BETA

105 Amendments of Adrián VÁZQUEZ LÁZARA related to 2020/0374(COD)

Amendment 91 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
(13) In particular, online intermediation services, online search engines, web browsers, operating systems, online social networking, video sharing platform services, number- independent interpersonal communication services, cloud computing services and online advertising services all have the capacity to affect a large number of end users and businesses alike, which entails a risk of unfair business practices. They therefore should be included in the definition of core platform services and fall into the scope of this Regulation. Online intermediation services should be covered irrespective of the technology used to provide such services. In this regard, virtual or voice activated assistants and other connected devices should fall within the scope of this Regulation irrespective of the software used as an operating system, an online intermediation service or a search engine. Online intermediation services may also be active in the field of financial services, and they may intermediate or be used to provide such services as listed non-exhaustively in Annex II to Directive (EU) 2015/1535 of the European Parliament and of the Council32 . In certain circumstances, the notion of end users should encompass users that are traditionally considered business users, but in a given situation do not use the core platform services to provide goods or services to other end users, such as for example businesses relying on cloud computing services for their own purposes. __________________ 32Directive (EU) 2015/1535 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 September 2015 laying down a procedure for the provision of information in the field of technical regulations and of rules on Information Society services, OJ L 241, 17.9.2015, p. 1.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 106 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31
(31) To ensure the effectiveness of the review of gatekeeper status as well as the possibility to adjust the list of core platform services provided by a gatekeeper, the gatekeepers should inform the Commission of all of their intended and concluded acquisitions of other providers of core platform services or any other services provided within the digital sectorprior to their application. Such information should not only serve the review process mentioned above, regarding the status of individual gatekeepers, but will also provide information that is crucial to monitoring broader contestability trends in the markets where gatekeepers operate, in particular in the digital sector and can therefore be a useful factor for consideration in the context of the market investigations foreseen by this Regulation.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 108 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 33
(33) The obligations laid down in this Regulation are limited to what is necessary and justified to address the unfairness of the identified practices by gatekeepers and to ensure contestability in relation to core platform services provided by gatekeepers. Therefore, the obligations should correspond to those practices that are considered unfair by taking into account the features of the digital sector and where experience gained, for example in the enforcement of the EU competition rules, shows that they have a particularly negative direct impact on the business users and end users. The obligations laid down in the Regulation may specifically take into account the nature of the core platform services provided. In addition, it is necessary to provide for the possibility of a regulatory dialogue with gatekeepers to tailor those obligations that are likely to require specific implementing measures in order to ensure their effectiveness and proportionality. The obligations should only be updated after a thorough investigation on the nature and impact of specific practices that may be newly identified, following an in-depth investigation, as unfair or limiting contestability in the same manner as the unfair practices laid down in this Regulation while potentially escaping the scope of the current set of obligations. In order to enhance the effectiveness of the updating process, the Commission should also use the reporting mechanism involving competitors, business users, end-users and competent national authorities, that would inform the Commission in the event of any of those detected practices.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 112 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 37
(37) Because of their position, gatekeepers might in certain cases restrict the ability of business users of their online intermediation services to offer their goods or services to end users under more favourable conditions, including price, through other online intermediation services, their own interface or direct channel. Such restrictions have a significant deterrent effect on the business users of gatekeepers in terms of their use of alternative online intermediation services, limiting inter-platform contestability, which in turn limits choice of alternative distribution channels including alternative online intermediation channels for end users. To ensure that business users of online intermediation services of gatekeepers can freely choose alternative online intermediation services and differentiate the conditions under which they offer their products or services to their end users, it should not be accepted that gatekeepers limit business users from choosing to differentiate commercial conditions, including price. Such a restriction should apply to any measure with equivalent effect, such as for example increased commission rates or de-listing of the offers of business users.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 115 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 38
(38) To prevent further reinforcing their dependence on the core platform services of gatekeepers, the business users of these gatekeepers should be free in promoting and choosing the distribution channel they consider most appropriate to interact with any end users that these business users have already acquired through core platform services provided by the gatekeeper. Conversely, end users should also be free to choose offers of such business users and to enter into contracts with them either through core platform services of the gatekeeper, if applicable, or from a direct distribution channel of the business user or another indirect distribution channel such business user may use. This should apply to the promotion of offers and conclusion of contracts between business users and end users. Moreover, the ability of end users to freely acquire content, subscriptions, features or other services or items outside the core platform services of the gatekeeper should not be undermined or restricted notably through the use of technical restrictions. In particular, it should be avoided that gatekeepers restrict end users from access to and use of such services vialegally acquired digital content and services via hardware or a software application running on their core platform service. For example, subscribers to online content purchased outside a software application download or purchased from a software application store should not be prevented from accessing such online content on a software application on the gatekeeper’s core platform service simply because it was purchased outside such software application or software application store.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 121 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40
(40) Identification and ancillary services are crucial for the economic development of business users to conduct their business, as these can allow them not only to optimise services, to the extent allowed under Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Directive 2002/58/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council33 , but also to inject trust in online transactions, in compliance with Union or national law. Gatekeepers should therefore not use their position as provider of core platform services to require their dependent business users to include any identification or ancillary services provided by the gatekeeper itself as part of the provision of services or products by these business users to their end users, where other identification services are available to such business users. __________________ 33 Directive 2002/58/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 July 2002 concerning the processing of personal data and the protection of privacy in the electronic communications sector (Directive on privacy and electronic communications) (OJ L 201, 31.7.2002, p. 37).
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 123 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 41
(41) Gatekeepers should not restrict the free choice of end users by technically preventing switching between or subscription to different software applications and services. Gatekeepers should therefore ensure a free choice irrespective of whether they are the manufacturer of any hardware by means of which such software applications or services are accessed and should not raise artificial technical barriers so as to make switching impossiblmore cumbersome or ineffective. The mere offering of a given product or service to end users, including by means of pre- installation, as well the improvement of end user offering, such as better prices or increased quality, would not in itself constitute a barrier to switching.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 126 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 42
(42) The conditions under which gatekeepers provide online advertising services to business users including both advertisers and publishers are often non- transparent and opaque. This opacity is partly linked to the practices of a few platforms, but is also due to the sheer complexity of modern day programmatic advertising. The sector is considered to have become more non-transparent after the introduction of new privacy legislation, and is expected to become even more opaque with the announced removal of third-party cookies. This often leads to a lack of information and knowledge for advertisers and publishers about the conditions of the advertising services they purchased and undermines their ability to switch to alternative providers of online advertising services. Furthermore, the costs of online advertising are likely to be higher than they would be in a fairer, more transparent and contestable platform environment. These higher costs are likely to be reflected in the prices that end users pay for many daily products and services relying on the use of online advertising. Transparency obligations should therefore require gatekeepers to provide advertisers and publishers to whom they supply online advertising services, when requested and to the extent possible, with easily accessible and real-time information that allows both sides to understand the price paid for each of the different advertising services provided as part of the relevant advertising value chain.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 129 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 46
(46) A gatekeeper may use different means to favour its own services or products on its core platform service, to the detriment of the same or similar services that end users could obtain through third parties. This may for instance be the case where certain software applications or ancillary services are pre-installed by a gatekeeper. To enable end user choice, gatekeepers should not prevent end users from un- installing any pre-installed software applications on its core platform service and thereby favour their own software applications.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 135 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 48
(48) Gatekeepers are often vertically integrated and offer certain products or services to end users through their own core platform services, or through a business user over which they exercise control which frequently leads to conflicts of interest. This can include the situation whereby a gatekeeper offers its own online intermediation services through an online search engine. When offering those products or services on the core platform service, gatekeepers can reserve a better position or a differentiated treatment to their own offering, in terms of ranking, as opposed to the products of third parties also operating on that core platform service. This can occur for instance with products or services, including other core platform services, which are ranked in the results communicated by online search engines, or which are partly or entirely embedded in online search engines results, groups of results specialised in a certain topic, displayed along with the results of an online search engine, which are considered or used by certain end users as a service distinct or additional to the online search engine. Other instances are those of software applications which are distributed through software application stores, or products or services that are given prominence and display in the newsfeed of a social network, or products or services ranked in search results or displayed on an online marketplace. In those circumstances, the gatekeeper is in a dual- role position as intermediary for third party providers and as direct provider of products or services of the gatekeeper. Consequently, these gatekeepers have the ability to undermine directly the contestability for those products or services on these core platform services, to the detriment of business users which are not controlled by the gatekeeper.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 136 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 49
(49) In such situations, the gatekeeper should not engage in any form of differentiated or preferential treatment in ranking on the core platform service, whether through legal, commercial or technical means, in favour of products or services it offers itself or through a business user which it controlsoperates with. To ensure that this obligation is effective, it should also be ensured that the conditions that apply to such ranking are also generally fair and do not allow the gatekeeper’s own services or products to benefit from competition-relevant information about competing products or services. Ranking should in this context cover all forms of relative prominence, including among others display, rating, order, linking or voice results. To ensure that this obligation is effective and cannot be circumvented it should also apply to any measure that may have an equivalent effect to the differentiated or preferential treatment in ranking. The guidelines adopted pursuant to Article 5 of Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 should also facilitate the implementation and enforcement of this obligation.34 __________________ 34Commission Notice: Guidelines on ranking transparency pursuant to Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ C 424, 8.12.2020, p. 1).
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 139 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 53
(53) The conditions under which gatekeepers provide online advertising services to business users including both advertisers and publishers are often non- transparent and opaque. This often leads to a lack of information for advertisers and publishers about the effect of a given ad. To further enhance fairness, transparency and contestability of online advertising services designated under this Regulation as well as those that are fully integrated with other core platform services of the same provider, the designated gatekeepers should therefore provide advertisers and publishers, when requested, with free of charg, publishers, or third parties authorised by advertisers and publishers, when requested, with free of charge, continuous, detailed, comprehensive, accessible and real-time access to the performance measuring tools of the gatekeeper and the information necessary, including aggregated data and performance data, for advertisers, advertising agencies acting on behalf of a company placing advertising, as well as for publishers to carry out their own independent verification of the provision of the relevant online advertising services.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 147 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 58 a (new)
(58a) During the implementation period of three months, designated gatekeepers should inform the Commission about what they intend to implement and how, in order to ensure effective compliance with their obligations. Such information should be made available to concerned third parties of undertakings, taking into account the protection of trade secrets of designated gatekeepers.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 151 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 64
(64) The Commission should investigate and assess whether additional behavioural, or, where appropriate, structural remedies are justified, in order to ensure that the gatekeeper cannot frustrate the objectives of this Regulation by systematic non- compliance with one or several of the obligations laid down in this Regulation, which has further strengthened its gatekeeper position. This would be the case if the gatekeeper’s size in the internal market has further increased, economic dependency of business users and end users on the gatekeeper’s core platform services has further strengthened as their number has further increased and the gatekeeper benefits from increased entrenchment of its position. The Commission should therefore in such cases have the power to impose any remedy, whether behavioural or structural, having due regard to the principle of proportionality. Structural remedies, such as legal, functional or structural separation, including the divestiture of a business, or parts of it, should only be imposed either where there is no equally effective behavioural remedy or where any equally effective behavioural remedy would be more burdensome for the undertaking concerned than the structural remedy. Changes to the structure of an undertaking as it existed before the systematic non- compliance was established would only be proportionate where there is a substantial risk that this systematic non-compliance results from the very structure of the undertaking concerned.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 152 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 65 a (new)
(65a) In case of urgency where a risk of serious and immediate damage for business users or end-users of gatekeepers could result from new practices that may undermine contestability of core platform services or may be unfair, it is also important to ensure that the Commission can implement interim measures and thus temporarily impose obligations to the gatekeeper concerned. These interim measures should be proportionate and limited to what is necessary and justified. They should apply pending the conclusion of the market investigation and the corresponding final decision of the Commission.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 153 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 67
(67) Where, in the course of a proceeding into non-compliance or an investigation into systemic non- compliance, a gatekeeper offers commitments to the Commission, the latter should be able to adopt a decision making these commitments binding on the gatekeeper concerned, where it finds that the commitments ensure effective compliance with the obligations of this Regulation. This decie Commission should also find that there are no longer grounds for action by the Commission., where appropriate, be entitled to require the commitments to be tested, including A/B tested in order to optimise their effectiveness. The commitments should be reviewed after they have been in place for an appropriate period. Should the review of the commitments by the Commission show that they have not led to effective compliance, the Commission shall be entitled to require their amendment or revoke them;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 154 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 70
(70) The Commission should be able to directly request that undertakings or association of undertakings provide any relevant evidence, data and information. In addition, the Commission should be able to request any relevant information from any public authority, body or agency within the Member State, or from any natural person or legal person for the purpose of this Regulation. Those public authorities, bodies or agencies within Member States should have the possibility, on their own initiative, to provide the Commission with relevant information. When complying with a decision of the Commission, undertakings are obliged to answer factual questions and to provide documents.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 164 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 5
5. Member States shall not impose on gatekeepers further obligations by way of laws, regulations or administrative action for the purpose of ensuring contestable and fair markets. This is without prejudice to rules pursuing other legitimate public interests, in compliance with Union law. In particular, nothing in this Regulation precludes Member States from imposing obligations, which are compatible with Union law, on undertakings, including providers of core platform services where these obligations are unrelated to the relevant undertakings having a status of gatekeeper within the meaning of this Regulation in order to protect consumers or to fight against acts of unfair competition and unfair trading practices in business- to-business relationships.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 166 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 6
6. This Regulation is without prejudice to the application of Articles 101 and 102 TFEU. It is also without prejudice to the application of: national rules prohibiting anticompetitive agreements, decisions by associations of undertakings, concerted practices and abuses of dominant positions; national competition rules prohibiting other forms of unilateral conduct insofar as they are applied to undertakings other than gatekeepers or amount to imposing additional obligations on gatekeepers; Council Regulation (EC) No 139/200438 and national rules concerning merger control; Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 and, Regulation (EU) …./.. of the European Parliament and of the Council39 . __________________, Directive 2005/29/EC on unfair commercial practices, Council Directive 93/13/EEC on unfair terms in consumer contracts and Directive 2010/13/EU on the provision of audiovisual media services 1a. __________________ 1a OJ L 95, 15.4.2010, p. 1 38Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 of 20 January 2004 on the control of concentrations between undertakings (the EC Merger Regulation) (OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1). 39Regulation (EU) …/.. of the European Parliament and of the Council – proposal on a Single Market For Digital Services (Digital Services Act) and amending Directive 2000/31/EC.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 172 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point c a (new)
(ca) web browsers;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 173 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point g a (new)
(ga) Payment aggregation services;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 174 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point h
(h) advertising services, including any advertising networks, advertising exchanges and any other advertising intermediation services, provided by a provider where the undertaking to which it belongs to is also a provider of any of the core platform services listed in points (a) to (g);
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 185 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new)
(3a) ‘Virtual assistant’ means software that responds to oral or written commands expressed in a non-technical language by end-users and perform tasks or services by itself or mediates with IT systems if needed and on behalf of the end user;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 186 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 7 a (new)
(7a) ‘Web browser’ means independent or embedded software applications to access and interact with information hosted on web servers and networks such as the internet;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 189 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 11 a (new)
(11a) ‘Payment aggregation services’ means technical services as defined in Article 3(j) of Directive (EU) 2015/2366 of the European Parliament and of the Council, which enable any business activity set out in annex I of Directive (EU) 2015/2366 of the European Parliament and of the Council within the framework of contracts between payment aggregation services providers and third- party providers.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 196 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 17 a (new)
(17a) ‘Competitor to the gatekeeper’s core platform service’ means any natural or legal person acting in a commercial or professional capacity providing a core platform service in the same category as the one of the gatekeeper;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 198 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 18
(18) ‘Ranking’ means the relative prominence given to goods or services offered through online intermediation services including software application stores and virtual assistants or online social networking services, or the relevance given to search results by online search engines, as presented, organised or communicated by the providers of online intermediation services including software application stores and virtual assistants or of online social networking services or by providers of online search engines, respectively, whatever the technological means used for such presentation, organisation or communication;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 201 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 23 a (new)
(23a) ‘National competent authority’ means any national authority that has been designated by a Member State as such within the meaning and for the purpose of this Regulation, notably in respect of Article 17;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 211 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) it enjoys an entrenched and durable position in its operations or it is foreseeable that it will enjoy such a position in the near future.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 216 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. Where a provider of core platform services meets all the thresholds in paragraph 2, it shall notify the Commission thereof within threone months after those thresholds are satisfied and provide it with the relevant information identified in paragraph 2.. That notification shall include the relevant information relating to the quantitative thresholds identified in paragraph 2 for each of the core platform services of the provider that meets the thresholds in paragraph 2 point (b). The notification shall be updated whenever other core platform services individually meet the thresholds in paragraph 2 point (b).
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 217 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Where the gatekeeper presents such sufficiently substantiated arguments to demonstrate that it does not satisfy the requirements of paragraph 1, the Commission shall apply paragraph 6 to assess whether the criteria in paragraph 1 are met.deleted
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 220 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – point d a (new)
(da) the ability of the undertaking to implement conglomerate strategies, in particular through its vertical integration or its significant leverage in related markets;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 222 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – point f
(f) other structural market characteristics such as the degree of multi- homing among business and end-users of the core platform services provided.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 224 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 3
Where the provider of a core platform service that satisfies the quantitative thresholds of paragraph 2 fails to comply with the investigative measures ordered by the Commission pursuant to Chapter V of this Regulation in a significant manner and the failure persists after the provider has been invited to comply within a reasonable time-limit and to submit observations, the Commission shall be entitled to designate that provider as a gatekeeper.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 226 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 4
Where the provider of a core platform service that does not satisfy the quantitative thresholds of paragraph 2 fails to comply with the investigative measures ordered by the Commission pursuant to Chapter V of this Regulation in a significant manner and the failure persists after the provider has been invited to comply within a reasonable time-limit and to submit observations, the Commission shall be entitled to designate that provider as a gatekeeper based on facts available.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 231 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(ba) there is new relevant information that was not examined before the adoption of the decision;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 234 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3
3. The Commission shall publish and update the list of gatekeepers and the list of the core platform services for which they need to comply with the obligations laid down in Articles 5 and 6 on an on-going basis and send it to the European Parliament.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 235 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) refrain from combining personal data sourced from these core platform services with personal data from any other services offered by the gatekeeper or with personal data from third-party services, and from signing in end users to other services of the gatekeeper in order to combine personal data, unless the end user has been presented with the specific choice and provided consent in the sense of Regulation (EU) 2016/679. In the event that the end user has been presented with the specific choice and has not provided consent, or has withdrawn consent, the gatekeeper shall refrain from offering different or degraded services compared to the services offered to an end user that provided consent, unless such consent is indispensable to ensure the same quality of service;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 241 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) allow business users to offer the same products or services to end users through third party online intby any other mediation serviceans at prices or conditions that are different from those offered through the online intermediation services of the gatekeeper;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 242 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(ba) refrain from requiring business users to inform the gatekeeper of the differentiated prices or conditions they choose to apply on their own channel of distribution or through any other means;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 243 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) allow business users to promote offers to end users acquired via the core platform service, and to conclude contracts with these end users or receive payments for services provided regardless of whether for that purpose they use the core platform services of the gatekeeper or not, and allow end users to access and use, through the core platform services of the gatekeeper, content, subscriptions, features or other items by using the software application of a business user, where these items have been acquired by the end users from the relevant business user without using the core platform services of the gatekeeper;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 246 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) refrain from preventing or restricting business users and end-users from raising issues with any relevant public authority relating to any practice of gatekeepers including through the reporting mechanism for business users and end-users pursuant to Article 21a;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 249 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) refrain from requiring business users to use, offer or interoperate with an identification servicey ancillary service as defined in points (14) and (15) of Article 2 of the gatekeeper in the context of services offered by the business users using the core platform services of that gatekeeper;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 253 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) refrain from requiring business users or end users to subscribe to or register with any other core platform services identias defined pursuant toin Article 32 or which meets the thresholds in Article 3(2)(b)any ancillary services provided by the gatekeeper as a condition to use, access, sign up or register to any of their core platform services identified pursuant to that Article;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 254 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point g
(g) provide advertisers and publishers, or third parties authorised by advertisers and publishers, to which it supplies advertising services, upon their request, with and free of charge, with continuous, detailed, comprehensive, real-time and easy to access information concerning the price paid by the advertiser and publisher, as well as the amount or remuneration paid to the publisher, for the publishing of a given ad and for each of the relevant advertising services provided by the gatekeeper. , including aggregated data and performance data in a manner that would allow advertisers and publishers to run their own verification and measurement tools to assess performance of the core services provided for by the gatekeepers;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 258 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point g a (new)
(ga) refrain from imposing on business users or end users software applications or services, which are used in the context of or together with core platform services, or contractual licensing agreements, which would limit end users' ability or economic incentive to use third party software applications or service and/or give preferential treatment to the gatekeeper’s own products or services;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 264 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) refrain from using, in competition with business users, any data not publicly available, which is generated through or in connection with activities by those business users, including by the end users of these business users, of its core platform services or of its ancillary services or which is provided by those business users of its core platform services or its ancillary services or by the end users of these business users;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 266 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(ba) refrain from exclusively enabling its own core platform services as default services when equivalent alternative services which perform the same function can be proposed in non-discriminatory manner;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 268 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) allow and technically enable the installation and effective use and interoperability of third party software applications or software application stores using, or interoperating with, operating systems of that gatekeeper and allow and enable these software applications or software application stores to be accessed by means other than the core platform services of that gatekeeper. The gatekeeper shall not be prevented from taking proportionate measures to ensure that third party software applications or software application stores do not endanger the integrity of the hardware or operating system provided by the gatekeeper , provided that such proportionate measures are duly justified;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 272 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) refrain from treating differently or more favourably in ranking, display, installation, activation, or default settings, services and products offered by the gatekeeper itself or by any third party belonging to the same undertaking compared to similar services or products of third party and apply fair and non- discriminatory conditions to such ranking, display, installation, activation and default settings;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 275 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) refrain from technically restricting the ability of end users to switch between and subscribe to different software applications and services to be accessed using the operating system or the cloud computing services of the gatekeeper, including as regards the choice of Internet access provider for end users or using its virtual assistant;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 276 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) allow business users, end users and providers of ancillary services access to and interoperability with the same operating system, hardware or software features, including near-field communication antennas or technology related to these antennas, that are available or used in the provision by the gatekeeper of any ancillary services or industry-standard features of its core platform services; in such cases, access and interoperability conditions shall be fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 279 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point g
(g) provide advertisers and publishers, upon their request and free of charge, withor third parties authorised by advertisers and publishers, upon their request and free of charge, with continuous, detailed, comprehensive, accessible and real-time access information access to the performance measuring tools of the gatekeeper and the information necessary for advertisers and publishers to carry out their own independent verification of the ad inventory, including aggregated data and performance data in a manner that would allow advertisers and publishers to run their own verification and measurement tools to assess performance of the core services provided for by the gatekeepers;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 281 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point h
(h) provide effective portability of data provided for or generated through or in the context of the activity of a business user or end user and shall, in particular, provide tools ffree of charge and technically accessible tools for business users, or third parties authorised by business users or end users to facilitate the exercise of data portability, in line with Regulation EU 2016/679, including by the provision of continuous and real-time access;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 285 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point i
(i) provide business users, or third parties authorised by a business user, free of charge, with effective, high-quality, continuous and real-time access and use of aggregated or non-aggregated data, that is provided for or generated in the context of the use of the relevant core platform services or of ancillary services offered by the gatekeeper by those business users and the end users engaging with the products or services provided by those business users; for personal data, provide access and use only where directly connected with the use effectuated by the end user in respect of the products or services offered by the relevant business user through the relevant core platform service, and when the end user opts in to such sharing with a consent in the sense of the Regulation (EU) 2016/679;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 288 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point k
(k) apply fair and non-discriminatory general conditions of access for business users to its software application storeor of ancillary services offered by the gatekeeper software application store, cloud computing services, online search engines and online social networking services designated pursuant to Article 3 of this Regulation.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 293 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point k a (new)
(ka) provide its business users and end users with clear, fair and non- discriminatory licensing conditions, including in terms of charges and fees, preventing material changes limiting the use of software applications or services in conjunction with a core platform service, and safeguarding the reasonably expected use of the software application or service, including after its transfer to another end user, where applicable.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 300 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Before implementing any change to fees or fee structures charged to business users and which follow from the gatekeeper’s obligations pursuant to paragraph 1, the gatekeeper shall notify the Commission and the affected business users at least one month in advance of such changes;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 303 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Within six months after its designation pursuant to paragraph 8 of Article 3, the gatekeeper shall provide the Commission with detailed information on the measures to be taken in order to ensure compliance with its obligations laid down in Articles 5 and 6. This information shall be provided in the form of a report and shall be updated on an annual basis, whereby a summary of this report shall be published on the Commission’s website without undue delay.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 304 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2
2. Where the Commission finds that the measures that the gatekeeper intends to implement pursuant to paragraph 1, or has implemented, do not ensure effective compliance with the relevant obligations laid down in Article 6, it may by decision specify the measures that the gatekeeper concerned shall implement in order to comply with the obligations laid down in Article 6. In view of adopting the decision, the Commission shall take into account the information provided by all relevant stakeholders, such as interested third parties, governments or national authorities. The Commission shall adopt such a decision within six months from the opening of proceedings pursuant to Article 18.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 306 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4
4. In view of adopting the decision under paragraph 2, the Commission shall communicate its preliminary findings within three months from the opening of the proceedings. In the preliminary findings, the Commission shall explain the measures it considers to take or it considers that the provider of core platform services concerned should take in order to effectively address the preliminary findings. Legitimate third parties with direct implication shall be able to provide comments to the national competent authorities with regard to the preliminary findings. Member States shall define the rules to exercise such consultation procedure.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 310 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 7
7. A gatekeeper may request the opening of proceedings pursuant to Article 18 for the Commission to determine whether the measures that the gatekeeper intends to implement or has implemented under Article 6 are effective in achieving the objective of the relevant obligation in the specific circumstances. A gatekeeper mayshall, with its request, provide a reasoned submission to explain in particular why the measures that it intends to implement or has implemented are effective in achieving the objective of the relevant obligation in the specific circumstances.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 317 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
In assessing the request, the Commission shall take into account, in particular, the impact of the compliance with the specific obligation on the grounds in paragraph 2 as well as the effects on the gatekeeper concerned and on third parties. The suspension may be made subject to conditions and obligations to be defined by the Commission in order to ensure a fair balance between the goals pursued by the grounds in paragraph 2 and the objectives of this Regulation. Such a request may be made and granted at any time pending the assessment of the Commission pursuant to paragraph 1. The Commission shall review any exemption decision adopted according to paragraph 1 on an annual basis and may amend its decision in accordance with its findings.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 319 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 347 to update the obligations laid down in Articles 5 and 6 where, based on a market investigation pursuant to Article 17, it has identified the need for new obligations addressing practices that limit the contestability of core platform services or are unfair in the same way as the practices addressed by the obligations laid down in Articles 5 and 6.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 323 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. A gatekeeper shall inform the Commission of any intended concentration within the meaning of Article 3 of Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 involving another provider of core platform services or of any other services provided in the digital sector irrespective of whether it is notifiable to a Union competition authority under Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 or to a competent national competition authority under national merger rules.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 326 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
A gatekeeper shall inform the Commission of such a concentration within at least 2 months prior to its implementation and following the conclusion of the agreement, the announcement of the public bid, or the acquisition of a controlling interest. The Commission shall make this information available to relevant national authorities.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 329 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2
2. The notification of information pursuant to paragraph 1 shall at least describe for the acquisition targets their EEA and worldwide annual turnover, for any relevant core platform services their respective EEA annual turnover, their number of yearly active business users and the number of monthly active end users, as well as the rationale of the intended concentration.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 330 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. The Commission shall inform the competent national authorities of any information received pursuant to paragraphs 1 and 2. With due respect to the protection of trade secrets, the Commission shall publish annually the list of acquisitions of which it has been informed by gatekeepers which have fallen below the notification thresholds of Council Regulation No 139/2004.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 331 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Within six months after its designation pursuant to Article 3, a gatekeeper shall submit to the Commission an independently audited description of any techniques for profiling of consumers that the gatekeeper applies to or across its core platform services identified pursuant to Article 3. This descriptionWithout prejudice to trade secrets protection, the gatekeeper shall make an overview of the audited description of applied profiling techniques of consumers publicly available. This description and its publicly available overview shall be updated at least annually.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 336 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 3 – point b a (new)
(ba) a significant number of unfair practices alerts have been raised by national authorities pursuant the reporting mechanism or other relevant stakeholders.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 337 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 3 – point b b (new)
(bb) there is new relevant information that was not examined before the adoption of the decision;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 339 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission and national competition authorities may conduct a market investigation for the purpose of examining whether a provider of core platform services should be designated as a gatekeeper pursuant to Article 3(6), or in order to identify core platform services for a gatekeeper pursuant to Article 3(7) and Article 3 (8). It shall endeavour to conclude its investigation by adopting a decision in accordance with the advisory procedure referred to in Article 32(4) within twelve months from the opening of the market investigation.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 341 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 3
3. Where the provider of core platform services satisfies the thresholds set out in Article 3(2), but has presented significantly substantiated arguments in accordance with Article 3(4), the Commission shall endeavour to conclude the market investigation within five months from the opening of the market investigation by a decision pursuant to paragraph 1. In that case the Commission shall endeavour to communicate its preliminary findings pursuant to paragraph 2 to the provider of core platform services within three months from the opening of the investigation.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 343 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 4
4. When the Commission pursuant to Article 3(6) designates as a gatekeeper a provider of core platform services that does not yet enjoy an entrenched and durable position in its operations, but it is foreseeable that it will enjoy such a position in the near future, it shall declare applicable to that gatekeeper onlyspecific obligations laid down in Article 5(b) and Article 6(1) points (e), (f), (h) and (i) as specified in the designation decision. The Commission shall only declare applicable those obligations that are appropriate and necessary to prevent that the gatekeeper concerned achieves by unfair means an entrenched and durable position in its operations. The Commission shall review such a designation in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 4.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 344 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1
1. Where the market investigation shows that a gatekeeper has systematically infringed theany obligations laid down in Articles 5 and 6 and has further strengthened or extended its gatekeeper position in relation to the characteristics under Article 3(1), the Commission may by decision adopted in accordance with the advisory procedure referred to in Article 32(4) impose on such gatekeeper any behavioural or structural remedies which are proportionate to the infringement committed and necessary to ensure compliance with this Regulation. The Commission shall, where appropriate, be entitled to require the remedies to be tested to optimise their effectiveness. The Commission shall conclude its investigation by adopting a decision within twelve months from the opening of the market investigation.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 347 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 3
3. A gatekeeper shall be deemed to have engaged in a systematic non- compliance with the obligations laid down in Articles 5 and 6, where the Commission has issued at least threewo non-compliance or fining decisions pursuant to Articles 25 and 26 respectively against a gatekeeper in relation to any of its core platform services within a period of five years prior to the adoption of the decision opening a market investigation in view of the possible adoption of a decision pursuant to this Article.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 349 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1
The Commission and competent national authorities may conduct a market investigation with the purpose of examining whether one or more services within the digital sector should be added to the list of core platform services or to detect types of practices that may limit the contestability of core platform services or may be unfair and which are not effectively addressed by this Regulation. It shall issue a public report at the latest within 24 months from the opening of the market investigation.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 356 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 4
4. Where the Commission requires undertakings and associations of undertakings to supply information by decision, it shall state the purpose of the request, specify what information is required and fix the time-limit within which it is to be provided. Where the Commission requires undertakings to provide access to its data-bases and algorithms, it shall state the legal basis and the purpose of the request, and fix the time- limit within which it is to be provided. ItThe decision shall also indicate the penalties provided for in Article 26 and indicate or impose the periodic penalty payments provided for in Article 27. It shall further indicate the right to have the decision reviewed by the Court of Justice.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 357 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 6
6. At the request of the Commission, the governments and authorities or on their own initiative, relevant public authorities, bodies or agencies within of the Member States shall provide the Commission with all the necessary information to carry out the duties assigned to it by this Regulation.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 360 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 1
The Commission, and competent national authorities, may interview any natural or legal person which consents to being interviewed for the purpose of collecting information, relating to the subject-matter of an investigation, pursuant to Articles 7, 16, 17, 25 and 26, including in relation to the monitoring, implementing and enforcing of the rules laid down in this Regulation.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 362 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 2
2. On-site inspections may also be carried out with the assistance of auditors or experts appointed by the Commission pursuant to Article 24(2) as well as competent national authorities in the territory of that Member State, where the gatekeeper has its premises.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 363 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 a (new)
Article 21a Reporting mechanism for business users, end-users and relevant stakeholders 1. Business users, competitors and end- users of the core platform services as defined in Article 2(2) may notify to the Commission as well as to the competent national authority any malpractice or behaviour by gatekeepers, which could possibly undermine the contestability of a core platform service, may be unfair pursuant to Article 10 (2) , or give rise to concerns with regard to non-compliance pursuant to Article 25. 2. The Commission shall share the information received pursuant to paragraph 1 with the competent national authorities through the European Competition Network. 3. The Commission may be able to prioritise investigations and may decide to not undertake investigations at all. 4. Without prejudice to Article 33, the competent national authority may request the Digital Markets Advisory Committee to adopt a reasoned opinion in this regard within one month after having received the request. 5. If the reasoned opinion states that the circumstances would justify an enforcement priority, the Commission shall within a further delay of four months examine whether there are reasonable grounds to open such investigation. Where the Commission does not follow the reasoned opinion of the Advisory Committee, it shall give its reasons.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 365 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1
1. In case of urgency due to the risk of serious and irreparablmmediate damage for business users or end users of gatekeepers, the Commission may, by decision adopt in accordance with the advisory procedure referred to in Article 32(4), order interim measures against a gatekeeper on the basis of a prima facie finding of an infringement of Articles 5 or 6.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 366 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. In case of urgency due to the risk of serious and immediate damage for business users or end-users of gatekeepers, resulting from new practices implemented by one or several gatekeepers that may undermine contestability of core platform services or may be unfair pursuant to Article 10 (2), the Commission may, by decision adopted in accordance with the advisory procedure referred to in Article 32(4), order interim measures on the concerned gatekeepers in order to avoid the materialization of the said risk.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 367 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. A decision pursuant to paragraph 3 may only be adopted in the context of a market investigation pursuant to Article 17 and within 6 months of the opening of such an investigation. The interim measures shall apply for a specified period of time and, in any case, shall be replaced by the new obligations that may arise under the final decision resulting from the market investigation pursuant to Article 17.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 368 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 1
1. If during proceedings under Articles 16 or 25 the gatekeeper concerned offers commitments for the relevant core platform services to ensure compliance with the obligations laid down in Articles 5 and 6, the Commission may by decision adopted in accordance with the advisory procedure referred to in Article 32(4) make those commitments binding on that gatekeeper and declare that there are no further grounds for action. The Commission shall, where appropriate, be entitled to require the commitments to be tested to optimise their effectiveness.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 369 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. The Commission shall regularly review the commitments with regard to their purpose and where, following investigation, it finds that they are not effective, shall be entitled to require amendments to the commitments or revoke them where appropriate;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 370 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
(ca) there is new relevant information that was not examined before the adoption of the decision;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 372 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 2
2. The actions pursuant to paragraph 1 may include the appointment of independent external experts and auditors to assist the Commission, including ones from competent national authorities, to monitor the obligations and measures and to provide specific expertise or knowledge to the Commission.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 373 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 2
2. Before adopting the decision pursuant to paragraph 1, the Commission shall communicate its preliminary findings to the gatekeeper concerned. In the preliminary findings, the Commission shall explain the measures it considers to take or it considers that the gatekeeper should take in order to effectively address the preliminary findings. The Commission shall take into account the views of relevant third parties such as end-users or business users before adopting a decision.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 374 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
(ea) the obligation to provide within the time-limit information that is required for assessing their designation as gatekeepers pursuant to Article 3(2) or supply incorrect, or misleading information;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 375 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. The Commission may by decision impose on undertakings and associations of undertakings fines not exceeding 1% of the total turnover of the undertakings or association of undertakings concerned in the preceding financial year where they intentionally or negligently:
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 377 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 1
1. The powers conferred on the Commission by Articles 26 and 27 shall be subject to a threfive year limitation period.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 380 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. If the Commission considers it necessary, it may also hear other natural or legal persons before taking the decision as provided in paragraph 1.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 382 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 a (new)
Article 31a Commission cooperation with competent national authorities 1. The Commission may be assisted by the competent national authorities, designated for this purpose by the Member States, with regard to human, financial and organisational resources. 2. The Commission may, in particular, develop a close cooperation with national competent authorities with regard to the enforcement of this Regulation. Competent national authorities shall, at the request of the Commission, be entitled to exercise the powers of Articles 12, 15, 16 and 17. 3. Where requested by the Commission to assist in any investigation pursuant to paragraph 2 of this Article, the competent national authorities shall have the power to enforce the obligations deriving from Articles 19, 20, 21 and 24. 4. Competent national authorities shall also be empowered to receive complaints and information on possible cases of non- compliance by gatekeepers from end users and business users in their territory for transmission to the Commission.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 384 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 1
1. When three or more Member States request the Commission to open an investigation pursuant to Articles 15, 16 and 17 or to institute proceedings in respect of possible non-compliance pursuant to Article 25 because they consider that there are reasonable grounds to suspect that a provider of core platform services should be designated as a gatekeeper, that new services or practices should be included within the scope of this Regulation or that a gatekeeper is not complying with its obligations, the Commission shall within four months examine whether there are reasonable grounds to open such an investigation.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 389 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The Commission may adopt implementing acts concerning: Articles 3, 6, 12, 13, 15, 16, 17, 20, 22, 23, 25 and 30 with respect to:
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 390 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the form, content and other details of the technical measures that gatekeepers shall implement in order to ensure compliance with points (h), (i) and (j) of Article 6(1).
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 391 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(ba) the form, content and other details of the regulatory reports delivered pursuant to Article 7.1 a;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 392 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
(ca) the practical arrangements for the cooperation and coordination between the Commission and competent national authorities, provided for in Article 1(7).
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 393 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 2
2. the practical arrangements for the cooperation and coordination between the Commission and Member States provided for in Article 1(7).Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the advisory procedure referred to in Article 32(4). Before the adoption of any measures pursuant to paragraph 1, the Commission shall publish a draft thereof and invite all interested parties to submit their comments within the time limit it lays down, which may not be less than one month.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 396 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Articles 3(65) and 910(1) shall be conferred on the Commission for a period of five years from DD/MM/YYYY. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five-year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 397 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 3
3. The delegation of power referred to in Articles 3(65) and 910(1) may be revoked at any time by the European Parliament or by the Council. A decision to revoke shall put an end to the delegation of the power specified in that decision. It shall take effect the day following the publication of the decision in the Official Journal of the European Union or at a later date specified therein. It shall not affect the validity of any delegated acts already in force.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 398 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 6
6. A delegated act adopted pursuant to Articles 3(6) and 9(1) shall enter into force only if no objection has been expressed either by the European Parliament or by the Council within a period of twohree months of notification of that act to the European Parliament and to the Council or if, before the expiry of that period, the European Parliament and the Council have both informed the Commission that they will not object. That period shall be extended by twohree months at the initiative of the European Parliament or of the Council.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 400 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. This Regulation shall apply from sixthree months after its entry into force.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI