Activities of Mikuláš PEKSA related to 2020/2221(INI)
Shadow reports (1)
REPORT on the impact of organised crime on own resources of the EU and on the misuse of EU funds with a particular focus on shared management from an auditing and control perspective
Amendments (26)
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas financial and economic crime includesmakes use of corruption, fraud, coercion, violence, collusion, obstruction, money laundering and and intimidation for unlawful gain, concealing the money of illegal origin through money laundering, with the option of using it for further unlawful purposes, including the financing of terrorism;
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas a rising number of organised crime groups are active in the EU, often with cross-border reach; whereas the phenomenon is increasingly complex with new criminal markets and new ways of operating that are emerging due to globalisation and new technologies; whereas Mafia-style organisations are particularly active in their attempts to intercept EU funds in various Member States;
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas technology brings new detection and monitoring capabilities, reducmaking the burdeaction onf investigators more effective and enabling the design of smarter enforcement measures;
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that value-added tax (VAT) fraud is another major component of revenue fraud; points out that one of the sectors most at risk is the fuel sector, where criminal networks abuse VAT exemption rules and price differences among different types of fuel, resulting in huge losses of tax revenue; is concerned by the fact that criminal groups have been proven to exchange knowledge, information and intelligence in the area of VAT fraud;
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Expresses its regret that subsidies are an area affected by fraud on the expenditure side of the Union budget; notes that subsidy fraud happens in many areas of EU spending, such as agriculture policy, cohesion policy, research and development and environmental policy; points out that many such fraudulent activities are carried out by organised crime gangs, including Mafia-style gangs;
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Takes note of the special impact of organised crime in the misuse of common agricultural policy (CAP) funds; reiterates its concern that the current structure of CAP subsidies incentivises land grabbing by criminal and oligarchical structures; stresses that limited transparency in combination with corruption enables criminal organisations to keep their actions out of sight and prevent EU funding from reaching its intended beneficiaries; reiterates that the development of proper Union-level legal instruments against land grabbing and the enabling effective information sharing are crucial in this regard; reiterates firmly that an improved cooperation between the Commission and Member States is necessary, as well as tightening of rules with regard to data collection and management for final beneficiaries of CAP subsidies;
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Takes note of the special impact of organised crime in the misuse of common agricultural policy (CAP) funds; reiterates its concern that the current structure of CAP subsidies incentivises land grabbing by criminal and oligarchical structures; stresses that limited transparency in combination with corruption enables criminal organisations to keep their actions out of sight and prevent EU funding from reaching its intended beneficiaries; reiterates that the development of proper Union-level legal instruments against land grabbing and the enabling effective information sharing are crucial in this regard; points to the need for greater scrutiny by the Commission or the relevant agencies, including with regard to livestock, with particular reference to the funds granted per head of cattle, whose actual existence must be properly verified;
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Notes with concern that the Commission and OLAF have identified fraud in public tenders and procurement as a major trend among fraudsters; points out thatregrets that in many Member States there is no specific legislation against organised crime in the face of fraud schemes which often take place on a transnational level and can span several (EU and non-EU) countries, making them difficult to identify and dissolve;
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Notes that the COVID-19 pandemic creates new opportunities for fraudsters and organised crime; notes with concern that Europol observed a rise in coronavirus-related criminal activities in the form of cybercrime, fraud and counterfeiting, including that of medical equipment and personal protective equipment (PPE); recalls the scams and fake offers of vaccines detected by EU countries, as one of many harmful examples, where fraudsters tried to sell more than 1.1 billion vaccine doses for a total price of over EUR 15.4 billion;
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Is concerned by the assessment of the PIF Report, which found that seven Member States detected fraud in relation to health infrastructure in 2019 and that health infrastructure was particularly affected by violations of public procurement rules; points out that the dependence on emergency procurement procedures in response to the COVID-19 crisis may have aggravated these problems and calls on the Commission and Member States to carryout a representative sample of ex-post controls in cases where emergency procurement procedures were used;
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Is extremely worried by Europol’s expectation that the recession following the pandemic will create new opportunities for organised crime; warns that as organised crime follows the money, the unprecedented increase in EU spending in the context of the NextGenerationEU recovery plan offers major potential for misuse of funds by organised crime; reiterates its call to the Council to agree with additional 40 posts for auditors with the European Court of Auditors and to the OLAF and EPPO to make sure they allocate sufficient resources in discovering and prosecuting criminal activities targeting the NextGenerationEU;
Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Stresses that organised crime, in particular Mafia-style crime, has already, in the past, geared its business to renewable energy; warns that, since they are already active in this sector, criminal organisations can easily intercept funds earmarked for the ecological transition, which account for a significant percentage of Next Generation EU funds;
Amendment 30 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Takes note with concern of the facilitators of organised crime, such as money laundering, cybercrime, document fraud, corruption, fake registration and the use of shell companies; stresses that these actions impact on the authorities’ ability to effectively monitor whether EU money is spent as intended;
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Notes that the 2019 PIF Report counted 514 fraudulent irregularities on the expenditure side with a financial value of EUR 381.4 million, and 425 fraudulent irregularities on the revenue side, totalling EUR 79.7 million; emphasises that these numbers do not capture the true extent of fraud, which is likely to be significantly greater; further highlights that not all fraud is committed by organised crime gangs, especially on the expenditure side, where fraud is frequently committed by individuals or individual companies and can even include high public or government officials;
Amendment 36 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Stresses with concern that corruption is an integral part of nearly all the activities of criminal organisations and that it poses a serious threat to the financial interests of the European Union, with an estimated GDP loss ranging between EUR 170 and 990 billion and a cost to the EU of more than EUR 5 billion per year for the public procurement part of the budget alone1 a; _________________ 1a 'The Cost of Non-Europe in the area of Organised Crime and Corruption: Annex II: Corruption' RAND Europe, 2016
Amendment 44 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Welcomes the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO), with its mandate to investigate, prosecute and bring to judgment crimes against the EU budget, as an important asset in the fight against fraud and organised crime in the EU; calls for effective funding for the EPPO; regrets that five Member States have not yet joined the EPPO; regrets the lack of nominations of European delegated prosecutors, in particular by Slovenia, and considerable delays in many other Member States; highlights that this may represent a substantial hindrance in the EPPO’s effectivepoints out that EPPO’s lack of mandate to operate in Member States who did not join EPPO severely weakens the efficiency and effectiveness of the pan-European fight against cross-border crimes;
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Welcomes the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO), with its mandate to investigate, prosecute and bring to judgment crimes against the EU budget, as an important asset in the fight against fraud and organised crime in the EU; calls for effective funding for the EPPO; regrets that five Member States have not yet joined the EPPO and for those countries calls for greater oversight on the part of the Commission; regrets the lack of nominations of European delegated prosecutors, in particular by Slovenia, and considerable delays in many other Member States; highlights that this may represent a substantial hindrance in the EPPO’s effective fight against cross-border crime;
Amendment 51 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Regrets that the national approaches to tackle organised crime vary significantly across Member States in terms of legislation, strategies and operational capacity; notes that this is partly due to varying levels of adoption and implementation of EU legislation; regrets greatly that some Member States continuously choose not to implement OLAF’s recommendations following the conclusion of an investigation and do not launch judiciary actions aiming at recovering defrauded EU funds;
Amendment 58 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Notes that although the Commission has encouraged Member States to develop national anti-fraud strategies (NAFS), only 13 Member States have done so and none of them used the template provided by the Commission; notes with concern that these differences across Member States pose obstacles for efficient cooperation; calls, therefore, on the Commission to take more resolute action with a view to making it mandatory for the Member States to lay down rules to prevent fraud against the EU;
Amendment 60 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21a. Is of the view that, given the transnational dimension of the fraudulent activities of criminal organisations, it is of vital importance to take action through measures to prevent and combat crime, including Mafia-style crime, and through the approximation of criminal laws in the Member States;
Amendment 61 #
22. Is concerned that the current system of differing national approaches prevents an effective, cross-border approach to address the problem, which gives criminals an opportunity to continue their actions without being held accountable; calls on the Member States to cooperate closely with EU bodies and each other and to make use of the Union’s tools and services in the fight against organised crime in order to excel data exchange and facilitate cross- border operations targeting organised crime activities against the EU budget;
Amendment 65 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Calls on the Member States and the Commission to consider a more coherent use of all the available tools to detect and tackle fraud, in particular the Arachne IT platform and EDES; emphasises that the interoperability of Arachne, EDES, institutional and national databases is crucial for ensuring an effective information exchange aimed at preventing and identifying fraud against the EU budget; calls on the Commission to consider the extension of the application of EDES to funds under shared management; calls on the Commission to make the use of Arachne, especially for funds under CAP, mandatory for the Member States;
Amendment 69 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Calls on the Member States, with the support of the Commission, to provide training to national authorities to equip them with adequate knowledge for using tools such as EDES and Arachne effectively and in accordance with EU reporting standards; calls for Anti-Money Laundering trainings schemes allowing authorities to detect risk of potential fraud before the funds are disbursed, particularly in area of KYC and unrevealed involvement of PEPs in CAP subsidies, projects and grants;
Amendment 71 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)
Paragraph 24 a (new)
24 a. Believes that transparency of public funds is crucial to maintain a high level of accountability and avoid conflicts of interests or corruption; recommends that all political parties in Europe operate with transparent bank accounts, which allow citizens to consult they transaction history and identify potential fraudulent behaviour such as links to organised crime;
Amendment 74 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Highlights that an important step in fighting organised crime is making it less profitable; recalls in this regard the work of OLAF, whose investigations are a crucial tool in the fight against fraud; regrets that the indictment rate following recommendations by OLAF to Member States is low and follows a downward trend, as it decreased from 53 % in the 2007-2014 period to 37 % in the 2016- 2020 period; further notes that the extent to which financial amounts recommended for recovery are actually recovered has not been assessed in recent years, and that the most recent assessment covering the years 2002 to 2016 indicates a recovery rate of 30 %; calls on OLAF and the Commission to investigate the underlying reasons and on the Member States to cooperate closely with the Union bodies, to ensure that funds misused by organised crime are effectively recovered; takes the view that decisive action to recover funds, including through preventive or value-based seizures, can deter criminal organisations from committing fraud against the European Union, thereby protecting its financial interests;