13 Amendments of Elisabeth SCHROEDTER related to 2013/0000(INI)
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 9
Citation 9
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 11 a (new)
Citation 11 a (new)
- having regard to the Communication from the Commission on “Think Small First”- A “Small Business Act” for Europe, (COM(2008)0394),
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the legal basis for the new proposals, as stipulated by Article 109 TFEU, provides only for consultation of Parliament, not the ordinary legislative procedure; whereas Parliament has no say in the adoption of the guidelines on regional State aid for 2014-2020;
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas the most common forms of State support schemes take the form of grants and subsidies, tax deductions, waivers, incentive awards, soft loans, guarantees, preferential borrowing rates, and equity participation granted by national, regional and local government as well as by publicly controlled entities and through an increasing number of forms of public-private partnership;
Amendment 22 #
1. Takes the view that the implementation of both the Cohesion Policy and the rules on State support schemes to reinforce local and regional investments are of key importance for promoting economic, social and territorial cohesion, regional and local development, industrialsmart, sustainable and inclusive growth and job creation; is, however, concerned about whether the State aid rules are coherent with the implementation of the European Structural and Investment Funds;
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Highlights that the State aid rules, as well as the Cohesion Policy objectives, should lead to improving the situation of the less-developed regions, and that the SAM process must reflect the objectives of cohesion throughout the EU; believes that the modernisation of competition rules must be based on understanding the impact of these rules at sub-national level on one hand and prevent subsidy races of businesses on the other hand;
Amendment 33 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Welcomes the Commission’s aim in the SAM process to make the principles clearer, more straightforward and easier; takes the view that these principles should be both well coordinated with other EU policies and sufficiently clear, predictable and flexible to meet the needs of certain Member States and their regions facing a time of crisis and severe economic hardship; reiterates its recognition of the role played by State aid in addressing the crisis; expresses its concern that the proposal, as published for consultation, is not sufficiently evidence-basedcomplementary to Cohesion Policy in particular in relation to the rules for preventing relocation and will go against the objective of simplification;
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Takes the view that the geographical zoning of the new Guidelines on Regional State Aid 2014-2020 (RSAG) should not be reduced, and that decreasing the aid intensity should be reconsidered, taking into account the political, economic and social situation in the Member States; points out that, in the global context, the EU economy could be placed at a disadvantage relative to third countries benefitting from looser employment schemes or lower costs;
Amendment 90 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Believes that the application of State aid rules within Cohesion Policy programmes could be better achieved by focussing on large-scale aid, simplifying rules, increasing the de minimis ceiling, and extending the horizontal categories in the Enabling Regulation and the scope of the block exemption rules in the General Block Exemption Regulation;
Amendment 98 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Takes the view that application of the State aid rules within the Cohesion policy programmes in infrastructure projects exploited for economic activities, namely after the above-mentioned ruling of the Court of Justice in joint cases Mitteldeutsche Flughafen and Flughafen Leipzig/Halle v Commission, may lead to a greater administrative burden being imposed on local and regional authorities and/or their public entities; stresses that the implementation of these projects may be jeopardised by the demanding financial management rules, including the de- commitment rules pertaining to the Cohesion Policy and the complaint practice in the State aid procedure;
Amendment 107 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Believes that certain, newly proposed rules in the draft RSAG for 2014-2020 – such as counterfactual scenarios, clear evidence that the aid has an impact on the investment choice, or the condition that work on the project must not start before a decision to award aid is taken by public authorities – which the Commission would like to impose in the coming period – both on companies applying for incentives and on the Member States and their sub- national government structures – go against the principle of simplification and ‘debureaucratiswill improve the capacity for selection of operation’s as promoted in the Cohesion Policy and other EU and national policies; reiteratnd the effectiveness of spending; recognises that such rules may mean that certain projects will be excluded from investment aid;
Amendment 116 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Is of the opinion that excluding large enterprises companies from State aid rules in areas covered by Article 107(3)(c) TFEU is not justified given their contribution to employment, the supply- chains that they create with SMEs, their common involvement in research and development, and the role they play in the economic crisis; takes the viewworth being considered given the lack of incentive effect for large enterprises as evidence suggests; recalls, however, that the presence of large undertakings is often key to the success of SMEs that benefit from clusters led by large companies and from their sub- contracting activities; underlines that such a decision may lead to job losses and reduced economic activity in the regions and to the relocation of companies to other regions either within and outside the EU;
Amendment 128 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Believes that the eligibility of large enterprises for State aid incentives should be determined not only on the basis of the size of the enterprise or the sector in which it operates but also on the basis of the number of jobs that could be created under the incentive, the quality and the sustainability of these jobs or the sustainability of the project as a whole including the long term effects for the development of the concerned region; stresses that, in compliance with the principle of subsidiarity, decisions to determine which particular projects have the highest potential to achieve the objectives of EU policies should be left to the Member States, the regions concerned and local governments;