, labour and education inspectorates, trade unions or civil society organisations - concerning the matters they are entrusted with under Directives 2006/54/EC and 2010/41/EU. That statistical information should not contain any personal data. _________________ 75 Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the application of Council Directive 2000/43/EC implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of racial or ethnic origin (‘the Racial Equality Directive’) and of Council Directive 2000/78/EC establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation (‘the Employment Equality Directive’) SWD(2021) 63 final.
Amendment 207 #
2022/0400(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 46
Recital 46
(46) This Directive aims at ensuring the functioning of equality bodies according to minimum standards, with a view to improving their effectiveness and guaranteeing their independence, to strengthen the application of the principle of equal treatment. Since the objective of this Directive cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States and should therefore be achieved at Union level, the Union may adopt measures, iIn 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, which limits itself to setting minimum standards, does not go beyond what is necessary to achieve that objective. Any unnecessary centralisation of power must be avoided. The Member States should still be able to adopt their own mechanisms to ensure the principle of equal treatment, without uniform measures being called for that do not necessarily reflect local needs and circumstances.
Amendment 227 #
2022/0400(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall take measures to ensure that equality bodies are independent and free from external influence in performing their tasks and exercising their competences, in particular as regards their legal structure, accountability, budget, staffing, and organisational matters, at the same time respecting the principles of restricted public intervention and individual freedom.
Amendment 235 #
2022/0400(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 2
Article 3 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall provide for transparent rules and safeguards concerning the selection, appointment, revocation and potential conflict of interest of the staff of equality bodies, in particular persons holding a managerial position, in order to guarantee their competence and independence. The rules shall also cover the management of conflicts of interest and the rules on disqualification, which precisely set out the notification obligations in connection with different disqualification situations.
Amendment 240 #
2022/0400(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 3
Article 3 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall ensure that appropriate safeguards are in place, in particular in the internal structure of equality bodies, to guarantee the independent exercise of their competences, notably where some require impartiality and others focus on support to victims. The Member States shall implement the measures required to ensure that the equality bodies can perform their tasks without any external pressure or influence, and to guarantee their judicial independence and autonomy.
Amendment 247 #
2022/0400(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 4
Article 3 – paragraph 4
4. The Member States shall ensure that appropriate safeguards are in place in the internal structure of multi-mandateequality bodies to guaranteensure the autonomous and effective exercise of the equality mandate in the case of multi-mandate bodies.
Amendment 263 #
2022/0400(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) adopt a strategy to raise awareness of the general population, throughout their territory, with particular attention to individuals and groups at risk of discrimination, on the rights under Directives 2006/54/EC and 2010/41/EU and on the existence of equality bodies and their services, and which respects the diversity of opinions;
Amendment 272 #
2022/0400(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) ensure that equality bodies engage in the prevention of discrimination and in the promotion of equal treatment, and adopt a strategy defining how they will engage in public dialogue, communicate with individuals and groups at risk of discrimination, provide training and guidance, and promote equality duties, and equality mainstreaming and positive action among public and private entities.
Amendment 315 #
2022/0400(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
In particular, that framework shall provide equality bodies with effective rights to access information which is necessary to establish whether discrimination has occurred. It shall also provide for appropriate mechanisms for equality bodies to cooperate with relevant public bodthe authorities for that purpose.
Amendment 333 #
2022/0400(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that equality bodies have the right to act in court proceedingsparticipate in administrative and civil law matters relating tocourt proceedings concerning the implementation of the principle of equal treatment laid down in Directives 2006/54/EC and 2010/41/EU in accordance with paragraphs 2 to 5,. This shall, however, be without prejudice to national rules on the admissibility of actions.
Amendment 363 #
2022/0400(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 10 – paragraph 1 a (new)
The Member States shall guarantee that the procedural safeguards laid down in this Directive are complied with and that, at the same time, the rights of persons and organisations accused of discrimination are safeguarded. The principles of fair procedure and the presumption of innocence must be applied at all stages of the complaint handling process.
Amendment 376 #
2022/0400(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 1
Member States shall ensure that equality bodies have appropriate mechanisms in place to cooperate, within their respective fields of competence, with other equality bodies within the same Member State, and with relevant public and private entities, including civil society organisations, at national, regional, local level as well as in other Member States and at Union and international level. Cooperation shall be voluntary and non-coercive in nature, respecting the independence of different institutions.
Amendment 422 #
2022/0400(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 18 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Member States shall ensure that the collection of personal data by equality bodies is strictly limited to the performance of their assigned tasks. Private individuals shall have the right to monitor their personal data and the right not to allow the collection of any data that are not directly relevant to the purpose of the Directive.
Amendment 10 #
2018/2545(RSP)
Recital B
B. whereas SMEs are disproportionately affected by administrative burdens and financial obstacles by comparison with larger firms and whereas these burdens and obstacles promote the shadow economy; whereas at EU and Member State level further efforts could be made to create an simpler, SME- friendly environment which go beyond the political pledges already given;
Amendment 59 #
2018/2545(RSP)
Paragraph 5
5. Points out that the employee numbers is not a criterion which can be used to draw up for accurate EU-wide comparisons, as labour productivity varies from one Member State to another; welcomes, therefore, a shift towards the criteria, if account is taken of the major disparities in productivity between sectors such as cleaning and ICT services in the EU, and the need for comparability of SMEs at EU level, the staff complement criterion is determined sector by sector on the basis of tEurnover and balance sheet totalostat’s classification of sectors;
Amendment 58 #
2018/2161(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Recognises that the EIB gives priority to innovation and skills in order to drive growth and ensure Europe’s long- term competitiveness, with loans amounting to EUR 13.9 billion in 2017but hopes that this can also be confirmed in the findings of independent impact assessments and not merely by the fact of using money for, inter alia, 7.4 million high-speed digital connections and the installation of 36.8 millionor smart meters;
Amendment 120 #
2018/2161(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Recognises the achievements of the EFSI by its third anniversary and welcomesCalls for an independent impact assessment of the achievements of the EFSI, taking into account the requirements laid down for the EFSI at the time when it was established and the fact that the EUR 335 billion in investment mobilised across the Union since the adoption of the EFSI Regulation1 by the co-legislators gives no indication of the profitability of investments; _________________ 1 Regulation (EU) 2015/1017.
Amendment 2 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 4
Citation 4
— having regard to its TAXE committee resolution of 25 November 20152 and its TAX2 committee resolution of 6 July 20163 on tax rulings and other measures similar in nature or effect, _________________ 2 Resolution of 25 November 2015 on tax rulings and other measures similar in nature or effect, OJ C 366, 27.10.2017, p. 51. 3 Resolution of 6 July 2016 on tax rulings and other measures similar in nature or effect, OJ C 101, 16.3.2018, p. 79.
Amendment 6 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 7
Citation 7
— having regard to the Commission’s follow-up to each of the above mentioned Parliament resolutions,6 ,6, _________________ 6 The March 2016 joint follow-up on bringing transparency, coordination and convergence to corporate tax policies in the Union and TAXE 1 resolutions, the November 2016 follow-up to the TAXE 2 resolution and the April 2018 follow-up to the PANA resolution.
Amendment 7 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 8
Citation 8
— having regard to the numerous revelations ofby investigative journalists, which have become knownsuch as the LuxLeaks, Panama papers, Paradise papers and CumEx scandals,
Amendment 23 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 22 a (new)
Citation 22 a (new)
- having regard to the Commission proposal of 23 April 2018 on the protection of whistle-blowers;
Amendment 28 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 25 a (new)
Citation 25 a (new)
- having regard to the report by Transparency International and Global Witness entitled 'European Getaway. Inside the Murky World of Golden Visas';
Amendment 38 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Recalls that current international and national tax rules were mostly conceived in the early 20th century; asserts that there is an urgent rules need forto be reform of the rulesed continuously, as criminals find new ways of laundering money and evading tax, so that international, EU and national tax systems are fit for the new economic, social and technologic challenges of the 21st century; notes the broad understanding that current tax systems are not equippedrecalls that money laundering and other crimes often occur in conjunction with capital flight, which cannot be curbed without solving the economic and administrative problems of the country of origin; notes the broad understanding of the need to reform tax systems to keep upace with these developments and ensure that all market participants pay fair taxes;
Amendment 43 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Recalls that improving tax collection in EU countries is likely to reduce crime associated with tax evasion and the money laundering that follows it;
Amendment 48 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Highlights that Parliament has made a substantial contribution to the fight against financial crimes, tax evasion and tax avoidance as uncovered in the LuxLeaks, Panama Papers and Paradise Papers cases, notably with the work of the TAXE, TAXE2 and TAX3 Special Committees, the PANA inquiry committee and the ECON committee;
Amendment 59 #
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, but is astonished that the administrative system of the United States still seems to be more effective at detecting abuses; calls for the swift adoption of initiatives that have not yet been finalised and for careful monitoring of the implementation to ensure efficiency and proper enforcementof both laws and supervision, in order to keep pace with the versatilityvarious forms of tax fraud, tax evasion and aggressive tax planning, and to obtain information about them in other ways than by means of whistle-blowing on scandals; calls on the Commission to clarify the practices adhered to in the United States in order to protect and encourage whistle-blowers;
Amendment 74 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Deplores again ‘the lfack of reliable and unbiased statistics on the magnitude of tax avoidance and tax evasion [and] stresses the importance of developing appropriate and transparent methodologiest that there is little statistical information on tax evasion, tax fraud and money laundering; considers that the quality of the monitoring of the implementation of directives depends on sufficient data collection being ensured from the outset; recalls that statistical data can be used to quaidentify the scale of theseuses and consequences of phenomena, as wellsuch as their impact on countries’ public finances, economic activities and public investments’; calls for technical assistance to be requested from Eurostat for the collection of comprehensive and accurate statistics and for guidance on what statistics are needed, so that they are provided in a comparable, easily coordinated digital format;
Amendment 78 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Calls for statistics to be collected in accordance with the guidelines of Eurostat or other experts concerning not only taxation but also measures against money laundering, applicants for CBI and RBI and applications that have been accepted and rejected, large transactions at free ports, customs warehouses and special economic zones, as well as disclosures made by intermediaries and whistle-blowers;
Amendment 80 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Considers that the detection of criminal offences requires both rapid provision of information by banks and intermediaries and rapid exchanges of information between national and EU authorities; takes the view that, in addition to making it possible to require banks to afford immediate access to data, it is necessary to make the information systems of tax administrations and financial intelligence units (FIUs) compatible and uniform in order to accelerate exchanges of information; considers that, in developing information systems, one objective should be a European standard to facilitate rapid exchanges of information between the Member States' police and tax authorities in cases where fraud is suspected;
Amendment 210 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
Amendment 306 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
Amendment 362 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 43
Paragraph 43
43. Reminds Member States of their obligation under the Treaty32 to cooperate loyally, sincerely and expeditiously; calls, therefore, in the light of cross-border cases, most notably in the light of the so- called Cum-Ex files, for the nomination of Single Points of Contact (SPoC) by all Member States’ national tax authorities, in line with the SPoC-system of the Joint International Taskforce on Shared Intelligence and Collaboration (JITSIC) in the framework of the OECD33, to facilitate and enhance cooperation in combating tax fraud, tax evasion and aggressive tax planning; calls further on the Commission to facilitate and coordinate cooperation between Member States’ SPoCs; _________________ 32 Article 4(3) TEU. 33 http://www.oecd.org/tax/forum-on-tax- administration/jitsic/
Amendment 367 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44 a (new)
Paragraph 44 a (new)
44a. With reference to its Cum-Ex Resolution of 29 November 2018, calls on Member States to identify loopholes in the arrangements for refunds of dividend tax and other taxes and to reform their tax systems in order to eliminate loopholes; calls on the Commission to support Member States in this task by sharing information on tax collection systems that can combat the tax collection problems that have come to light as a result of the Cum-Ex scandal; calls for an extension of mandatory automatic exchanges of information between tax authorities to include necessary information on dividend tax and tax refunds.
Amendment 400 #
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 into negotiations with Parliament in order to ensure the swift adoption of the proposal;
Amendment 450 #
2018/2121(INI)
Amendment 475 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 56
Paragraph 56
Amendment 517 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 65
Paragraph 65
65. Welcomes, therefore, the Commission’s VAT action plan of 6 April 2016 to reform the VAT framework and the 13 legislative proposals adopted by the Commission since December 2016 that address the shift towards the definitive VAT regime, remove VAT obstacles to e- commerce, review the VAT regime forwith reference to SMEs, modernise the VAT rates policy and tackle the VAT tax gap;
Amendment 520 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 66
Paragraph 66
Amendment 575 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 80 a (new)
Paragraph 80 a (new)
80а. Recalls that VAT fraud can also be used on a large scale for terrorist financing purposes; considers that combating terrorist financing is an effective way of thwarting the activities of terrorist organisations; points out that around 2% of those who commit VAT fraud make some 80% of the profits from crime, for which reason exchanges of information between the police, tax authorities and other authorities should be expedited, including in cross-border cases;
Amendment 593 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 83
Paragraph 83
Amendment 620 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 86
Paragraph 86
86. Observes that at least 5 000 non-EU citizens have obtained EU citizenship through citizenship by investment schemes58 ; notes that, according to a study published by Transparency International and Global Witness, at least 6 000 people have been granted citizenship and almost 100 000 residence permits have been issued; _________________ 58 See the above-mentioned study.
Amendment 630 #
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, threats to security and the potential for corruption, money laundering and tax evasion; reiterates its concern that citizenship or residence couldan be granted through these schemes without proper or indeed any customer due diligence (CDD) having been carried outby the competent authorities having been carried out; points out that the requirements of the Fifth Anti-Money Laundering Directive (AMLD5) compelling obliged entities to consider persons who have submitted applications under CBI and RBI schemes as being high risk for purposes of the due diligence process, do not reduce the risks associated with such schemes and must not absolve Member States from their responsibility to establish, comply with and monitor enhanced customer due diligence; 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 sustainabilre is no evidence of economic benefitys and visustainability of the investments provided through these schemes remain uncertain; stresses that, as a result of freedom of movement, systemic risks affect all Member States;
Amendment 644 #
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 someobserves that only a few Member States make explicit the name and nationalities of the individuals who are granted citizenship or residency under these schemes; calls on all Member States currently providing CBI and RBI to increase their transparency in this regard as soon as possible;
Amendment 661 #
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 and security risks they present; calls on Member States to phase out all 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 the work of the competent authorities monitored, as required by AMLD5; calls, furthermore, on the Commission to identify legislative instruments that set EU-wide uniform standards for CBI and RBI schemes; calls on the Member States to ensure that competent authorities have ultimate responsibility for assessing the due diligence processes and decisions; calls on the Commission to monitor rigorously and continuously the proper implementation and application of CDD within the framework of CBI and RBI schemes until they are repealed in each Member State;
Amendment 674 #
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; and to consider possible ways to address the problems associated with these schemes; calls on the Commission to assess the risks associated with the issuance of, and in particular the sale of, citizenship and residence permits as part of the next supranational risk assessment; also calls on the Commission to assess the risks associated with visa waiver agreements with countries operating CBI or RBI schemes; calls on the Commission to extend the list of obliged entities under the fifth Anti-Money Laundering Directive (AMLD5) to all operators and service providers involved in trade in citizenship or residence permits or acting as advisers in this field; calls on the Commission to develop procedures to coordinate the exchange of information between Member States on unsuccessful applications;
Amendment 709 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 102 a (new)
Paragraph 102 a (new)
102a. Notes that the end of banking secrecy has led to the emergence of investment in new assets such as art, which has led to rapid growth of the art market in recent years; stresses that free zones provide them with a safe and widely disregarded storage space, where trade can be conducted untaxed and ownership can be concealed, while art itself remains an unregulated market, due to factors such as the difficulty of determining market prices and finding specialists; points out that, for example, it is easier to move a valuable painting to the other side of the world than a similar amount of money;
Amendment 867 #
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 extend the list of obliged entities to operators and service providers involved in trade in citizenship or residence permits or acting as advisers in this field;
Amendment 876 #
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; stresses that the interconnection of registers should be ensured by the Commissioncalls on the Member States to establish freely accessible and transparent registers; stresses that the interconnection of registers should be ensured by the Commission; calls on the Commission to formulate and adopt technical guidelines to promote uniform formatting, 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 904 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 138 a (new)
Paragraph 138 a (new)
138a. Calls, in this context, on the Member States to implement, as soon as possible, the fifth Anti-Money Laundering Directive, which imposes an obligation on virtual currency wallet and exchange services to identify their customers, making it difficult to use virtual currencies anonymously;
Amendment 924 #
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 anti-money laundering legislation obliges Member States to publish information and statistics on the implementation of anti- money laundering measures, in particular that decisions on administrative measures or sanctions for breaches of anti-money laundering provisions must be published on the official websites of the competent authorities immediately when the person to be penalised has been informed of the decision, and that the publication should include at least information on the type and nature of the breach and the identity of those responsible; calls on the Member States, in addition, to publish information on the nature and level of sanctions imposed; calls on the Member States to apply sanctions and other measures also to members of executive bodies and other natural persons who under national law are responsible for breaches of anti- money laundering rules;
Amendment 1162 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 180
Paragraph 180
180. Believes that the protection of whistle-blowers and the provision of adequate incentives for them is of major importance to ensure that unlawful activities and abuse of law are prevented or do not prosper; stresses that whistle- blowers are often a crucial source for investigative journalism and should therefore be protected against any form of harassment and retaliation and should be guaranteed anonymity; considers that whistle-blowers must be provided with sufficient incentives, taking account of the possible long-term effects of disclosure and subsequent retaliation; believes that it is necessary to protect the confidentiality and anonymity of investigative journalism’s sources, including whistle- blowers, if the role of investigative journalism as a watchdog in democratic society is to be safeguarded; calls on the Commission to study the practices adhered to in the United States to protect and provide incentives for whistle-blowers, and to put forward a proposal to make similar schemes in the EU even more effective;
Amendment 1172 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 181 a (new)
Paragraph 181 a (new)
181a. Welcomes the Commission proposal of 23 April 2018 on the protection of whistle-blowers; regrets, however, that EU staff were not included among the target groups covered by the proposal for a directive; recognises that EU staff are currently not offered the same level of protection as in the proposal; calls on all EU agencies and institutions to tackle this shortcoming immediately by adapting their internal rules in order to reflect best international whistle-blower protection practices;
Amendment 1189 #
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 corruption and money laundering component have been murdered in Malta and, Slovakia and Bulgaria85; _________________ 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; Viktoria Marinova, murdered in Bulgaria on 6.10.2018.
Amendment 1198 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 187 a (new)
Paragraph 187 a (new)
187a. Notes that the Bulgarian authorities have initially denied that there was any connection between the murder of Viktoria Marinova and her work as a journalist; is concerned about the doubts expressed by some journalists that the murder also had a political dimension; calls, therefore, on the Bulgarian authorities to continue the investigation into the murder of Viktoria Marinova;
Amendment 1231 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 199
Paragraph 199
199. Calls for the newly elected Parliament to initiate an overall assessment on progress as regards access to documents requested by the TAXE, TAXE2, PANA and TAX3 committees, comparing the requests made with those granted by the Council and other EU institutions, and to initiate, if needed, the necessary procedural and/or legal measures;
Amendment 1282 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 207
Paragraph 207
207. Takes the view that the work of the TAXE, TAXE2, PANA and TAX3 committees should be continued, in the forthcoming parliamentary term, in a permanent structure within Parliament such as a subcommittee to the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (ECON);
Amendment 181 #
2018/2119(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Stresses the importance of increasing the labour force participation rateemployment rate and reducing unemployment in order to keep social security systems sustainable, particularly in the context of an increasing dependency ratio;
Amendment 216 #
2018/2119(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Calls for taxation reforms and tax audits, and for the use of electronic payment and taxation systems to be promoted with a view to improving tax collection; highlights the need for better coordination of administrative practices in the field of taxation;
Amendment 229 #
2018/2119(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Recalls the importance of a resilient banking sector that safeguards financial stability; welcomes calls for the step-by-step complestabilising impact that economic growth has on the banking sector; expresses its dissatisfaction ofthat the bBanking uUnion, with a credible European deposit insurance scheme and a package to reduce non-performing loan is being promoted without hundreds of billions of non- performing loans having been removed from banks’ balance sheets;
Amendment 2 #
2018/2093(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
Amendment 13 #
2018/2093(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls for any future model of differentiated integration to be designed tso provide incentives for and fully support Member States aspiring to ‘opt in’ in their efforts of economic deas not, by means of support funding, to encourage Member States short-sightedly to join systems which have lopment and conversion aimed at meeting the necessary criteria in a reasonable timeframng-term effects but no effective means of escape;
Amendment 16 #
2018/2093(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Stresses the importance for convergence of the Cohesion, Structural and Investment Funds and of the EIB, welcomes and takes a critical view of programmes such as the Reform Support Programme to help Member States on their way to joining the euro and further conversion within the EU, and requests an increase in the budget allocation for such programmes.
Amendment 8 #
2018/2028(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas multilingualism is one of Europe’s greatest assets, but also one of its biggest challenges, since it creates natural barriers to the operation of the single market and increases the EU’s administrative costs;
Amendment 17 #
2018/2028(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas LTs can contribute to future European cross-border and cross- language communication, economic growth and social stability and reduce natural barriers;
Amendment 19 #
2018/2028(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital E
Recital E
Amendment 22 #
2018/2028(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas technological mastery of human language could enable a wide range of innovative IT products and services in industry, commerce, government and administration, reducing both costs and natural barriers to the operation of the internal market, including the labour market;
Amendment 25 #
2018/2028(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas Human Language Technologies (HLTs) in Europe are still far behind, owing to market fragmentation, uncoordinated research and insufficient funding, but they are developing rapidly and offer huge potential;
Amendment 30 #
2018/2028(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital G a (new)
Recital G a (new)
Ga. whereas, given that technological development can be impeded or brought to a standstill if it is path dependent, technological neutrality and a high degree of feedback must both be ensured when technology is being developed;
Amendment 42 #
2018/2028(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Calls for earlier experience to be turned to account, one example being the development of the Internet and email as a university network internal communication tool, in order to ensure good-quality feedback, user-friendliness, and technological neutrality;
Amendment 49 #
2018/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas sustainable financing must at the same time take into account a number of market failures, such as (1) negative externalities affecting the environment, (2) the systemic risk to financial and capital markets (lying in the possibility that the buck may stop with the taxpayer once the entire financial sector is threatened), (3) society's need to fund investment in clean energy and green solutions (based on the positive externalities of innovation, which mean that their funding is too low), and (4) the lack of funding due to asymmetric information;
Amendment 61 #
2018/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses the potential oflimited possibilities presented by a faster green transition as an opportunity forin order to orienting capital markets towards long- term, innovative and efficient investments; notes that environmental, social and governance (ESG) benefits and risks are not reflected, because of which they should be fully introduced; notes that the best way to take into account environmental, social and governance (ESG) benefits and risks is, on the basis of environmental and other policies, to incorporate them directly into prices and that thisasset values; since this is mostly not being done, the current situation provides a market advantage to unsustainable and short-termist geared finance; stresses that a political and regulatory framework to govern sustainable finance is overdue;
Amendment 75 #
2018/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Recalls that private investment in green-economy undertakings was extremely strong before the financial crisis, at a time when oil prices stood at record levels, and that, despite low interest rates, the risks associated with financial markets and economic development are still considered too high on the financial markets for private financing to be channelled sufficiently into long-term sustainable investments;
Amendment 83 #
2018/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses 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; emphasises in that respect the instrumental role of economic, fiscal and monetary policy in fostering sustainable finance by facilitating capital allocation to decarbonised 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, which is why it is high time to discontinue the free allocation of greenhouse gas emission allowances and to do away with all support which promotes carbon dioxide emissions;
Amendment 97 #
2018/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Emphasises the massive systemic risks thatat, although value is still attached to carbon investment on the balance sheets of undertakings, the situation may be different in the future, once the transition to a low-carbon society has been achieved; after the transition, stranded carbon assets may represent to financial stabilitya massive systemic risk to financial stability if undertakings and financial institutions do not wake up to the situation in time; stresses the need for the identification and mandatory reporting of these assets as essential to the orderly transition to climate-positive investments; calls for the introduction of ‘carbon stress tests’ for banks and other financial intermediaries to determine the risks related to such stranded assets;
Amendment 113 #
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, and to take into account sustainability in all public investments;
Amendment 116 #
2018/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Calls on the Member States to assess the cost and funding of the necessary national and municipal public investment, with a view to ensuring that the ample funding available for investment is used where the need for, and the returns on, sustainable investment are greatest, whether to repair mould-infected local-authority schools or to modernise water treatment technologies;
Amendment 149 #
2018/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Welcomes the recent inclusion of sustainability issues in the PRIIPs and STS Regulations, as well as in Shareholders Rights Directive and the NFRD; stresses, however, the need to ensure comparability of the risks associated with products by separating financial risks from environmental risks; applauds the inclusion in the IORPs Directive of recognition of stranded assets; asks for the transversal integration of sustainable finance criteria in all legislation related to the financial sector, but without jeopardising the ability of consumers to evaluate the yields and risks associated with their investments;
Amendment 162 #
2018/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Asks the Commission to adopt a regulatory strategy aimed inter alia at measuring sustainability risks within the framework of capital adequacy rules; stresses that capital adequacy rules must be based on and fully reflect demonstrated risks; aims to initiate an EU pilot project within the next annual budget to begin developing methodological benchmarks for that purpose; stresses, at the same time, that concern for sustainable financing must not undermine efforts to restore financial stability, or for deepening integration and increasing the level of EU spending, but that in all action, including the use of EU funds, an effort should be made to improve the allocation of resources, in order to safeguard the environment and save resources;
Amendment 211 #
2018/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Calls on the European supervisory authorities to formulate guidelines on the collection of statistics on the identification and integration into financing of environmental, social and governance risks, and calls for statistics to be published wherever possible;
Amendment 228 #
2018/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Calls on national banking and financial market authorities to draw up clear and concise instructions on how the new classification system and other changes associated with this legislation can be implemented without this generating unavoidable costs and delays;
Amendment 234 #
2018/2007(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Notes the urgent need for a uniform standard for green bonds; insists that such green bonds 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; points out that such efforts should not be jeopardised by giving Eurobonds a green veneer;
Amendment 73 #
2018/0212(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) In order, in particular, to help Member States whose currency is the euro to respond better to rapidly changing economic circumstances and stabilise their economies by preserving public investment in the event of large asymmetric shocks, a European Investment SThe Stabilisation Function will not resolve the structural competition problems of the euro area: on the contrary. So that the euro countries that are suffering from structural, long-term competition problems do not perpetuate their unemployment and do not delay solutions to their problems by incurring debt, the market mechanism must be allowed to operate. Public support, such as a stabilisation function, maintains the inefficient allocation of resources, because it acts as a brake on the adjustment of the price level to a changed market situation. In this way, long-term unemployment and related labour market exclusion are aggravated and problems become more intractable. If the problems of a euro country affected by an asymmetric shock are only transient, it is not difficult for the euro country concerned to borrow on the financial markets, so there is no need for so-called stabilisation Ffunction (EISF) should be established. s financed from public funds.
Amendment 25 #
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. 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, or due to the lack of confidence in the usefulness of reporting.
Amendment 35 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) Whistleblower protection is necessary to enhance the enforcement of Union law on public procurement. In addition to the need of preventing and detecting fraud and corruption in the context of the implementation of the EU budget, including procurement, it is necessary to tackle insufficient enforcement of rules on public procurement by national public authorities and certain public utility operators when purchasing goods, works and services. Breaches of such rules create distortions of competition, increase costs for doing business, violate the interests of investors and shareholders and, overall, lower attractiveness for investment and create an uneven level playing field for all businesses across Europe, thus affecting the proper functioning of the internal market. Attention must also be paid to protecting those reporting misuse or misconduct regarding the EU budget and EU institutions.
Amendment 59 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 24
Recital 24
(24) Persons need specific legal protection where they acquire the information they report through their work- related activities and therefore run the risk of work-related retaliation (for instance, for breaching the duty of confidentiality or loyalty). 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 retaliation.
Amendment 62 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 26
Recital 26
(26) Protection should, firstly, apply to persons having the status of 'workers', within the meaning of Article 45 TFEU, as interpreted by the Court of Justice of the European Union52 , i.e. persons who, for a certain period of time, perform services for and under the direction of another person, in return of which they receive remuneration. Protection should thus also be granted to workers in non-standard employment relationships, including part- time workers and fixed-term contract workers, as well as persons with a contract of employment or employment relationship with a temporary agency, which are types of relationships where standard protections against unfair treatment are often difficult to apply. Considering the report by Transparency International published in the summer of 2018 underscoring the need for whistleblower protection within EU institutions as well, protection should extend similarly to EU staff. _________________ 52 Judgments of 3 July 1986, Lawrie-Blum, Case 66/85; 14 October 2010, Union Syndicale Solidaires Isère, Case C-428/09; 9 July 2015, Balkaya, Case C-229/14; 4 December 2014, FNV Kunsten, Case C- 413/13; and 17 November 2016, Ruhrlandklinik, Case C-216/15.
Amendment 64 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 27
Recital 27
(27) Protection should also extend to people facilitating the reporting, such as intermediaries, NGO activists and investigative journalists, who disclose potential or actual breaches, as well as 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 activities. 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. In the case of such whistleblowers as NGOs, journalists, investigators and human rights defenders, there is a risk of being targeted with strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPP). 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 84 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 55
Recital 55
(55) Member States and EU institutions should ensure that competent authorities have in place adequate protection procedures for the processing of reports of infringements and for the protection of the personal data of the persons referred to in the report. Such procedures should ensure that the identity of every reporting person, concerned person, and third persons referred to in the report (e.g. witnesses or colleagues) is protected at all stages of the procedure. This obligation should be without prejudice to the necessity and proportionality of the obligation to disclose information when this is required by Union or national law and subject to appropriate safeguards under such laws, including in the context of investigations or judicial proceedings or to safeguard the freedoms of others, including the rights of defence of the concerned person.
Amendment 86 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 57
Recital 57
(57) Member States and EU institutions should ensure the adequate record-keeping of all reports of infringement and that every report is retrievable within the competent authority and that information received through reports could be used as evidence in enforcement actions where appropriate.
Amendment 148 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. Member States and EU institutions shall ensure that the competent authorities:
Amendment 155 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 3
Article 6 – paragraph 3
3. Member States and EU institutions shall ensure that competent authorities follow up on the reports by taking the necessary measures and investigate, to the extent appropriate, the subject-matter of the reports. The competent authorities shall communicate to the reporting person the final outcome of the investigations.
Amendment 158 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 4
Article 6 – paragraph 4
4. Member States and EU institutions 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.
Amendment 163 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 4
Article 7 – paragraph 4
4. Member States and EU institutions 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 165 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 1
1. Member States and EU institutions shall ensure that competent authorities have staff members dedicated to handling reports. Dedicated staff members shall receive specific training for the purposes of handling reports.
Amendment 170 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Member States and EU institutions shall ensure that competent authorities publish on their websites in a separate, easily identifiable and accessible section at least the following information:
Amendment 172 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 1
Article 11 – paragraph 1
1. Member States and EU institutions shall ensure that competent authorities keep records of every report received.
Amendment 173 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 1
Member States and EU institutions shall ensure that competent authorities review their procedures for receiving reports and their follow-up regularly, and at least once every two years. In reviewing such procedures competent authorities shall take account of their experience and that of other competent authorities and adapt their procedures accordingly.
Amendment 179 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Member States and EU institutions shall take the necessary measures to prohibit any form of retaliation, whether direct or indirect, against reporting persons meeting the conditions set out in Article 13, including in particular in the form of:
Amendment 189 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 1
Article 15 – paragraph 1
1. Member States and EU institutions shall take the necessary measures to ensure the protection of reporting persons meeting the conditions set out in Article 13 against retaliation. Such measures shall include, in particular, those set out in paragraphs 2 to 8.
Amendment 190 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 8
Article 15 – paragraph 8
8. In addition to providing legal aid to reporting persons in criminal and in cross- border civil proceedings in accordance with Directive (EU) 2016/1919 and Directive 2008/52/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council63 , and in accordance with national law, Member States and EU institutions may provide for further measures of legal and financial assistance and support for reporting persons in the framework of legal proceedings. _________________ 63 Directive 2008/52/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2008 on certain aspects of mediation in civil and commercial matters (OJ L 136, 24.5.2008, p. 3).
Amendment 192 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 1
Article 16 – paragraph 1
1. Member States and EU institutions shall ensure that the concerned persons fully enjoy the right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial as well as the presumption of innocence and the rights of defence, including the right to be heard and the right to access their file, in accordance with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.
Amendment 194 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Member States and EU institutions shall provide for effective, proportionate and dissuasive penalties applicable to natural or legal persons that:
Amendment 200 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 20 – paragraph 1
Article 20 – paragraph 1
1. Member States and EU institutions shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive by 15 May 2021, at the latest. They shall forthwith communicate to the Commission the text of those provisions.
Amendment 202 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 21 – paragraph 1
Article 21 – paragraph 1
1. Member States and EU institutions shall provide the Commission with all relevant information regarding the implementation and application of this Directive. On the basis of the information provided, the Commission shall, by 15 May 2023, submit a report to the European Parliament and the Council on the implementation and application of this Directive.
Amendment 203 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 21 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 21 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. Without prejudice to reporting obligations laid down in other Union legal acts, Member States and EU institutions shall, on an annual basis, submit the following statistics on the reports referred to in Chapter III to the Commission, if they are available at a central level in the Member State concerned:
Amendment 204 #
2018/0106(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 21 – paragraph 3
Article 21 – paragraph 3
3. The Commission shall, by 15 May 2027, taking into account its report submitted pursuant to paragraph 1 and the Member States’ statistics submitted pursuant to paragraph 2, submit a report to the European Parliament and to the Council assessing the impact of national law transposing this Directive. The report shall evaluate the way in which this Directive has operated and consider the need for additional measures, including, where appropriate, amendments with a view to extending the scope of this Directive to further areas or Union acts. Statistics and reports related to whistleblowing within EU institutions are published.
Amendment 28 #
2018/0105(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) Sharing information between Financial Intelligence Units and with competent authorities should only be permitted where it is necessary on a case- by-case basis, either for the prevention, detection, investigation or prosecution of serious criminal offences or for money laundering, the associated predicate offences and terrorist financing.
Amendment 36 #
2018/0105(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) Under its specific competences and tasks as laid down in Article 4 of Regulation (EU) 2016/794 of the European Parliament and of the Council16, Europol provides support to Member States’ cross- border investigations into the money laundering activities of transnational criminal organisations. According to Regulation (EU) 2016/794, the Europol National Units are the liaison bodies between Europol and the Member States' authorities competent to investigate criminal offences. To provide Europol with the information necessary to carry out its tasks, Member States should provide that their Financial Intelligence Unit replies swiftly and to the best of its ability to requests for financial information and financial analysis made by Europol through the respective Europol National Unit. Member States should also provide that their Europol National Unit replies to requests for information on bank accounts by Europol. Requests made by Europol have to be duly justified. They have to be made on a case-by case basis, within the limits of Europol's responsibilities and for the performance of its tasks. _________________ 16 Regulation (EU) 2016/794 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2016 on the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation (Europol) and replacing and repealing Council Decisions 2009/371/JHA, 2009/934/JHA, 2009/935/JHA, 2009/936/JHA and 2009/968/JHA, OJ L 135, 24.5.2016, p. 53.
Amendment 40 #
2018/0105(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) To achieve the appropriate balance between efficiency and a high level of data protection, Member States should be required to ensure that the processing of sensitive financial information that could reveal a person's race or ethnic origin, political opinions, religion or philosophical beliefs, trade union membership, health, sexual life or sexual orientation should be allowed only to the extent that it is strictly necessary and relevant to a specific investigation.
Amendment 232 #
2018/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 12 a (new)
Recital 12 a (new)
(12 a) At present, there are no common European minimum standards to regulate credit servicers. In particular, no common standards have been laid out to regulate debt collection.
Amendment 236 #
2018/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) Therefore, action at Union level is necessary in order to address the position of credit purchasers and credit servicers in relation to credit originally granted by credit institutions. It is not proposed to cover credit originally issued by non-credit institutions or debt collection in general at this stage, as there is no evidence of macroeconomic relevance, misaligned incentives or ill-funlthough experiences in some Member States point towards a need to establish common European minimum standards to regulate credit servicers, and debt collection ing markets for such an extended scope particular.
Amendment 257 #
2018/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 54 a (new)
Recital 54 a (new)
(54 a) Member States should ensure that behaviour or practices that may invade consumers' privacy, damage their dignity or mislead them, are prohibited.
Amendment 320 #
2018/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. The Commission, in cooperation with other relevant stakeholders, should issue guidelines that help Member States specify what behaviour should be considered as invasive to consumers' privacy, or could damage their dignity or mislead them.
Amendment 11 #
2017/2226(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas, according to Commission forecasts, the expansion of the European economy is expected to continue, although the pace of job creation and household purchasing power growth implies a slight loss of momentum over the next two years, with growth reaching 2.3 % this year in the EU and then marginally slowing to 2.1 % in 2018 and to ease slightly to 1.9 % in 2019; whereas, however, growth is still fragile and relies on a continuing monetary policy stimulus;
Amendment 20 #
2017/2226(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas private consumption growth is expected to drop slightly next year before easing in 2019, as a result of higher inflation compared to last year, which is dampening the purchasing power of households and this effect is likely to be only partially mitigated by lower private savings; on the other hand, inflation remains significantly below the ECB’s target of 2% per annum, so that deflation has not yet been eliminated;
Amendment 30 #
2017/2226(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) has provided important support for investment in the EU, in addition to the European Structural and Investment Funds, whilere is no clear research- based evidence that the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) and the European Structural and Investment Funds have produced any results over and above those which would have been achieved without their involvement; at the same time, the orientation of savings towards equity has decreased returns and provided fewer incentives for investment;
Amendment 42 #
2017/2226(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas employment is expected to continue to expand, while some labour market indicators and the relatively high level of ‘involuntary’ part-time work, suggest persistent labour market difficulties aggravating inequalitiesproblems of competitiveness, which are being allowed to be resolved slowly through falls in unemployment and in wages, as hitherto;
Amendment 164 #
2017/2226(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
Amendment 346 #
2017/2226(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Highlights the importance of an improved European Semester process, including the formalisation of the euro area aggregate fiscal stance as a key tool for policy formulation and implementation across the EMU; calls for a broader reformreturn to the market discipline of the Stability and Growth Pact (SGP) in order to improve its flexibility, to incorporate the differentiated treatment of investments and to introduce the concept of aggregate fiscal stanc, if possible;
Amendment 140 #
2017/2191(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Underlines that the bailout of Veneto Banca and Banca Popolare di Vicenza was based on the assumption that these were systemic banks in their region, and; notes that in future such examples may be relied on for obtaining state aid; calls on the Commission to develop thisplit such banks line of thinking into smaller units or find other ways to prevent systemic risks and to secure compliance with EU rules and the bail-in principle;
Amendment 152 #
2017/2191(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Believes that the financial crisis has increased concentration in the banking sector, and calls on the Commission to carry out a region-by-region study at European level to examine this phenomenon and its effects on competitionthat this is being deliberately encouraged with a view to the resolution of non-performing credits; calls on the Commission to ensure competition in the event of mergers and, as regards systemic risk, to guard against the emergence of over-large banks;
Amendment 26 #
2017/2173(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Considers that the minutes of meetings of the Board of Supervisors and of the Stakeholder Groups, which are publicly available, should be published more swiftly so that it is possible to monitor any interference with supervision by parties in positions of influence.
Amendment 27 #
2017/2172(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Considers that the minutes of meetings of the Board of Supervisors and of the Stakeholder Groups, which are publicly available, should be published more swiftly, so that it is possible to monitor any interference with supervision by parties in positions of influence.
Amendment 31 #
2017/2171(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Considers that the minutes of meetings of the Board of Supervisors and of the Stakeholder Groups, which are publicly available, should be published more swiftly so that it is possible to monitor any interference with supervision by parties in positions of influence.
Amendment 30 #
2017/2072(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas at the end of 2016 the total number of credit institutions in the euro area stood at 5 073 on an unconsolidated basis, down from 5 475 in 2015, 5 614 in 2014 and 6 767 3in 20083, but whereas it is desirable to include a reference to how the proportion of too-big-to-fail banks has changed over the same period; _________________ 3 For the data on 2015, 2014 and 2008, see: ECB, Report on Financial Structures, October 2016, p. 22. The data for 2016 have been sent to us by the ECB and are based on the SDW (http://sdw.ecb.europa.eu/). They can be updated once the Report on Financial Structures for 2017 is available.
Amendment 38 #
2017/2072(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the stock of non- performing loans of significant institutions (SIs) stood at EUR 865 billion at the end of March 2017, but it is desirable to make a reference to how the number has developed during the crisis;
Amendment 50 #
2017/2072(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the 2017 banking cases have shown that the move from bail-out to bail-in has yet to be finalisedmust always be made;
Amendment 112 #
2017/2072(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes the ECB’s determination in the context of the precautionary recapitalisation of Monte dei Paschi di Siena that the bank is solvent and meets the capital requirements; notes, in this regard, that the determination of solvency leaves room for an element of subjectivity as this determination greatly depends on how a bank’s assets are valued; observes that the credibility of subscription to bonds and bail-ins has at all events suffered, because the bank was rescued by means of State aid;
Amendment 143 #
2017/2072(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Reiterates its concerns about the high level of non-performing loans (NPLs) in certain jurisdictions; agrees with the Commission that ‘Member States and banks themselves have a primary responsibility in tackling non-performing loans’'4; welcomes, nonetheless,expresses its dissatisfaction with the work done by different EU institutions and bodies on this issue by promoting or increasing solidarity; calls on these actors and the Member States to duly implement the Council conclusions of 11 July 2017 on the action plan to tackle non- performing loans in Europeeal with non-performing loans before progressing within the Banking Union; _________________ 4 Commission communication on completing the Banking Union, 11 October 2017, p. 15 (COM(2017)0592).
Amendment 168 #
2017/2072(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Recalls that there are risks associated with sovereign debt; notes that in some Member States financial institutions have overly invested in bonds issued by their own governments, constituting excessive ‘home bias’; takes note, in this respect, of the Commission’s ongoing work on the idea of so-called sovereign bond-backed securities (SBBS)recalls that the idea of so-called sovereign bond-backed securities (SBBS), on which the Commission is currently working, entails its own systemic risks;
Amendment 307 #
2017/2072(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Calls for progress to be made on the legislative proposals implementing total loss-absorbing capacity (TLAC) in Union law and for it to be broadened and completed, separating investment banking and retail banking from each other; supports the inclusion of a pre- resolution moratorium tool in the BRRD;
Amendment 352 #
2017/2072(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Recalls that deposit protection is a common concern for all EU citizens and that tax payers have to pick up the tab for the failure of non-performing loans and too-big-to fail banks; is currently debating the proposal on an EDIS at committee level; notes, in this respect, that the Commission’s more proportionate ‘new approach’ to an EDIS as put forward in its communication of 11 October 2017 presupposes solution of the problems of non-performing loans and too-big-to fail banks;
Amendment 383 #
2017/2072(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Notes the potential benefits and the likely risks related to the introduction of an EDIS; considers, therefore, risk reduction measures to bthat measures to reduce all risks are essential building blocks laying the foundations for an EDIS;
Amendment 5 #
2017/2053(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. WelcomesTakes note of the work of the High Level Group on Own Resources, and in particular the measures aimed at reducing the share of the GNI-based contribution, which is residual in nature; argues that this reduction should be compensated for by the use of genuine own resources;
Amendment 26 #
2017/2053(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Considers that preference should be given to genuine European own resources, such as a tax based on the cthe right to tax people in Europe should be retained solely and exclusively by the Member States, and that any additional revenue from possible harmonisation of taxation, such as from a Common cConsolidated cCorporate tTax bBase (CCCTB) and a contribution based on a definitive VAT system, thereby delivering a fairer system for European citizens with respec, should be credited only to the budgets of the Member States concerned, not to the EU budget;.
Amendment 36 #
2017/2053(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Advocates the establishment of a budgetary capacity for the Eurozone that would perform functions of macroeconomic Rejects the proposal to estabilisation and bring about economic and social convergence; considers, moreover, that this capacity should be financed through own resources specific toh a budgetary capacity for the eEuro area, such as a tax on financial transactions, a bank levy and a share of the ECB’s profitszone;
Amendment 53 #
2017/2053(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. ConsiderEmphasizes that the EU should be able to issue zero-risk debt assets in order to offset the volatility in own resources’ revenues;must not issue any type of public debt, since Article 310 (1) TFEU requires revenue and expenditure in the annual budget to be in balance.
Amendment 65 #
2017/2053(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Stresses, with a view to achieving common EU and Eurozone economic governance objectives, the need for adequate financial support, which should bimportance of the no-bailout principle financed by genuine own resources in order to ensure democratic legitim Article 125 TFEU and strict adherence to the Stability and Growth Pacyt;
Amendment 66 #
2017/2053(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
Amendment 79 #
2017/2053(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
Amendment 93 #
2017/2053(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
Amendment 11 #
2017/2052(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
Amendment 35 #
2017/2052(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses that funding should be guaranteed for the new industrial policy strategy so that the EU can become the world leader in innovation, digitisation and decarbonisation; calls for the necessary financial programme to be safeguarded through a dedicated investment programme that facilitates the development of a comprehensive industrial strategy; takes the view that the effectiveness of funding of the new industrial policy strategy should be ensured by continuous gathering of sufficient statistics to realise high-quality follow-up and regular independent impact assessments;
Amendment 80 #
2017/2052(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Reiterates that, in the next MFF, financial instruments cannot replace grants in financing energy efficiency, renewable energy, innovative technologies for conventional energy and R&I projects, as only grants can maximise output on the ground; takes the view that the effectiveness of grants and other funding instruments should be ensured by regular impact assessments that can directly guide the allocation of new funding.
Amendment 95 #
2017/2052(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Recalls the importance of completing the digital single market by making full use of spectrum, 5G and internet connectivity, and by making further progress on EU telecom rules, including harmonisation of pricing and ensuring a flexible service throughout the EU;
Amendment 115 #
2017/2052(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Reiterates the need to continue wit, in so far as the programmes under Horizon 2020 promote technology and knowledge by producing either basic research Horizon 2020 useful applied research, to continue its funding and to provide it with at least the same share of funding as at present in order to respond to societal challenges and secure Europe’s global competitiveness and industrial leadership in innovationposition in the forefront of industrial technology; calls also for a greater focus on implementing innovation through joint undertakings, on supporting investment in key technologies and on ensuring that SMEs have better access to risk capital;
Amendment 130 #
2017/2052(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Calls for an upgraded EFSI that would make it possible to bridge the gap between research and the market and would focus on boosting market innovationsupport innovative solutions and the development of technologies without sidelining private innovative projects and their funding, because what Europe needs is increased private risk capital rather than public funding;
Amendment 141 #
2017/2052(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Emphasises that the next EU budget should include sufficient space-related funding to continue and further develop the EU’s flagship Galileo, EGNOS and Copernicus space programmes; similarly, it needs to be ensured that space programmes engender positive technological developments which then spread to other parts of society;
Amendment 159 #
2017/2052(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Draws attention to the European Defence Fund and the recent Commission proposal for a European defence industrial development programme which is intended to cover the period 2019-2020; welcomes the Commission’s intention to submit both a more substantial defence industrial development programme and a programme to support defence research as part of the MFF; considers that these programmes should not draw funds away from other programmes in the same heading. similarly, it needs to be ensured that defence programmes engender positive technological developments which then spread to other parts of society;
Amendment 26 #
2017/0333R(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the introduction of the euro is one of the European project’s most significant political achievemain causes of Europe’s major economic problems, such as over- indebtedness, unemployments and a cornerstone of EMU constructionweak economic growth;
Amendment 33 #
2017/0333R(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the financial and economic crisis has revealed the weaknesses of the euro architecture, highlighting the need for the swift completion of the EMU;
Amendment 44 #
2017/0333R(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas membership of a common currency area requires common rules and obligations, as well as common tools to respond to symmetric and asymmetric shocks and for the promotion of solidarity and socioeconomic upward convergence; whereas risk reduction and risk sharing should go hand in hand in deepening the EMU to be respected;
Amendment 93 #
2017/0333R(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
Amendment 106 #
2017/0333R(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
Amendment 137 #
2017/0333R(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 143 #
2017/0333R(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
Amendment 212 #
2017/0333R(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
Amendment 7 #
2017/0326(COD)
Draft legislative resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Deplores the fact that the Council missed the opportunity to negotiate with France on the European Parliament's double seat arrangement, and points out that having a double seat is incompatible with sustainable development, good governance, avoiding wasteful use of resources, supporting democratic decision-making, and gender equality objectives;
Amendment 11 #
2017/0326(COD)
Draft legislative resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Believes that the European Parliament should be systematically andinvolved, on equal terms with the Commission and Council involved, in defining and weighting the criteria for the location of all Union bodies and agencies, as well as in decision-making on its own location; requests the Commission and Council to launch a revision of the Joint Statement of 19 July 2012 on decentralised agencies with the aim of ensuring a strong involvement of the European Parliament whilst respecting in particular its co- decision powers;
Amendment 46 #
2017/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) A broad range of investments which establish or maintain lasting and direct links between investors from third countries and undertakings carrying out an economic activity in a Member State should be covered. In addition, the framework should cover short-term investment masquerading as a long-term commitment, including direct investment flows intended to avoid tax or for money laundering purposes, and investment channelled towards sectors with high research and product development expenditure with a view to acquiring technology.
Amendment 100 #
2017/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. The framework for screening carried out by Member States on the grounds of security or public order should, in particular, include projects or programmes relating to critical infrastructure, critical inputs, or critical technology.
Amendment 109 #
2017/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – indent 2
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – indent 2
- critical technologies, including artificial intelligence, robotics, semiconductors, technologies with potential dual use applications, cybersecurity, space or nuclear technology, and technologies developed using public support;
Amendment 115 #
2017/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – indent 4 a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – indent 4 a (new)
- foreign investors' property acquisitions that might affect security or public order.
Amendment 128 #
2017/0224(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 a (new)
The measures referred to in the first paragraph shall include direct investment statistics reflecting real investment, compiled in accordance with OECD and IMF guidelines so as to exclude balance of payments financial flows.
Amendment 27 #
2017/0138(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) Member States find it increasingly difficult to protect their national tax bases from erosion as tax planning structures have evolved to be particularly sophisticated and often take advantage of the increased mobility of both capital and persons within the internal market. These structures commonly consist of arrangements which are developed across various jurisdictions and move taxable profits towards more beneficial tax regimes or have the effect of reducing the taxpayer´’s overall tax bill. As a result, Member States often experience considerable reductions in their tax revenues which hinder them from applying growth-friendly tax policies, in addition to other harmful effects to transparency and regulation of enterprises. It is therefore critical that Member States' tax authorities obtain comprehensive and relevant information about potentially aggressive tax arrangements. This information would enable those authorities to be able to promptly react against harmful tax practices and to close loopholes through enacting legislation or by undertaking adequate risk assessments and carrying out tax audits.
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 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 47 #
2017/0138(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 6 a (new)
Recital 6 a (new)
(6a) Recent tax-related leaks have also underlined the need for better information exchange on aggressive tax planning arrangements. To highlight one example, it is scandalous that despite of various inquiries on Apple’s tax practices, its recent Jersey-based tax avoidance structure was only revealed with the Paradise Papers leak.
Amendment 51 #
2017/0138(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) It is acknowledged that the disclosure of potentially aggressive cross- border tax planning arrangements would stand a better chance of achieving its envisaged deterrent effect where the relevant information reached the tax authorities at an early stage, in other words before the disclosed arrangements are actually implemented. Where the disclosure obligation is shifted to taxpayers, it would be practical to place the obligation to disclose those potentially aggressive cross-border tax planning arrangements at a slightly later stage, as taxpayers may not be aware of the nature of the arrangements at the time of the inception. To facilitate Member States' administrations, the subsequent automatic exchange of information on these arrangements could take place every quarter.
Amendment 56 #
2017/0138(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9 a (new)
Recital 9 a (new)
(9a) The constantly growing role and importance of intellectual property rights in the business models and tax structures of large corporations further underline the urgency of better information exchange on tax avoidance arrangements, given the various easy options that the use of immaterial rights give for artificial transfer of profits.
Amendment 57 #
2017/0138(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9 b (new)
Recital 9 b (new)
(9b) The lack of comprehensive, public country-by-country reporting on relevant financial figures of major multinational enterprises has contributed into the poor reliability of aggregated data on offshore structures, highlighted by the fact that many of the recent high-profile tax avoidance structures are not visible in the current commercial corporate financial account databases. These gaps in statistics hinder the attempts of tax authorities to conduct risk assessments on risk jurisdictions and underlines the need for greater information exchange on tax planning structures.
Amendment 63 #
2017/0138(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 11 a (new)
Recital 11 a (new)
(11a) Penalties are to be effective, proportionate and dissuasive, but their design is left for Member States’ legislation. Since all Member States might not have the incentives to design and implement effective sanctions, in order to ensure consistent implementation across Member States, the exchange of information between tax authorities has to be automatic also in regard to penalties imposed, as well as to situations where the Member State has refrained from imposing any.
Amendment 69 #
2017/0138(CNS)
(13a) Since the knowledge source of new procedures are Member States, which might have a tradition of enticing foreign direct investment with tax advantages, sufficient incentives to expose tax avoidance arrangements in good time must be in place. In particular, sanctions should be increasing with elapsed time on non-reporting to national tax authorities and on sharing the new procedures that meet the specified hallmarks with other Member States’ tax authorities.
Amendment 80 #
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 e
Article 3 – point 18 – point e
(e) such arrangement or series of arrangements hascan potentially have a tax- related impact on at least two jurisdictions.
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 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 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 105 #
2017/0138(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 (new)
Directive 2011/16/EU
Chapter II – section II – Article 8 a a a – paragraph 4 a (new)
Chapter II – section II – Article 8 a a a – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Each Member State shall take the necessary measures to investigate the tax arrangements disclosed through the exchange of information provided by this Directive, as well as to provide the resources required for this to their tax authorities.
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 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 54 #
2017/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) Articles 101 and 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) are a matter of public policy and should be applied effectively throughout the Union to ensure that competition in the internal market is not distorted. Effective enforcement of Articles 101 and 102 TFEU is necessary to ensure more open competitive markets in Europe, where companies compete more on their merits and without company erected barriers to market entry, enabling them to generate wealth and create jobs. ItCompetition is an important incentive for innovation. Europe’s small, segmented markets typically suffer more from the lack of it. Competition protects consumers from business practices that keep the prices of goods and services artificially high and enhances their choice of innovative goods and services.
Amendment 78 #
2017/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) NCAs should have the necessary resources, in terms of staff, expertise, financial means and technical equipment, to ensure they can effectively perform their tasks when applying Articles 101 and 102 TFEU. In case their duties and powers under national law are extended, the resources that are necessary to perform those tasks should still be sufficient. Competition authorities, in particular, must be given the capability and knowledge to maintain competition among goods in the digital economy whose value is dependent on network externalities. In the digital economy, network externality goods, such as payment cards, are more common than in the past. If they are successful, they become natural monopolies, as the number of customers increases the value of the product to other customers. The ability of the competition authorities to act and their knowledge and cooperation in the field of regulation of pricing or regulation of income distribution should be developed at European level in relation to network externality goods, in order to ensure that costs are properly allocated and that healthy competition, innovation, the digital economy and technological development are not stifled or the interests of consumers harmed.
Amendment 5 #
2016/2224(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas since the financial crisis of 2007-2009 we have seen a wave of action against international tax avoidance and evasion; whistle-blowers have played an important role in sustaining this momentum;
Amendment 7 #
2016/2224(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A b (new)
Recital A b (new)
Ab. whereas the already agreed initiatives to strengthen international information exchange in tax matters have been very helpful and the various tax- related leaks have revealed large amounts of societally important information on private malpractices that would not have surfaced otherwise;
Amendment 8 #
2016/2224(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A c (new)
Recital A c (new)
Ac. whereas the focus of global anti- corruption efforts have thus far been predominantly focused on public sector wrongdoings, yet recent leaks have highlighted the role of financial institutions, advisers and other private companies in facilitating corruption;
Amendment 9 #
2016/2224(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A d (new)
Recital A d (new)
Ad. whereas the introduction of public beneficial ownership registries for company trusts and similar legal arrangements and other transparency measures for investment vehicles may act as a counter-deterrent against the wrongdoings that whistle-blowers typically address;
Amendment 12 #
2016/2224(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas it is regrettable that the existing channels for making formal complaints about misconduct of Multinational Enterprises rarely result in any concrete punishments for wrongdoings;
Amendment 20 #
2016/2224(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas there are cultural differences across the European Union which must be respected and the establishment of whistle-blowing channels that work within these cultures and different national legal systems should be encouraged;
Amendment 47 #
2016/2224(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Reiterates that given the often technical nature of the leaked information and barriers that officials face in their attempts to access it, inside whistle- blowers may often be the only option for bringing societally illegal activities to the public;
Amendment 48 #
2016/2224(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Calls for more transparency in the financial services sphere in order to discourage malpractice and allow the appropriate environment for whistle- blowing when necessary;
Amendment 57 #
2016/2224(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Calls on public and private organisations to establish internal whistle-blowing procedures for their employees including rights and obligations and redress measures; these internal procedures should not act as a tool for prohibiting the act of information the wider public of illegal activities that severely harm the public interest;
Amendment 75 #
2016/2224(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Calls on the Commission to confirm the full implementation in both the Commission and EU Agencies of their own guidelines protecting whistle-blowers as per amendments to their staff regulations in 2012, thereby setting an example for all public and private bodies in the EU and beyond.
Amendment 80 #
2016/2224(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Expresses the need to achieve a better functioning system for reporting corporate malpractices that complement and seek to improve the efficiency of the current National Contact Points for the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises;
Amendment 85 #
2016/2224(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 c (new)
Paragraph 5 c (new)
5c. Stresses the need for more attention to be put on business ethics in the educational curricula of business studies and related disciplines.
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 40 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Recalls the role of Parliament as foreseen in the regulation, in particular in relation to the monitoring of EFSI implementation;, acknowledges, however, that it is too early to finalise a comprehensive assessment of the functioning of EFSI and its impact on the EU economy, but is of the opinion that a preliminary evaluation is crucial in order to identify possible areas of improvement for EFSI 2.0 and thereafternd questions the deletion of the provision linking the continuation of EFSI to the results of an independent evaluation;
Amendment 47 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Acknowledges that it is not too early to assess the functioning of EFSI and its expected impact on the EU economy, considering the absence of evidence on significant additionality effects in the independent evaluation commissioned by the Commission; acknowledges and understands that the lack of significant additionality effects means that no significant impacts with respect to growth and jobs can be expected from EFSI;
Amendment 58 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Recalls that the purpose of EFSI is to ensure additionality by helping to address market failures or suboptimal investment situations and supporting operations which could not have been carried out under existing Union financial instrumentsotherwise;
Amendment 68 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Recalls that the projects supported by EFSI, while striving to create employment, sustainable growth, economic, territorial and social cohesion, are considered to provide additionality if they carry a risk corresponding to EIB special activities, as defined in Article 16 of the EIB Statute and by the credit risk policy guidelines of the EIBould not have been carried out otherwise; underlines that EIB projects carrying a risk lower than the minimum risk under EIB special activities may also be supported by EFSI only if use of the EU guarantee is required to ensure additionality;
Amendment 79 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Notes that, while all projects approved under EFSI are presented as ‘special activities’, anthe independent evaluation hascommissioned by the Commission found that somealmost all projects could have been financed otherwise, merely not all to the same vague extent;
Amendment 88 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on the Commission, in cooperation with the EIB, to draw up an inventory of all EU-backed EIB financing falling under the additionality criteria and specify which ends have met the criteria; evaluation reports suggest that R&D in SMEs may be an exception that fulfils the additionality criteria; urges more detailed reporting to fully spell out the impacts of EFSI financing;
Amendment 95 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Urges the EIB to comply fully with the letter and the spirit of the EFSI Regulation and to implement real additionality by restricting eligibility to those sectors where projects showed significant additionality according to the independent evaluation commissioned by the Commission;
Amendment 102 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Acknowledges that it is not clear from Annex 4 Tables 2 and 3 of the independent evaluation what the actual share of fully additional projects were in total EFSI financing; since they were SME projects, which are typically smaller than infrastructure investments and accounted for 24 % of total financings, is concerned that the actual share of fully additional project can be smaller than 2% of total EFSI financing;
Amendment 106 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 b (new)
Paragraph 8 b (new)
8b. Acknowledges that if the share of fully additional projects is small in total EFSI financing, and its boost to the extent of investment is negligible, the correct conclusion is that EFSI has failed to reach additionality;
Amendment 107 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 c (new)
Paragraph 8 c (new)
8c. Urges the Commission to comply fully with the letter and the spirit of the EFSI Regulation, and to fully report the results on EFSI additionality effects obtained by the independent evaluation by the EY; in particular, any independent evaluation commissioned by the Commission should spell out the share of EFSI financing that contributed to projects that would not have been carried out in the absence of EFSI financing at all, or specify the extent to which EFSI added to the realization of projects if there was some additional contribution;
Amendment 117 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Requests all concerned to implement the principle underscored by the European Court of Auditors that all EFSI-supported projects must address market failures or sub-optimal investment situations, and that they could not have been carried out, or not to the same extent, without EFSI support;
Amendment 154 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Acknowledges that it may take some years to prepare new innovative projects, that the EIB is under pressure to achieve the EUR 315 billion goal and therefore had no option but to launch EFSI activities immediately, is concerned, however, that the EIB, when implementing EFSI, has thus far drawn on its existing project pipeline with lower risk projects to a large extent, thereby reducing its own conventional financing; fFears that EFSI does not provide complementary financing for high-risk innovative projects; underlines that even though a project qualifies as a special activity, this does not necessarily imply that it is risky, and enjoys high private or social returns; however the classification as a special activity might also stem from the fact that its financing has been structured in an artificially risky fashion, implying that very low-risk projects can also easily end up as high-risk projects; as pointed out by the European Court of Auditors, there is a risk that equating EFSI operations to Special Activities of the EIB may create an incentive to use unnecessarily complex financing structures or to allocate a risk profile that does not correspond to the real risk of the operation; fears that such complexity would further confound impact assessment of EFSI;
Amendment 157 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Underscores that as pointed out by the European Court of Auditors, EFSI must provide complementary financing only to projects that address market failures or sub-optimal investment situations and that could not have been carried out, or not to the same extent, without EFSI support;
Amendment 158 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 b (new)
Paragraph 12 b (new)
12b. Requests all parties concerned to take into account the concern of the European Court of Auditors that there is a risk that the multiplier effect is overstated; requests all parties concerned to implement the proposal of the auditors to improve the “EFSI Multiplier Methodology” and use it to produce one the key performance indicator for the EFSI, which shows how much private capital has been mobilised;
Amendment 171 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Considers it important to discuss whether the envisaged leverage of 15 is appropriate to enable EFSI to support high quality projects in terms of high private or social returns bearing a higher risk; invites the EIB to weigh up complementing the volume requirement with secondary goals to be achieved;
Amendment 179 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. If suitable projects that meet the agreed criteria are not found, no funding should be extended;
Amendment 181 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 b (new)
Paragraph 15 b (new)
15b. If independent evaluation results suggest a potential for additionality only in the SME & RDI window, then the financing should be restricted to those purposes, regardless of the criteria set out for sectoral coverage;
Amendment 182 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 c (new)
Paragraph 15 c (new)
15c. Considers that data collection should be carried out hand-in-hand with project approval and implementation to allow for rapid impact evaluation of EFSI funds with respect to additionality, job creation and potential growth impacts in the short and longer run;
Amendment 183 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 d (new)
Paragraph 15 d (new)
15d. Impact evaluation should follow the state-of-the art methodology allowing for causal inference on the impact of EFSI funds on growth and employment; if current data collection and procedures do not allow for this, they are to be immediately amended respectively;
Amendment 184 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 e (new)
Paragraph 15 e (new)
15e. All impact evaluations are to publish all results with respect to additionality, growth and jobs in detail with respect to the nature of the project, its location, type of location, its riskiness relative to expected returns, and the project’s innovativeness relative to similar projects, to allow for improved the allocation of funds;
Amendment 191 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Emphasises that EFSI is a demand- driven instrument, which should, however, be guided by the political objectives extend financing only to ends where there is genuine demand, and where the projects meet additionality and other strict criteria set out in the regulation and defined by the Steering Board;
Amendment 204 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Welcomes that all sectors defined in the EFSI Regulation have been covered by EFSI financing; points out, however, that certain sectors are under-represented; notes that this might be due to the fact that certain sectors already offered better investment opportunities in terms of shovel-ready, bankable projects wdistribution of the demand for financing may differ from then EFSI started upRegulation; invites the EIB against this backdrop to discuss how to improve sectorial diversification,better meet effective demand, while linking it to the goals set out in the Regulation as well as the issue of whether EFSI support should be extended to other sectors;
Amendment 212 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Considers that data collection should be carried out hand-in-hand with project approval and implementation to allow for rapid impact evaluation of EFSI funds with respect to additionality, growth and job creation in the short and longer run;
Amendment 214 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 b (new)
Paragraph 17 b (new)
17b. Impact evaluation should follow the state-of-the art methodology allowing for causal inference on the impact of EFSI funds on growth and employment; if current data collection and procedures do not allow for this, they are to be immediately amended respectively;
Amendment 216 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 c (new)
Paragraph 17 c (new)
17c. All impact evaluations are to publish all results with respect to additionality, growth and jobs in detail with respect to the nature of the project, its location, type of location, its riskiness relative to expected returns, and the project’s innovativeness relative to similar projects;
Amendment 222 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18a. Invites the EIB to reflect on the ways in which data collection could be carried out hand-in-hand with project approval and implementation, to allow for rapid impact evaluation of EFSI funds with respect to additionality, growth and job creation in the short and longer run;
Amendment 223 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 b (new)
Paragraph 18 b (new)
18b. Invites the EIB to reflect on the ways in which impact evaluation could follow state-of-the art methodology allowing for causal inference on the impact of EFSI funds on growth and employment;
Amendment 236 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21a. Invites the EIB to reflect on the ways in which data collection could be carried out hand-in-hand with project approval and implementation, to allow for rapid impact evaluation of EFSI funds with respect to additionality, growth and job creation in the short and longer run;
Amendment 237 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 b (new)
Paragraph 21 b (new)
21b. Invites the EIB to reflect on the ways in which impact evaluation could follow state-of-the art methodology allowing for causal inference on the impact of EFSI funds on growth and employment;
Amendment 242 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)
Paragraph 22 a (new)
22a. Urges the EIB to publish all results with respect to additionality, growth and jobs in detail with respect to the nature of the project, its location, type of location, its riskiness relative to expected returns, and the project’s innovativeness relative to similar projects;
Amendment 328 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 43
Paragraph 43
43. Notes that the Commission has proposed an extension of EFSI, both in terms of duration and financial capacity, and that this would have an impact on the EU budget; expresses its intention to put forward alternative financing proposalcalls on the Commission to postpone this suggestion until it can produce reliable evidence on real returns in terms of growth and jobs;
Amendment 331 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44
Paragraph 44
Amendment 340 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45
Paragraph 45
45. Notes that awareness of overlaps and competition betweene overlap of EFSI and financial instruments of the EU budget on the part of the Commission and the EIB has led to the adoption of guidelines recommending the combination of EFSI and ESI financing; points, however, to persistent differences in the eligibility criteria, regulations, timeframe for reporting and competition and failure to generate real returns in terms of growthe application of state aid rules, which hinder combined usage; welcomes the fact that the Commission has begun to address these in its proposal for a revision of the Financial Regulation; believes that further efforts are required and that the second and third pillars of the investment plan are key to this nd jobs; calls for reorienting EFSI to purposes only with real demand, additionality and contribution to growth and employmendt;
Amendment 353 #
Amendment 383 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 49
Paragraph 49
49. Acknowledges that EFSI alone - and on a limited scale- will probably not be able to close the investment gap in Europe, but that it neverthelessIn line with the European Court of Auditors, questions the deletion of the provision linking the constitutes a central pillar of the EU’s investment plan and signals the EU’s determination to tackle this issue; calls for further proposals to be made on how to permanently boost investment in Europenuation of EFSI to the results of an independent evaluation; urges the Commission to take into account the concern of the European Court of Auditors that there is little evidence that the proposed increase is justified, except with respect to investments for SMEs where high budgetary consumption is observed;
Amendment 388 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 49 a (new)
Paragraph 49 a (new)
49a. Acknowledges that based on the independent (EY) evaluation of EFSI’s first year, there is no lack of financing in Europe, with the possible exception of the SME research and development niche; acknowledges that there is no need to double EFSI financing, but redirect its funding to fields where real additionality can be found and consequently real impacts on growth and jobs can be expected; calls for effective proposals that could actually work and boost investment and growth in Europe;
Amendment 28 #
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 up to 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 society of such practices 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 68 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas some specific tax jurisdictions actively contribute to designing aggressive tax policies which help of tax advisory firms on behalf of MNEs who thereby avoid taxation; whereas the corporate tax rate in some jurisdictions is close or equal to zero per cent; or it can be negative e.g. due to artificial deductions allowed by the loopholes in tax laws; whereas the complexity of different tax systems create a lack of transparency which is globally harmful;
Amendment 78 #
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 knowledge of final beneficiaries and continued banking and corporate 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, the ongoing efforts to build automatic exchange of information are not watertight; whereas, without effective enforcement, the weaknesses of the systems will encourage tax evasion and avoidance;
Amendment 94 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K
Recital K
K. whereas some Member States have prepared their own lists of uncooperative jurisdictions; whereas there are big 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; whereas none of these lists contain clear, measurable and exhaustive criteria on how secretive particular jurisdictions are;
Amendment 114 #
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 it should be noted that there have been some gaps in these country-by- country reports and that these gaps should be addressed; 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;
Amendment 179 #
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 position on the ATAP and keep the Anti-Tax Avoidance Directive as one single directive; welcomes the initiative to create a common Union list of uncooperative jurisdictions in the External Strategy for Effective Taxation; stresses that this list should be based on objective, exhaustive and quantifiable criteria
Amendment 317 #
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 objectives; insists that R&D canshould be promoted through subsidies which should be given preference over patent boxes, as subsidies are less at risk of being abused by tax avoidance schemesusing broader policy measures that promote long-term innovation and independent research; 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;
Amendment 513 #
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)any possible future trade treaties in order to ensure a level playing field, create more value for society as a whole and combat tax fraud and avoidance;
Amendment 514 #
2016/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 46 a (new)
Paragraph 46 a (new)
46a. Notes that in some cases, trade agreements can also be used to hinder the work against tax fraud and avoidance, and calls for close attention to these risks in trade negotiation conducted by the EU;
Amendment 33 #
2016/0414(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) Money laundering and the associated financing of terrorism and organised crime remain significant problems at the Union level, thus damaging the integrity, stability and reputation of the financial sector and threatening the internal security and the internal market of the Union. In order to tackle those growing problems and also reinforce the application of Directive 2015/849/EU34 , this Directive aims to tackle money laundering by means of criminal law, allowing for better cross- border cooperation between competent authorities. _________________ 34 Directive (EU) 2015/849 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2015 on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purposes of money laundering or terrorist financing, amending Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 of the European Parliament and the Council, and repealing Directive 2005/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Commission Directive 2006/70/EC (OJ L 141, 5.6.2015, p.73).
Amendment 34 #
2016/0414(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) Measures adopted solely at national or even at Union level, without taking into account international coordination and cooperation, would have very limited effect. The measures adopted by the Union in countering money laundering should therefore be compatible with, and at least as stringent as, other actions undertaken in international fora. Moreover, many international and European jurisdictions still allow the use of bearer shares, which are instrumental for receiving, owing and transferring illicit money anonymously and became a very useful tool for creating international schemes with a purpose to launder money. They allow a system which is more opaque than those in notorious tax havens such as, inter alia, Panama, Cayman Islands, Dominican Republic or Lichtenstein; therefore, the EU anti-money laundering legal framework should fully ban the use of bearer shares.
Amendment 40 #
2016/0414(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) Union action should continue to take particular account of the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) Recommendations and instruments of other international bodies active in the fight against money laundering and terrorist financing. The relevant Union legal acts should, where appropriate, be further aligned with the International Standards on Combating Money Laundering and the Financing of Terrorism and Proliferation adopted by the FATF in February 2012 (the ‘revised FATF Recommendations’). As a signatory to the Council of Europe Convention on Laundering, Search, Seizure and Confiscation of the Proceeds from Crime and on the Financing of Terrorism (CETS No. 198), the Union should transpose without delay the requirements of that Convention into its legal order.
Amendment 50 #
2016/0414(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) Where money laundering activity does not simply amount to the mere possession or use, but also involves the transfer or the concealing and disguise of property through the financial system and results in further damage than that already caused by the predicate offence, such as damaging the integrity of the financial system, that activity should be punished separately. Member States should thus ensure that such conduct, including cases of acquisition, mere possession and use, is also punishable when committed by the perpetrator of the criminal activity that generated that property (so-called self- laundering).
Amendment 51 #
2016/0414(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) In order for money laundering to be an effective tool against organised crime, it should noFor the effective countering of money laundering by criminal law measures, a conviction should be possible without being necessary to identify the specifics of the crime that generated the property, the type of crime that generated the property, let alone require a prior or simultaneous conviction for that crime. Prosecutions for money laundering should also not be impeded by the mere fact that the predicate offence was committed in another Member State or third country, provided it is a criminal offence in that Member State or third country. Member States may establish as a prerequisite the fact that the predicate offence would have been a crime in its national law, had it been committed therecrime. Moreover, Member States should take the necessary measures to ensure that the lawful origin of property, wealth and assets is demonstrated by the investigated person in every case involving large amounts of money of unclear origin, suspicious acquisitions or bank transactions, money transfer schemes such as hawala or any other potential proceeds of crime. Prosecutions for money laundering should also not be impeded by the mere fact that the predicate offence was committed in another Member State or third country, or that the person being investigated comes from a Member State where she/he is protected by immunity from prosecution, arrest and detention (such as politically exposed persons and magistrates, inter alia).
Amendment 61 #
2016/0414(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) This Directive aims to criminalise money laundering when committed intentionally. Intention and knowledge may be inferred from objective, factual circumstances. As this Directive provides for minimum rules, Member States are free to adopt or maintain more stringent criminal law rules for money laundering. Member States may, for example,should also provide that money laundering committed recklessly or by serious negligence constitutes a criminal offence.
Amendment 68 #
2016/0414(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) In order to deter money laundering throughout the Union, Member States should lay down minimum types and levels of penalties when the criminal offences defined in this Directive are committed. Where the offence is committed within a criminal organisation within the meaning of Council Framework Decision 2008/841/JHA37 8 or where the perpetrator abused their professional position to enable money laundering or when the perpetrator is a politically exposed person, Member States should provide for aggravating circumstances in accordance with the applicable rules established by their legal systems. _________________ 37 Council Framework Decision 2008/841/JHA of 24 October 2008 on the fight against organised crime, (OJ L 300, 11.11.2008, p. 42)
Amendment 70 #
2016/0414(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) Given the mobility of perpetrators and proceeds stemming from criminal activities, as well as the complex cross- border investigations required to combat money laundering, all Member States should establish their jurisdiction in order to enable the competent authorities to investigate and prosecute such activities. Member States should thereby ensure that their jurisdiction includes situations where an offence is committed by means of information and communication technology from their territory, whether or not based in their territory. To ensure the success of investigations and the prosecution of money laundering offences, those responsible for investigating or prosecuting such offences should make use of effective and improved investigative tools, such as those used in combating organized crime or other serious crimes. These tools should be adapted to the latest evolutions in the field of cybercrime and money laundering, including by using bitcoins, cryptocurrencies and ransomeware attacks.
Amendment 98 #
2016/0414(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point u a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point u a (new)
(ua) tax crimes relating to direct taxes and indirect taxes;
Amendment 103 #
2016/0414(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point v
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point v
(v) all other offences, including tax crimes relating to direct taxes and indirect taxes as defined in the national law of the Member States, which are punishable by deprivation of liberty or a detention order for a maximum of more than one year or, as regards Member States that have a minimum threshold for offences in their legal system, all offences punishable by deprivation of liberty or a detention order for a minimum of more than six months;
Amendment 106 #
2016/0414(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Each Member State shall ensure that the following conduct shall be a punishable criminal offence, when committed intentionally:
Amendment 108 #
2016/0414(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) the acquisition, possession or use of property, knowing at the time of receipt or at the time of use in economic and financial activities, that such property was derived from criminal activity or from an act of participation in such an activity.
Amendment 121 #
2016/0414(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) the identity of the perpetrator of the criminal activity, the type of crime that generated the property or other circumstances relating to that criminal activity;
Amendment 126 #
2016/0414(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) whether the criminal activity that generated the property was carried out in the territory of another Member State or in that of a third country, when the relevant conduct is a criminal offence under the national law of the Member State or the third country where the conduct was committed and would be a criminal offencewould have been a criminal activity in the sense of Article 2, paragraph 1 of this Directive, under the national law of the Member State implementing or applying this Articleese provisions, had it been committed there;.
Amendment 130 #
2016/0414(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Each Member State shall ensure that the conduct referred to in paragraph 1 shall be a punishable laundering offence in cases where the offender: a) suspected that the property was proceeds; b) ought to have assumed that the property was proceeds.
Amendment 131 #
2016/0414(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 3 b (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Each Member State shall ensure that the conduct referred to in paragraph 1 shall be subject to prosecution and conviction even if the suspected person has been granted immunity from prosecution, arrest and detention in her/his country of origin or within the European institutions.
Amendment 132 #
2016/0414(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1
Article 4 – paragraph 1
Each Member State shall ensure that inciting, aiding and abetting and attemptingparticipation in, inciting, association with or conspiracy to commit, attempts to commit and aiding, abetting, counselling and facilitating in any way an offence referred to in Article 3 shall be punishable.
Amendment 136 #
2016/0414(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1
1. Each Member State shall ensure that the conduct referred to in Articles 3 and 4 shall be punishable by autonomous, effective, proportionate and dissuasive criminal penalties.
Amendment 148 #
2016/0414(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 a (new)
Article 5 a (new)
Article 5 a Burden of proof Each Member State shall ensure that the burden of proof demonstrating the lawful origin of disproportionate income or property, as defined in this Directive, found by investigators or signalled by suspicious activity reports (SARs) is incumbent to the owner of such proceeds.
Amendment 153 #
2016/0414(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
(aa) the offender is a politically exposed person in the sense of Directive 2015/849 or the case involves corruption of elected officials; or
Amendment 154 #
2016/0414(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a b (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a b (new)
(ab) the criminal modus operandi involves the use of bearer shares, offshore jurisdictions, shell companies, illegal transfers of funds through systems such as Hawala, cash couriers, smurfing activities or non-governmental organisations; or
Amendment 155 #
2016/0414(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a c (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a c (new)
(ac) the suspect operates as a professional money launderer for two or more different criminal groups; or
Amendment 156 #
2016/0414(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a d (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a d (new)
(ad) the property or money being laundered are a result of the offences defined by Directive 2017/541 or of illicit arms trafficking; or
Amendment 166 #
2016/0414(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 2
Article 7 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall ensure that legal persons can be held liable where the serious negligence, lack of supervision or control by a person referred to in paragraph 1 has made possible the commission of any of the offences referred to in Articles 3 and 4 for the benefit of that legal person by a person under its authority.
Amendment 167 #
2016/0414(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 3
Article 7 – paragraph 3
3. Liability of legal persons under paragraphs 1 and 2 shall not exclude criminal proceedings against natural persons who are incite the commission of or arers, conspirators, perpetrators of , or are accessories (including facilitators or counsellors) to any of the offences referred to in Articles 3 and 4.
Amendment 183 #
2016/0414(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 9 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. When an offence referred to in Articles 3 and 4 falls within the jurisdiction of more than one Member State and when any of the Member States concerned can validly prosecute on the basis of the same facts, the Member States concerned shall cooperate in order to decide which of them will prosecute the offender, with the aim of centralising proceedings in a single Member State. The following factors shall be taken into account, by order of priority: a) the territory of the Member State where the offence was committed; b) the nationality or residency of the offender; c) the country of origin of the victims; d) the territory where the offender was found. Member States may have recourse to Eurojust in order to facilitate cooperation between their judicial authorities and the coordination of their actions.
Amendment 190 #
2016/0414(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – title
Article 10 – title
Investigative tools and confiscation measures
Amendment 193 #
2016/0414(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 1
Article 10 – paragraph 1
1a. Each Member State shall ensure that specific training and effective investigative tools, such as those used in countering organised crime or other serious crimes are available to persons, units or services responsible for investigating or prosecuting the offences referred to in Articles 3 and 4. Such tools and training need to be adapted to the latest evolutions in the field of cybercrime and money laundering, including by using bitcoins, cryptocurrencies and ransomeware attacks. 1b. Each Member State shall ensure that their competent authorities freeze or confiscate, as appropriate, in accordance with Directive 2014/42/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council, the property derived from and the instrumentalities used in committing or attempting to commit any of the offences referred to in this Directive. The provisions of Paragraph 2 apply irrespective of the fact that a natural or a legal person has committed the laundering of proceeds or the predicate offence.
Amendment 201 #
2016/0414(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 a (new)
Article 10 a (new)
Amendment 48 #
2016/0364(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) Directive 2013/36/EU8 of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation (EU) No 575/20139 of the European Parliament and of the Council have been adopted in response to the financial crises that unfolded in 2007-2008. These legislative measures have substantially contributed to strengthening the financial system in the Union and rendered institutions more resilient to possible future shocks. Although extremely comprehensive, these measures did not address all identified weaknesses affecting institutions. Deposit taking should have been separated from risky banking business, or dealing on own account or other high-risk trading activities should have been transferred to a separate entity, where these accounted for a significant share of a bank’s business. If risky activities were based within their own entity, they would no longer be supported by deposits. Also, some of the initially proposed measures have been subjected to review clauses or have not been sufficiently specified to allow for their smooth implementation. __________________ 8 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, amending Directive 2002/87/EC and repealing Directives 2006/48/EC and 2006/49/EC (OJ L 176, 27.6.2013, p. 338). 9 Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on prudential requirements for credit institutions and investment firms and amending Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 (OJ L 176, 27.6.2013, p. 1).
Amendment 40 #
2016/0339(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4 a (new)
Recital 4 a (new)
(4a) Underlying the BEPS initiative is also the declaration of G20 Leaders at their meeting in Saint Petersburg on 5-6 September 2013, expressing their wish to ensure that profits are taxed where economic activities deriving the profits are performed and where value is created. In practice, this would have required the introduction of unitary taxation with formulary apportionment of tax revenues to states. That goal has not been achieved.
Amendment 44 #
2016/0339(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5 a (new)
Recital 5 a (new)
(5a) The effects of hybrid mismatch arrangements should also be considered from the viewpoint of developing countries, and the Union and its Member States should aim to support developing countries in tackling such effects.
Amendment 50 #
2016/0339(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) Given that Directive (EU) 2016/1164 includes rules on hybrid mismatches between Member States, it is appropriate to include rules on hybrid mismatches with third countries in that Directive. Consequently, those rules should apply to all taxpayers that are subject to corporate tax in a Member State including permanent establishments of entities resident in third countries. It is necessary to cover all hybrid mismatches or related arrangements where at least one of the parties involved is a corporate taxpayer in a Member State.
Amendment 55 #
2016/0339(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) Rules on hybrid mismatches should address mismatch situations which are the result of conflicting tax rules of two (or more) jurisdictions. However, those rules should not affect the general features of the tax system of a jurisdiction and proportionality should be ensured.
Amendment 65 #
2016/0339(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) Hybrid transfers may give rise to a difference in tax treatment if, as a result of a transfer of a financial instrument under a structured arrangement or without it, the underlying return on that instrument is treated as derived simultaneously by more than one of the parties to the arrangement. The underlying return is the income related to and derived from the transferred instrument. This difference in tax treatment may lead to a deduction without inclusion or to a tax credit in two different jurisdictions for the same tax withheld at source. Such mismatches should therefore be eliminated. In case of a deduction without inclusion the same rules should apply as for neutralising a hybrid financial instrument or hybrid entity mismatch leading to a deduction without inclusion. In case of a double tax credit, the Member State concerned should limit the benefit of the tax credit in proportion to the net taxable income with respect to the underlying return.
Amendment 66 #
2016/0339(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) Imported mismatches shift the effect of a hybrid mismatch between parties in third countries into the jurisdiction of a Member State through the use of a non-hybrid instrument thereby undermining the effectiveness of the rules that neutralise hybrid mismatches. A deductible payment in a Member State can be used to fund expenditure under a structured arrangement involving a hybrid mismatch between third countries. To counter such imported mismatches, it is necessary to include rules that disallow the deduction of a payment if the corresponding income from that payment is set-off, directly or indirectly, against a deduction that arises under a hybrid mismatch or related arrangement giving rise to a double deduction or a deduction without inclusion between third countries.
Amendment 70 #
2016/0339(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) The objective of this Directive is to improve the resilience of the internal market as a whole against hybrid mismatch arrangementes. This cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States acting individually, given that national corporate tax systems are disparate and that independent action by Member States would only replicate the existing fragmentation of the internal market in direct taxation. It would thus allow inefficiencies and distortions to persist in the interaction of distinct national measures. This would thus result in a lack of coordination. That objective can rather, due to the cross-border nature of hybrid mismatches or hybrid mismatch arrangements and the need to adopt solutions that function for the internal market as a whole, be better achieved at Union level. The Union may therefore adopt measures, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union. In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Directive does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve that objective. By setting the required level of protection for the internal market, this Directive only aims to achieve the essential degree of coordination within the Union that is necessary to achieve its objectives.
Amendment 71 #
2016/0339(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 21 a (new)
Recital 21 a (new)
(21a) To ensure clear and effective implementation, consistency with the OECD report on Neutralising the Effects of Hybrid Mismatch Arrangements, Action 2 - 2015 should be highlighted.
Amendment 77 #
2016/0339(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b
Directive (EU) 2016/1164
Article 2 – point 9 – subparagraph 3 – introductory part
Article 2 – point 9 – subparagraph 3 – introductory part
A hybrid mismatch also includes the transfer of a financial instrument under a structured arrangement or without one involving a taxpayer where the underlying return on the transferred financial instrument is treated for tax purposes as derived simultaneously by more than one of the parties to the arrangement, who are resident for tax purposes in different jurisdictions, giving rise to any of the following outcomes:
Amendment 38 #
2016/0338(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) Situations, in which different Member States tax the same income or capital twice can create serious tax obstacles for businesses operating cross border. They create an excessive tax burden for businesses and are likely to cause economic distortions and inefficiencies, as well as to have a negative impact on cross border investment and growthEven though double taxation is overshadowed by problems created by double non-taxation, both create an excessive tax burden for businesses and are likely to cause economic distortions.
Amendment 51 #
2016/0338(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) The current global tax governance is based on a patchy network of bilateral tax treaties. Among other built-in problems of this system, the currently existing mechanisms provided for in bilateral taxthese treaties do not achieve the provision of a full relief from double taxation in a timely manner in all cases. The existing Convention on the elimination of double taxation in connection with the adjustments of profits of associated enterprises (90/436/EEC)7 ('the Union Arbitration Convention') has a limited scope as it is only applicable to transfer pricing disputes and attribution of profits to permanent establishments. The monitoring exercise carried out as part of the implementation of the Union Arbitration Convention has revealed some important shortcomings, in particular as regards access to the procedure and the length and the effective conclusion of the procedure. _________________ 7 OJ L 225, 20.8.1990, p. 10. OJ L 225, 20.8.1990, p. 10.
Amendment 58 #
2016/0338(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) With a view to create a fairer tax environment, rules on transparency need to be enhanced, and anti-avoidance measures need to be strengthened nationally, at the Union level and globally. At the same time in the spirit of a fair taxation system, it is necessary to ensure that taxpayers are not taxed twice on the same income and that mechanisms on dispute resolution are comprehensive, effective and sustainable. Improvements to double taxation dispute resolution mechanisms are also necessary to respond to a risk of increased number of double or multiple taxation disputes with potentially high amounts being at stake due to more regular and focused audit practices established by tax administrations.
Amendment 65 #
2016/0338(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) The introduction of an effective and efficient framework for resolution of tax disputes which ensures legal certainty and a business friendly environment forsupports investments is therefore a crucial action in order to achieve a fair and efficient corporate tax system in the Union. The double taxation dispute resolution mechanisms should also create a harmonised and transparent framework for solving double taxation issues in a timely manner and as such provide benefits to all taxpayers.
Amendment 72 #
2016/0338(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) The elimination of double taxation should be achieved through an objective procedure under which, as a first step, the case is submitted to the tax authorities of the Member States concerned with a view to settling the dispute by Mutual Agreement Procedure. In the absence of such agreement within a certain time frame, the case should be submitted to an Advisory Commission or Alternative Dispute Resolution Commission, consisting both of representatives of the tax authorities concerned and of independent persons of standing. The tax authorities should take a final binding decision by reference to the opinion of an Advisory Commission or Alternative Dispute Resolution Commission.
Amendment 99 #
2016/0338(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. The complaint is admissible ifwhen the taxpayer provides the competent authorities of each of the Member States concerned with the following information.
Amendment 108 #
2016/0338(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 5
Article 3 – paragraph 5
5. The competent authorities of the Member States concerned shall take a decision on the acceptance and admissibility of the complaint of a taxpayer as soon as possible within six months of the receipt thereof. The competent authorities shall inform the taxpayers and the competent authorities of the other Member States of their decision.
Amendment 125 #
2016/0338(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2
Article 5 – paragraph 2
2. Where the competent authorities of the Member States concerned have not taken a decision on the complaint as soon as possible within six months following receipt of a complaint by a taxpayer, the complaint shall be deemed to be rejected.
Amendment 131 #
2016/0338(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
The Advisory Commission shall adopt a decision on the admissibility and acceptance of the complaint as soon as possible within six months from the date of notification of the last decision rejecting the complaint under Article 5(1) by the competent authorities of the Member States concerned. By default of any decision notified within the six month period, the complaint is deemed to be rejected.
Amendment 154 #
2016/0338(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – point b
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) where that person or someone in that person's family has, or has had, a large holding in or is or has been an employee of or adviser to one or each of the taxpayers;
Amendment 158 #
2016/0338(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Article 8 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Independent persons of standing must be nationals of a Member State and resident within the Union. They must be competent, objective and independent.
Amendment 173 #
2016/0338(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. For the purposes of the procedure referred to in Article 6, the taxpayer(s) concerned mayshall provide the Advisory Commission or Alternative Dispute Resolution Commission with any information, evidence or documents that may be relevant for the decision. The taxpayer(s) and the competent authorities of the Member States concerned shall provide any information, evidence or documents upon request by the Advisory Commission or Alternative Dispute Resolution Commission. However, the competent authorities of any such Member State may refuse to provide information to the Advisory Commission in any of the following cases:
Amendment 177 #
2016/0338(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) information concerns trade, business, industrial or professional secret or trade process, in which case the legal reasons for this have to be stated very clearly;
Amendment 180 #
2016/0338(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
1. The Advisory Commission or Alternative Dispute Resolution Commission shall deliver its opinion as soon as possible and no later than six months after the date it was set up to the competent authorities of the Member States concerned.
Amendment 182 #
2016/0338(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2
Article 13 – paragraph 2
2. The Advisory Commission or Alternative Dispute Resolution Commission when drawing up its opinion shall take into account the applicable national rules and double taxation treaties. In the absence of a double taxation treaty or agreement between the Member States concerned, the Advisory Commission or Alternative Dispute Resolution Commission, when drawing up its opinion, may refer to international practice in matters of taxation such as the latest OECD Model Tax Convention and the latest United Nations Model Double Taxation Convention.
Amendment 185 #
2016/0338(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 1
Article 14 – paragraph 1
1. The competent authorities shall agree as soon as possible within six months of the notification of the opinion of the Advisory Commission or Alternative Dispute Resolution Commission on the elimination of the double taxation.
Amendment 193 #
2016/0338(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 2
Article 16 – paragraph 2
2. The competent authorities shall publish the final decision referred to in Article 14, subject to consent of each of the taxpayers concerned entirely. However, in case either of the taxpayers argue that some specific points in the decision are sensitive trade, industrial or professional information, the competent authorities should consider these arguments and publish as much information of the decision as possible whilst deleting the sensitive parts. The goal should always be the greatest extent of transparency possible whilst protecting information, the publication of which would clearly and evidently reveal commercially sensitive information to competitors.
Amendment 198 #
2016/0338(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Where a taxpayer concerned does not consent to publishing the final decision in its entirety, the competent authorities shall publish an abstract of the final decision with description of the issue and subject matter, date, tax periods involved, legal basis, industry sector, short description of the final outcomein accordance with paragraph 2.
Amendment 205 #
2016/0338(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 1
Article 17 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission shall make available online in an open data format and keep up to date the list of the independent persons of standing referred to in Article 8(4), indicating which of those persons can be appointed as chair. That list shall contain only the names and affiliations and curriculum vitae of those persons.
Amendment 131 #
2016/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) Additionality, a key feature of the EFSI, should be strengthened in the selection of projects. In particular, operations should only be eligible for EFSI support if they address clearly identified market failures or sub-optimal investment situationsand do not crowd out other funding. Operations in infrastructure under the Infrastructure and Innovation Window linking two or more Member States, including e-infrastructure, should be considered additional given their inherent difficulty and their high added value for the Unionmay meet these criteria, provided that they show considerable anticipated social returns and would not be carried out without EFSI funding.
Amendment 263 #
2016/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 a (new)
Regulation (EU) No 2015/1017
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 268 #
2016/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 b (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 b (new)
Regulation (EU) No 2015/1017
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
1b) In Article 5(1) subparagraph 2 shall be replaced by the following: ‘The projects supported by the EFSI, while striving to create employment and sustainable growth, shall be considered to provide additionality if they carry a risk corresponding to EIB special activities, as defined in Article 16 of the EIB Statute and by the credit risk policy guidelines of the EIB. projects would not be carried out without EFSI funding.’;
Amendment 276 #
2016/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Regulation (EU) No 2015/1017
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3
‘To better address market failures or sub- optimal investment situations, thereby ensuring additionality and avoiding crowding out other participants in the same market, EIB special activities supported by the EFSI shall typically have features such as subordination, participation in risk- sharing instruments, cross-border characteristics, exposure to specific risks or other identifiable aspects as further described in Annex II. considerable anticipated social returns, combined with non-completion of the project in the absence of EFSI funding.’
Amendment 285 #
2016/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Regulation (EU) No 2015/1017
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 5
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 5
The projects supported by the EFSI that consist of physical infrastructure linking two or more Member States or of the extension of physical infrastructure or services linked to physical infrastructure from one Member State to one or more Member States, shall also be considered to provide additionality.';, if they show considerable anticipated social returns, combined with non-completion of the project in the absence of EFSI funding.
Amendment 308 #
2016/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – point -a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – point -a (new)
Regulation (EU) No 2015/1017
Article 7 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
-a) In paragraph 3, the first subparagraph is replaced by the following: ‘The Steering Board shall comprise fourive members: three appointed by the Commission, one by the EIB and one by the EIBuropean Parliament. The Steering Board shall elect a Chairperson from among its members for a fixed term of three years, renewable once. The Steering Board shall take its decisions by consensus.’;
Amendment 340 #
2016/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 a (new)
Regulation (EU) No 2015/1017
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
5 a) Article 9, point (2), introductory words The EU guarantee shall be granted for EIB financing and investment operations approved by the Investment Committee referred to in Article 7(7) or for funding or guarantees to the EIF in order to conduct EIB financing and investment operations in accordance with Article 11(3). In accordance with the guidance of the Steering Board, an appropriate part of the EU guarantee shall be granted directly to investment platforms and national promotional banks or institutions, subject to an additionality requirement for their operations too. The operations concerned shall be consistent with Union policies and support any of the following general objectives:’
Amendment 396 #
2016/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point b
Regulation (EU) No 2015/1017
Article 11 – paragraph 3
Article 11 – paragraph 3
3. Where the EIB provides funding or guarantees to the EIF in order to conduct EIB financing and invBefore independent impact assestsment operations, the EU guarantee shall provide for a full guarantee on such funding or guarantees provided that an amount of at least EUR 4 000 000 000 of funding or guarantees is provided by the EIB without coverage by the EU guarantee, up to an initial limit of EUR 6 500 000 000. Without prejudice to paragraph 1, that limit may where appropriate be adjusted by the Steering Boards are carried out, there is no reason to continue EFSI funding without evidence of impact on growth and jobs.
Amendment 14 #
2016/0209(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) Council Directive 2011/16/EU11 as amended by Directive 2014/107/ EU12 applies as of 1 January 2016 to 27 Member States and as of 1 January 2017 to Austria. That Directive implements the Global Standard for Automatic Exchange of Financial Account Information in Tax Matters (“"Global Standard”") within the Union. As such, it ensures thatincreases the amount of information on Account Holders of Financial Accounts that is reported to the Member State where the Account Holder is resident. __________________ 11 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, 11.3.2011, p. 1). 12 Council Directive 2014/107/EU of 9 December 2014 amending Directive 2011/16/EU as regards mandatory automatic exchange of information in the field of taxation (OJ L 359, 16.12.2014, p. 1).
Amendment 28 #
2016/0209(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) It is therefore necessary to ensure the access by the tax authorities to the AML information, procedures, documents and mechanisms for the performance of their duties in monitoring the proper application of Directive 2011/16/EU and for the functioning of all forms of administrative cooperation by that Directive.
Amendment 34 #
2016/0209(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4 a (new)
Recital 4 a (new)
(4a) Moreover, given that the upgraded information exchange and the information leaks have increased the spontaneous exchange and availability of information, it is very important that Member States investigate and act upon all potential wrongdoings.
Amendment 52 #
2016/0209(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 a (new)
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 22– paragraph 1 b (new)
Article 22– paragraph 1 b (new)
Amendment 69 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 10 a (new)
Recital 10 a (new)
(10a) It is also possible to launder money in the trade of listed securities. Even though listed securities mostly fall outside the scope of this directive, it should be noted that the efficiency of fighting money laundering depends also on the tools that authorities have to find out the beneficial owners of listed securities. This should be taken into account especially when Member States reform the ownership registries of listed securities. The high level of transparency in the centralised, open registries of listed securities owners can be particularly useful in anti-money laundering efforts. These registries can be based either on a national, centralized registry system or a model where each listed company maintains a list of its owners, which stakeholders can access by request. Particular attention should be paid to know-your-customer policies in situations where the ownership of listed securities is mediated through one or more securities broker companies.
Amendment 87 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) The specific factor determining the Member State responsible for the monitoring and registration of beneficial ownership information of trusts and similar legal arrangements should be clarified. In order to avoid that, due to differences in the legal systems of Member States, certain trusts and similar legal arrangements are not monitored or registered anywhere in the Union, a. All trusts and similar legal arrangements should be registered where they are administeredincluding inter alia Treuhand, Stiftung, Privatstiftung, Usufruct Fiducia, or Fideicomiso, which operate in the Union should be registered in an EU Member State and be obliged to disclose beneficial ownership information to competent and law enforcement authorities in all other Member States. In order to ensure the effective monitoring and registration of information on the beneficial ownership of trusts and similar legal arrangements, cooperation among Member States is also necessary.
Amendment 118 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 36
Recital 36
(36) With a view to ensure a coherent and efficient registration and information exchange, Member States should ensure that their authority in charge of the register set up for the beneficial ownership information of trusts and other legal arrangements similar to trusts cooperates with its counterparts in other Member States, sharing information concerning trusts governed by the law of the first Member State and administered in another Member Stateand other similar legal arrangements to trusts.
Amendment 292 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10 – point a
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10 – point a
Directive 2015/849/EU
Article 31 – paragraph 1 –subparagraph 1
Article 31 – paragraph 1 –subparagraph 1
Member States shall ensure that this Article applies to trusts and other types of legal arrangements having a structure or functions similar to trusts, such as, inter alia, fTreuhand, Stiftung, Privatstiftung, Usufruct Fiduciea, Treuhand or fideicomisoor Fideicomiso, and all other similar in terms of structure or function, existing or future legal arrangements.
Amendment 339 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10 – point e
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10 – point e
Directive 2015/849/EU
Article 31 – paragraph 7 a – subparagraph 1
Article 31 – paragraph 7 a – subparagraph 1
In exceptional circumstances laid down in national law, where the access referred to in paragraphs 4 and 4aoint b of paragraph 5 would expose the beneficial owner to the risk of fraud, kidnapping, blackmail, violence or intimidation, or where the beneficial owner is a minor or otherwise incapable, Member States may provide for an exemption from such accessa competent authority may grant a temporary exemption to all or part of the information on the beneficial ownership on a case-by-case basis. When an exemption is granted this has to be clearly indicated in the register.
Amendment 363 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12
Directive 2015/849/EU
Article 32 a – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 32 a – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Those Member States which have not already done so shall establish national property registers and exchange the national data with competent authorities of other Member States. In order to facilitate the exchange of information the Commission shall develop, with FIUs, a standardised template for national competent authorities to use to submit the data.
Amendment 386 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 15 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 15 a (new)
Directive 2015/849/EU
Article 46 a (new)
Article 46 a (new)
(15a) the following Article 46a is inserted: Article 46a Member States should ensure that the ownership registries of listed securities also support the anti-money laundering efforts. In situations where Member States reform the ways they administer these ownership registries, they should investigate possibilities to introduce a model of direct, centralised and public ownership registry for listed securities either through national registry or a system where the list of owners would be available in the headquarters of each listed enterprise. In addition, particular attention should be paid to getting reliable information on ultimate beneficiaries in situations where listed securities are traded in chains involving one or more than one stock brokers.
Amendment 461 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 a (new)
Article 2 a (new)
Directive 2013/36/EU
Article 56 – paragraph 1 – point f a (new)
Article 56 – paragraph 1 – point f a (new)
Amendment 463 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 b (new)
Article 2 b (new)
Directive 2009/138/EC
Article 68 – paragraph 1 – point b – point iii a (new)
Article 68 – paragraph 1 – point b – point iii a (new)
Amendment 53 #
2016/0107(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) Calling for a globally fair and modern international tax system in November 2015, the G20 endorsed the OECD ‘'Action Plan on Base Erosion and Profit Shifting’' (BEPS) which aimed at providing governments with clear international solutions to address the gaps and mismatches in existing rules which allow corporate profits to shift to locations of no or low taxation, where no real value creation may take place. The BEPS initiative fell short of the pledge that the G20 finance ministers issued in St. Petersburg in September 2013 when they stated that "profits should be taxed where economic activities deriving the profits are performed and where value is created."[1] The failure of the BEPS process to meet its original objectives underlines the importance of heightened country-level reporting for all large enterprises. In particular, BEPS Action 13 introduces a country-by- country reporting by certain multinational undertakings to national tax authorities on a confidential basis. On 27 January 2016, the Commission adopted the ‘'Anti-Tax Avoidance Package’'. One of the objectives of that package is to transpose into Union law, the BEPS Action 13 by amending Council Directive 2011/16/EU20 . However, taxing profits where the value is created requires a more comprehensive approach to country-by-country reporting that is based on public reporting. __________________ 20 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, 11.3.2011, p. 1).
Amendment 70 #
2016/0107(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) Enhanced public scrutiny of corporate income taxes borne by multinational undertakings carrying out activities in the Union is an essential element to promote corporate accountability, further foster corporate responsibility, to contribute to the welfare through taxes, to promote fairer tax competitionevent exploitation of the loopholes in tax systems within the Union through a better informed public debate and to restore public trust in the fairness of the national tax systems. Such public scrutiny can be achieved by means of a report on income tax information, irrespective of where the ultimate parent undertaking of the multinational group is established.
Amendment 81 #
2016/0010(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point a
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point a
Directive 2011/16/EU
Article 3 – point 9 – point a
Article 3 – point 9 – point a
(a) for the purposes of Article 8(1) and Articles 8a and 8aa, the systematic communication of predefined information to another Member State, without prior request, at pre-established regular intervals; for the purposes of Article 8(1), reference to available information relates to information in the tax files of the Member State communicating the information, which is retrievable in accordance with the procedures for gathering and processing information in that Member State. Those documents shall also be available for developing countries. The work of sharing the reports with third countries has begun under OECD's Multinational Competent Authority Agreement, and it shall be guaranteed that third countries can get the needed information from all Member States.
Amendment 91 #
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 other Reporting Entity in accordance with Section II of Annex III, to file a country-by-country report with respect to its Reporting Fiscal Year within 12six months after the last day of the Reporting Fiscal Year of the MNE Group in accordance with Section II of Annex III.
Amendment 102 #
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 4
Article 8aa – paragraph 4
4. The communication shall take place within 15six months after the last day of the fiscal year of the MNE Group to which the country-by-country report relates. The first country-by-country report shall be communicated for the fiscal year of the MNE Group commencing on or after 1 January 2016.
Amendment 131 #
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 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 by 31 December 2016 notify the Commission of those rules and of those measures and shall notify it without delay of any subsequent amendment a and proportional to the MNE's size, so that non-compliance would result in a penalty that would have a genuine effecting on them MNE's finances.
Amendment 4 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 1 a (new)
Citation 1 a (new)
– having regard to the Treaty on the European Union (TEU), in particular Article 5 thereof;
Amendment 7 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 2 a (new)
Citation 2 a (new)
– having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), in particular Articles 123, 125, 126 and 140 thereof;
Amendment 8 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 2 b (new)
Citation 2 b (new)
– having regard to the Protocols 12 and 13 to the TEU and TFEU;
Amendment 9 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 3
Citation 3
Amendment 10 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 4
Citation 4
Amendment 39 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas the Member States of the Eurozone should comply with the Maastricht criteria;
Amendment 40 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A b (new)
Recital A b (new)
Ab. whereas Article 5 TEU lays down the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality which apply to the exercise of Union competences;
Amendment 41 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A c (new)
Recital A c (new)
Ac. whereas Article 123 TFEU prohibits the monetary financing of governments;
Amendment 42 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A d (new)
Recital A d (new)
Ad. whereas according to Article 125 TFEU it is illegal for a Member State to be liable for the liabilities of another Member State;
Amendment 43 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A e (new)
Recital A e (new)
Ae. whereas Protocols 12 and 13 to the TEU and TFEU lay down the so-called Maastricht criteria;
Amendment 92 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas progress has been achieved in addressing the flaws of EMU through legislation such as the Six-Pack and the Two-Pack regulations, as well as through the introduction of the European Semester and the creation of new instruments such as the ESM;
Amendment 123 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital J
Recital J
J. whereas the ECJ ruled in the Pringle case that the ESM is consistent with the TFEU and opened the door to a possible integration of that mechanism into the acquis communautaire within the current limits of the Treaties;
Amendment 130 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital J a (new)
Recital J a (new)
Ja. whereas the ESM is not formally under parliamentary control;
Amendment 131 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital J b (new)
Recital J b (new)
Jb. whereas the crisis revealed considerable democratic deficits in economic and financial policies, areas of European policy of particular significance for the citizens; whereas some Member States now see themselves subject to austerity policies which their parliaments would never have decided on their own, while other Member States see themselves forced to grant sizeable loans or guarantees in order to avoid a breakup of the euro; whereas, because of the spill over effects of national economic and fiscal policy decisions on the economies of other Euro area Member States, their national parliaments are thus effectively deprived of their budgetary autonomy;
Amendment 134 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital J c (new)
Recital J c (new)
Jc. whereas any reform of the EMU economic governance structure should respect the will of the EU Member States that have an opt-out from having to introduce the euro currency to retain their respective currencies;
Amendment 136 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital J d (new)
Recital J d (new)
Jd. whereas due consideration should be given to the mutual spill-over effects of the EMU and non-euro area members;
Amendment 137 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital J e (new)
Recital J e (new)
Je. whereas Union and national policy makers and parliamentarians should continuously explain to their citizens the benefits and possible downsides of a single currency, including the costs and risks linked to a break-up of the euro area;
Amendment 139 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital J f (new)
Recital J f (new)
Jf. whereas there is no wide public support for establishing a formal system of fiscal transfers within the Economic and Monetary Union;
Amendment 144 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Recalls that the Werner Report in 1970 highlighted the fact that a monetary union would require all the essential features of national public budgets to be decided at Community levelseveral Member States failed to comply with the Maastricht Criteria, both regarding their annual budgets and their total indebtedness;
Amendment 145 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
Amendment 161 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Considers, against this background, that shortcomings have existed in the Economic and Monetary Union (EMU) since its inception under the Maastricht Treaty with the attribution of monetary policy to the European level, while budgetary policy remains within the competencies of the Member States and is only framed by provisions on light coordination of national policies;
Amendment 182 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Considers that EMU exposed its vulnerability in the context of the global financial and economic crisis when unsustainable imbalances, triggered by capital flows from core euro area nations to the periphery and a rising public spending ratio in some Member States, aggravated and led to a sovereign debt crisis, in which government borrowing costs dramatically increased in some Member States, jeopardising, in the absence of a proper fiscal backstop, the mere existence of the euro area;
Amendment 193 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
Amendment 211 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Considers that, where a Member State whose currency is the euro is unwilling to further surrender its budgetary sovereignty, it should be given the option of leaving the euro area without leaving the EU; invites the Commission and the Eurogroup – acting in liaison with the ECB – to assist in such a scenario the Member State concerned with practical steps to make a withdrawal from the euro area feasible and as smooth as possible;
Amendment 222 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Observes that the stabilisation of the economic cycle since the beginning of the crisis has relied almost exclusively on the ECB, and that the reduced options available for monetary policy in a context of zero lower bound rates have led the ECB to implement unconventional and legally contested loose monetary policy measures; recalls that the President of the ECB has called for integrated institutions, for a stronger and proactive fiscal policy on the euro area scale and for euro area Member States to deliver on structural reform;
Amendment 239 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. AcknowledgesTakes into account the results achieved since the crisis broke in terms of risk reduction and better coordination; points in particular to the many measures taken by the EU institutions to address the shortcomings revealed by the crisis by strengthening coordination of national fiscal policies, in particular via the adoption of the Six-Pack and the Two-Pack Regulations; welcomnotes further the fact that the EU institutions have set up frameworks for action in current and future crises, namely by creating the European Financial Stability Mechanism (EFSM), the temporary European Financial Stabilisation Facility (EFSF) and its permanent successor, the European Stability Mechanism (ESM); underlines, however, that these mechanisms dramatically lack democratic oversight and parliamentary control, and hence ownership;
Amendment 254 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. RecallNotes the four pillars set out in the Five Presidents’ Report: completing the economic, financial and fiscal Union and strengthening democratic accountability, legitimacy and the institutional setting; emphasisnotes that this report reiterates the view set out in the Blueprint of the Commission and the Four Presidents’ Report, coordinated by then President of the European Council Mr Herman van Rompuy, that a shock absorption capacity at euro area level is needed to complement automatic stabilisers at national level, whose functioning is limited, as was shown during the crisisand calls for a shock absorption capacity at euro area level; stresses that any such mechanism, by its mere institutional set-up, risks to lack accountability and democratic legitimacy if it becomes just a new layer of governance which risks to cause moral hazard;
Amendment 273 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Believes that in order to regain trust, the euro must deliver on its promise of stability, convergence, growth and jobs; regards a fiscal capacity as a vital element in this enterprise, which can be successful only if solidarity is closely linked to responsibility, meaning that financial support is provided on the basis of cleariterates that the Member States whose currency is the euro must comply with the Maastricht criteria;
Amendment 284 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Argues that convergence, good governance and conditionality enforced through institutions being held democratically accountable at the euro-area and national level are key, notably to preventing permanent transfers and moral hazardis not the only way forward and poses a high risk of moral hazard; emphasizes that enforcing a credible no bail-out clause would also lead to these ends without requiring a burdening coordination and enforcement effort;
Amendment 295 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Takes the view that incentives for sound fiscal policymaking and for addressing structural weaknesses at national level, taking into account the aggregate euro area fiscal stance, are core elements for the functioning of the euro area; considers that a fiscal capacity should, moreover, address specific concerns for the euro area in the case of absorbing shocksare core elements for the functioning of the euro area;
Amendment 314 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
Amendment 338 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Points out that effective stabilisation of large euro area Member States or a group of closely economically intertwined countries requires sufficient resourcesa direct link between decision making and accountability;
Amendment 348 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Considers that three differente theoretical founcdations have to be fulfilled; argues, first, that in order to foster economic and social convergence within the euro area and to improve the economic competitiveness and resilience of the euro area, Member States’ structural reforms should be incentivised in good economic times; argues, secondly, that differences in the business cycles of euro area Member States stemming from structural differences create the need for an instrument to address asymmetric shocks; considers, thirdly, that symmetric shocks should be addressed so as to increase the resilience of the euro area as a wholefor macroeconomic "imbalances" and "shocks" are insufficiently specified, prone to confusing cause and effect, and too vague to shape the new economic governance structure of the EMU;
Amendment 364 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
Amendment 388 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
Amendment 403 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
Amendment 422 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
Amendment 439 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21a. Notes that the euro currency was supposed to contribute to more unity in Europe, but instead led to more divisiveness because of tensions between creditor and debtor countries of the euro area;
Amendment 483 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Stresses that significant progress in convergence and sustainable structural reforms is needed in order to reconcile fiscal consolidation, growth, jobs, productivity, and competitiveness and the Europeandifferent national social models so as to effectively prevent asymmetric shock; considers that financial support from the European level for the implementation of agreed structural reforms in the Member States, while keeping the responsibility for implementation at the national level, is therefore indispensable;
Amendment 492 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
Amendment 529 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 – indent 2
Paragraph 26 – indent 2
Amendment 551 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 – indent 3 – paragraph 1
Paragraph 26 – indent 3 – paragraph 1
Amendment 560 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 – indent 3 – paragraph 2
Paragraph 26 – indent 3 – paragraph 2
Amendment 573 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
Amendment 597 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Is convinced that increased convergence within the euro area will significantly increase the capacity of its Member States to absorb asymmetric shocks; believes, however, thatBelieves that, no matter how great the efforts regarding convergence and sustainable structural reforms, asymmetric shocks with an impact on the stability of the euro area as a whole cannot be ruled out completely, given the strong integration of the euro area Member Statesneglected preconditions for an optimal currency area; stresses, therefore, the need to have an instrument available for this emergency which provides an immediate stabilisation effectto make possible a withdrawal from the euro area without withdrawing from the EU;
Amendment 608 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
Amendment 620 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 a (new)
Paragraph 29 a (new)
29a. Notes that proposals for a shock absorption function at euro area level reflect the dominance of macro-managing than curing structural problems; believes that, while it may be tempting at first sight to allow counter-cyclical policies via a euro area treasury for highly indebted countries that would otherwise face market pressure, this possibility would reduce the need for consolidation since the ability to conduct counter-cyclical policies is a good reason to seek for fiscal space; considers therefore that a euro area fiscal capacity would make it even harder to reach the goals of the Stability and Growth Pact as amended by the Six- Pack and the Two-Pack;
Amendment 627 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
Amendment 643 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
Paragraph 31
Amendment 671 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
32. Considers that the EMF should provide the financial resources for either of these models, which could require increasing the amount of capital; points out that the fund should avoid long-term redistribution effects by ensuring Member States’ contributions are balanced over the cycle;long-term redistribution effects should be avoided by ensuring that the Member States' contributions to the EU budget are balanced over the cycle; reiterates that no Member State can be liable for the liabilities of another Member State nor for their commitments.
Amendment 681 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
Paragraph 33
33. Warns that future symmetric shocks could destabilise the euro area as a whole since the currency area is not endowed with the instruments to cope with another crisis of the extent of the previous one; is convinced that the right instrument to deal with symmetric shocks depends on the nature of the shock; recalls that the EMF should be used as an appropriate financial resource;
Amendment 696 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
34. Considers that in the case of symmetric shocks brought about by a lack of internal demand, monetary policy alone cannot reignite the economy, particularly in a context of zero lower bounds; is therefore convinced that public and private investment must be increased, the administrative burden reduced and a proper regulatory framework developed, with a view to stimulating potential growththat are caused by a lack of confidence must be diminished by addressing the flaws of the EMU´s economic governance structure;
Amendment 708 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
Paragraph 35
Amendment 730 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36
Paragraph 36
36. Considers that instability in the financial sector could also pose severe challenges for the euro area as a whole; urgesemphasizes that the completion of the Banking Union in order to lessen these challenges; calls for the fiscal capacity to operaims at improving the confidence in the financial sector in some Member States as a fiscal backstop for the Banking Union, as agreedt the expense of the perception of the financial sector stability in othe SRMrs;
Amendment 742 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37
Paragraph 37
37. Points out that theany fiscal capacity haswould have to be of significant size in order to be able to address these euro-area-wide shocks and to finance its functions; insists thwarns against creat in order to provide sufficient financial resources, the euro area fiscal capacity, including the EMF, should be able to increase the issuance of equities via a rise in guarantees; considers that these common issued equities should have the highest credit rateg net contributor and net receiver countries out overstretching solidarity and seeding tension;
Amendment 755 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38
Paragraph 38
38. Stresses that the Community methodsubsidiarity and proportionality principles should prevail in the development of economic governance for the euro area; urges that no reinforcement of intergovernmental structures should take place in parallel with existing structures;
Amendment 766 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39
Paragraph 39
39. Calls urgently for the European Parliament and national parliaments to be given a strengthened role in the renewed economic governance framework in order to reinforce democratic accountability; calls for increased national ownership in the European Semester in order to improve compliance with the CSRsstrict enforcement of the no bail-out clause in order to reinforce democratic accountability;
Amendment 791 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41
Paragraph 41
41. Considers that in order to provide for a genuine EMU, a euro area treasury should be created for collective decision- making, supervision and management of the budgetary capacity for the euro area; calls for the inclusion of thi to be in equilibrium, a country which considers that the costs tareasury wit outweighing the European Commission with full macroeconomic, fiscal and financial competences; calls for a vice-presidentbenefits of a membership of the Eeuropean Commission to head the treasury and simultaneously to act as president of the Eurogroup; urges full accountability of this treasury to the European Parliament area should be able to choose to leave;
Amendment 803 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42
Paragraph 42
Amendment 821 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 43
Paragraph 43
43. Acknowledges that the current political climate characterised by deep inequality, mistrust and uncertainty is not conducive to proper reforms to achieve and complete EMUhas been caused, among others, by pursuing the completion of the EMU regardless of economic objections; believes, therefore, that a comprehensive roadmap, including clear milestones within an agreed timetable and taking into account the political situation, should be urgently adopted with a clear commitment by euro area Heads of State and Government to achieving a genuine and complete EMU;
Amendment 5 #
2015/2132(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Believes the Commission Draft General Budget of the European Union for the financial year 2016 is a welcome step towards helping Member States tackle structural challenges, especially the loss of competitiveness; believes the EU should prioritise programmes and funding that will deliver growth in the European Union;
Amendment 9 #
2015/2132(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Highlights the crucialneed stimulate investment in Europe and notes the role to be played by the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) in closing gaps not covered by the market and in attracting private investments; welcomes that the agreement reached by the co-legislators on the increase in contributions to the EFSI to EUR 3 billion, to be found from the overall budgetary margins in the period 2016 to 2020; reaffirms its determination to further reduce the budgetaryis within the current MFF ceilings; highlights the need to monitor the impact on Horizon 2020 and the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) following the redeployment of budget lines from these programmes;
Amendment 21 #
2015/2132(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Believes the Draft General Budget 2016 is a first step towards achieving real focus, budget discipline and a concrete example of how the Commission is fulfilling its commitment to be ‘big on big things and small on small things’;
Amendment 22 #
2015/2132(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Calls for the Commission to continue to prioritise programmes that contribute to real growth, competitiveness and job creation and to identify areas within the EU budget where savings and efficiencies can be made in order to reinforce these priorities;
Amendment 30 #
2015/2132(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Recalls that the European Parliament strongly supported the creation of the European Supervisory Authorities (ESAs) and believes that the Union needs to further improve the quality of supervision across the Union; believes that the ESAs play an important part in the functioning of financial markets in the Union;
Amendment 31 #
2015/2132(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Stresses that inflexibility in the ability to second national experts from the supervisory bodies of Member States, as well as strict adherence to language requirements and the Commission Staffing code, has been a contributing factor to difficulties faced by the ESAs in attracting high quality staff for short periods of high need;
Amendment 35 #
2015/2132(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Notes the large amount of work the ESAs have done and will continue to do; highlights that close cooperation with national authorities is mandated and should deliver strictly complementary work thus avoiding wasteful duplication;
Amendment 39 #
2015/2132(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Believes all bodies should seek to reduce administrative costs and a detailed rationalisation of any budget expenditure must be delivered; believes that decentralised agencies cannot be exempt from sound budgetary management and welcomes the efforts made to restrain spending on these agencies; calls on all the ESAs to exercise budgetary efficiency and discipline;
Amendment 40 #
2015/2132(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6b. Believes that when additional task are delegated to the ESAs in the future that there should be a cost assessment made at a suitable stage during the legislative process, such as during trialogue negotiations, in order for MEPs and Member States to understand the cost consequences of the proposals they are making;
Amendment 41 #
2015/2132(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 c (new)
Paragraph 6 c (new)
6c. Notes that the Chair, Executive Director and the members of the Board of Supervisors and Management Boards should be in a position to act independently and only in the interest of the Union; believes that the current financing arrangements of the ESAs have not been fully utilised and do not allow enough flexibility for periods of high short term need that will not be necessary on an ongoing basis which would be best filled by seconded national experts;