6 Amendments of Dragoş TUDORACHE related to 2021/2026(INL)
Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Acknowledges that regulating the acquisition of nationality is primarily a Member State competence but stresses that that competence needs to be exercised in good faith, in a spirit of mutual respect, transparently, with due diligence and proper scrutiny, in accordance with the principle of sincere cooperation and in full respect of Union law15 ; considers that where Member States do not act in full compliance with those standards and principles, a legal ground for Union action arises; considers that a Union competence could also arise on the basis of Article 21(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) with respect to certain aspects of Member State nationality law16 ; _________________ 15 See the reasoning used in the Commission infringement procedures against Malta and Cyprus with respect to their investor citizenship schemes (https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorn er/detail/en/ip_20_1925) and the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union: Judgment of the Court of 7 July 1992, Mario Vicente Micheletti and others v Delegación del Gobierno en Cantabria, C-369/90, ECLI:EU:C:1992:295; Judgment of the Court of 11 November 1999, Belgian State v Fatna Mesbah, C- 179/98, ECLI:EU:C:1999:549; Judgment of the Court of 20 February 2001, Judgment of the Court of 20 February 2001, The Queen v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte: Manjit Kaur, C-192/99, ECLI:EU:C:2001:106; Judgment of the Court of 2 March 2010, Janko Rottman v Freistaat Bayern, C- 135/08, ECLI:EU:C:2010:104; and Judgment of the Court of 12 March 2019, M.G. Tjebbes and Others v Minister van Buitenlandse Zaken, C-221/17, ECLI:EU:C:2019:189. 16 EPRS EAVA Study, pp. 43-44.
Amendment 65 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 – point a
Paragraph 21 – point a
(a) increased due diligence and rigorous background checks of the applicant and the sources of their funds;
Amendment 69 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 – point b
Paragraph 21 – point b
(b) the regulation and, proper certification and scrutiny as well as limitation of the activities of intermediaries;
Amendment 70 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 – point c
Paragraph 21 – point c
(c) harmonised rules and obligations on Member States to report to the Commission regarding their RBI schemes and applications thereunder;
Amendment 74 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 – point d
Paragraph 21 – point d
(d) minimum physical residence requirements asnd minimum active involvement in the investment as conditions for acquiring residence under RBI schemes;
Amendment 95 #
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – indent 4
Annex I – indent 4
— The regulation should contain Union-level standards and procedures for increased due diligence and rigorous background checks for applicants and their source of wealth. A proposal for a regulation is more than warranted, especially in light of the fact that the Group of Experts on Investor Citizenship and Residence Schemes never made any progress as regards those elements. In particular, all applicants must be structurally crosschecked against all relevant national, Union (SIS, VIS, ECRIS-TCN, ETIAS) and international (Interpol) databases by the Member State authorities. There should also be an independent verification of documents submitted, a full background check of all police records and involvement in previous and current civil and criminal litigation, in- person interviews with the applicants and a thorough verification of how the applicant’s wealth was accumulated and its relation to the reported income.