164 Amendments of Fernando NAVARRETE ROJAS
Amendment 12 #
2024/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 17 a (new)
Citation 17 a (new)
– having regard to the Commission communication of 17 December 2024 entitled ‘Alert Mechanism Report 2025’ (COM (2024)702),
Amendment 13 #
2024/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 17 b (new)
Citation 17 b (new)
– having regard to the Commission recommendation of 17 December 2024 for a Council recommendation on the economic policy of the euro area (COM(2024)704),
Amendment 14 #
2024/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 17 d (new)
Citation 17 d (new)
– having regard to the Proposal for a Joint Employment Report from the Commission and the Council of 17 December 2024 (COM(2024)701),
Amendment 23 #
2024/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 27 a (new)
Citation 27 a (new)
– having regard to the Special Report 13/2024 of the European Court of Auditors entitled ‘Absorption of funds from the Recovery and Resilience Facility – Progressing with delays and risks remain regarding the completion of measures and therefore the achievement of RRF objectives’,
Amendment 25 #
2024/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 27 b (new)
Citation 27 b (new)
– having regard to the Monetary Dialogue Papers of November 2024 entitled 'The New Economic Governance Framework: Implications for Monetary Policy',
Amendment 26 #
2024/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 27 c (new)
Citation 27 c (new)
– having regard to National Bureau of Economic Research working paper 15438 of October 2009 entitled ‘Large Changes in Fiscal Policy: Taxes versus Spending,’
Amendment 27 #
2024/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 27 d (new)
Citation 27 d (new)
– - having regard to the in-depth analysis of the Economic Governance and EMU Scrutiny Unit of December 2024 entitled ‘Economic Dialogue with the European Commission on EU Fiscal Surveillance’
Amendment 41 #
2024/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas the European Semester aims to ensure economic growth, job creation, macroeconomic stability and sound public finances throughout the entire European Union;
Amendment 52 #
2024/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas reference values of up to 3 % of government deficit to GDP and 60 % of government debt to GDP are defined by the TFEU; whereas the EU’s headline deficit and government debt-to-GDP ratio remain above the reference values;
Amendment 53 #
2024/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas reference values of up to 3 % of government deficit and 60 % of public debt to GDP are defined by the TFEU; whereas the EU’s headline deficit and government debt-to-GDP ratio remain above the reference values;
Amendment 62 #
2024/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Recital E a (new)
Ea. whereas the economic outlook for the Union remains highly uncertain and the risk of future events or situations negatively affecting the economy is increasing; whereas Russia's aggression in Ukraine and conflicts in the Middle East are aggravating geopolitical risks and demonstrate Europe's energy vulnerability; whereas a rise in protectionist measures by trading partners may affect world trade, with negative repercussions for our economy;
Amendment 64 #
2024/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Recital E a (new)
E a. whereas the EU urgently needs to tackle the obstacles to competitiveness; whereas the European Semester will continue to focus on providing guidance on the policy action needed to address economic challenges, with the aim of improving the EU’s competitiveness;
Amendment 74 #
2024/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E b (new)
Recital E b (new)
E b. whereas fiscal stability is a precondition for both sustainable high social standards in the EU and its competitiveness;
Amendment 101 #
2024/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Believes that overcoming competitive and geopolitical challenges will require the transfer of some national expenditure to the EU level in certain policy areas related to the provision of European public goods to increase the efficiency of overall public expenditure, by making use of economies of scale, thus reducing the cost for taxpayers; welcomes the Union’s commitment to increasing its spending efficiency and investments in overall defence capabilities to match its needs in the context of rising threats and security challenges;
Amendment 114 #
2024/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Highlights the fact that a consistent and comprehensivehorizontal industrial policy is vital to increase investments in the EU’s innovation capacity, while preserving competitiveness and the integrity of the single market;
Amendment 118 #
2024/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Highlights the fact that a consistent and comprehensive industrial policy is vital to increase investments in the EU’s innovation capacity, while preserving competitiveness and the integrity of the single market; welcomes the tax incentives for private research and development, which can contribute to increasing an economy's overall spending on research and development;
Amendment 121 #
2024/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Welcomes the Commission’s recommendation on the economic policy of the euro area, urging Member States to enhance competitiveness and foster productivity through improved access to funding for businesses, reduced administrative burdens, and public and private investment in areas of common priorities;
Amendment 122 #
2024/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3 b. Welcomes the Commission's recommendation that, when defining fiscal strategies, euro area Member States should aim to improve the quality and efficiency of expenditure and revenue measures, and calls on them to adopt a judicious approach to fiscal adjustment, carefully designed to minimize detrimental impacts on growth; notes especially the more detrimental effect on growth of tax increases1a ; welcomes the 'Draghi report' conclusion that a coordinated reduction of labour income taxation for low-to middle-income workers is needed to promote EU competitiveness; _________________ 1a Alesina, Alberto, and Silvia Ardagna. Large changes in fiscal policy: taxes versus spending. Tax policy and the economy 24.1(2010): 35–68.
Amendment 125 #
2024/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 c (new)
Paragraph 3 c (new)
3 c. Welcomes the recommendations of the 'Draghi report' that EU competitiveness will require a strict set of fiscal rules; highlights the need to create fiscal buffers to address fiscal sustainability challenges, ensuring sufficient resources for investment and, absorb potential future shocks;
Amendment 129 #
2024/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Notes that, according to the Commission’s autumn 2024 economic forecast, EU GDP is expected to grow by 0.9 % (0.8 % in the euro area) in 2024 and, by 1.5 % (1.3 % in the euro area) in 2025 and by 1.8% (1.6% in the euro area) in 2026; notes that the economic outlook for the EU remains highly uncertain, with risks largely tilted to the updownside;
Amendment 131 #
2024/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Notes that, according to the Commission’s autumn 2024 economic forecast, EU GDP is expected to grow by 0.9 % (0.8 % in the euro area) in 2024 and by 1.5 % (1.3 % in the euro area) in 2025; notes that the economic outlook for the EU remains highly uncertain, with risks largely tilted to the upsidedownside; notes that for the EU, the figure is 0.1 percentage points below the economic growth figure in the Spring 2024 report, while the situation has remained unchanged in the euro area; recalls that these figures reflect a gradual recovery, but also limited economic expansion compared to previous periods;
Amendment 136 #
2024/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Is concerned that, according to the Commission's 2024 autumn forecast, investment in the EU is projected to contract by 1.6% in 2024; calls on the Commission to propose measures to improve the business environment and legal certainty to increase investment;
Amendment 141 #
2024/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Stresses that high debt levels undermine economic stability and the capacity to respond to crises; is concerned that the public debt ratio is projected to increase in 2025 (to 83.0 % in the EU and 89.6 % in the euro area) and in 20256 (to 83.4% in the EU and 90% in the euro area), up from the levels in 2024 (82.4 % for the EU and 89.1 % for the euro area); is concerned that general government debt is projected to increase in the Euro area from pre-pandemic levels from 83.6% in 2019 to 90% in 2026 and in the EU from 77.4% in 2019 to 83.4% in 2026, when the output gap will be at 0% of potential GDP in the Euro area and -0.1% of potential GDP in the EU; highlights that countries with higher deficits are expected to see rising debt-to-GDP ratios; regrets that eleven euro area Member States would still have debt ratios above 60%, with five remaining above 100%;
Amendment 147 #
2024/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Stresses that 10 EU Member States are expected to post a deficit of more than 3% of GDP in 2024; points out that this number will remain stable in 2025 and that in 2026 most Member States are forecast to have budgetary positions clearly lower than in 2019, with nine of them still posting deficits of above 3%;
Amendment 154 #
2024/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Points out that growth in the EU is expected to rise to up to 1.5% in 2025 driven by rising consumption and to 1.3% in the euro area, followed by 1.8% in the EU and 1.6% in the euro area in 2026; recalls that in the second half of the year the European Union and the euro area grew by 0.3%, despite the cooling seen in large economies; adds that this means a slower recovery than anticipated and underlines the economic difficulties Europe is experiencing;
Amendment 168 #
2024/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Notes that, according to the Commission’s 20245 Alert Mechanism Report identifies macroeconomic imbalances in 12 Member Stat, in-depth Reviews (IDRs) will be prepared in 2025 for the nine countries that were identified as experiencing imbalances or excessive imbalances in 2024 while another IDR should be undertaken for another Member State, as it presents particular risks of newly emerging imbalances;
Amendment 170 #
2024/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. NotDeplores that the Commission’s 2024 Alert Mechanism Report identifies macroeconomic imbalances in 12 Member States;
Amendment 176 #
2024/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. RecallsPoints out that the reform aims to make the framework simpler, more transparent and effective, with greater national ownership and better enforcement; recalls, furthermore, that it aims to strengthen fiscal sustainability through gradual and tailor-made adjustments complemented by reforms and investments and to promote countercyclical fiscal policies;
Amendment 197 #
2024/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Deplores the low level of enforcement of the fiscal rules framework in the past; stresses that it is essential for the new framework to ensure the equal treatment of the Member States; affirms that a successful and credible framework relies heavily on its rigorous implementation; calls on the Commission to rigorously implement it from the outset;
Amendment 205 #
2024/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Affirms that a renewed focus on medium-term net expenditure will require comprehensive reforms of national budgetary planning procedures across the Member States; encourages Member States to adapt their national fiscal stability rules to the new EU fiscal rules;
Amendment 221 #
2024/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11 a. Acknowledges the positive evaluation of 20 out of the 21 national medium-term fiscal-structural plans reviewed; calls on the Member States that have not yet submitted their Draft Budgetary Plans, especially those not engaged in electoral processes or new government formation, to do so as soon as possible; notes that in five Member States, significant and unjustified deviations are observed in macroeconomic assumptions related to potential GDP and/or the GDP deflator; regrets that such deviations might impact the annual expenditure growth ceiling and lead to backloading;
Amendment 222 #
2024/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Deplores the fact that some countries have submitted reformed fiscal plans to the European Commission without having debated them in national parliaments or consulted stakeholders; recalls that this is a breach of Regulation (EU) 2024/1263 on the effective coordination of economic policies and on multilateral budgetary surveillance; calls on the Commission to comply with the Regulation and respect the sovereignty of these countries' people;
Amendment 224 #
2024/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 b (new)
Paragraph 11 b (new)
11b. Deplores the fact that some of the medium-term fiscal-structural plans submitted backload the effort to the last four years (2028-2031); recalls that structural plans have to present realistic and consistent efforts over a long period of time, thus avoiding compromising future sustainability;
Amendment 225 #
2024/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 c (new)
Paragraph 11 c (new)
11c. Points out that some countries have yet to approve their national budgetary plans; recalls that national budget plans must be approved in a manner in accordance with the countries' fiscal reforms in order to be able to ascertain whether fiscal policies are in line with the recommendations; calls on the Commission to continue to ask these countries to submit their national budgetary plans;
Amendment 227 #
2024/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Notes that 18 Member States have proposed deviations from the expenditure path determined by the Commission, resulting, in some11 cases, in higher average expenditure growth; laments the fact that these deviations are justified on the basis of significant discrepancies between Member States’ economic assumptions and those of the Commission; calls on the Commission to ensure that economic arguments underpinning the new paths proposed by Member States are sound and data-driven; regrets that Member States are delaying thei properly monitor fdiscal adjustments to the end of the period, coinciding with slower GDP growth; calls repancies on assumptions along the Commission to prevent procyclical policiesadjustment period;
Amendment 234 #
2024/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12 a. Regrets that some Member States are delaying their fiscal adjustments to the end of the period, coinciding with slower projected GDP potential growth; notes that in three Member States, the Commission acknowledges a concentration of fiscal adjustment towards the end of the period; calls on the Commission to ensure that such concentration of the adjustment only takes place under the requirements set on the regulation and to prevent pro-cyclical policies;
Amendment 236 #
2024/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Laments the fact that only seven Member States have sought an opinion from their relevant independent fiscal institution; notes with concern that some independent fiscal institutions provided a negative opinion of the fiscal plan after its submission to the Commission for approval; regrets that nine Member States did not meet their obligation to conduct political consultations with regional authorities and relevant stakeholders prior to submitting their national plans; further laments the fact that severalten Member States have not involved their national parliaments in the approval process for the plans and have not reported whether the required consultations with national parliaments took place; recalls the requirement that Member States have to report in their plans whether political consultations took place;
Amendment 242 #
2024/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Observes that five Member States have requested an extension of the adjustment period; notes that the reforms and investments used to justify this extension rely heavily on reforms already approved under the Recovery and Resilience Facility; believes that some of these reforms do not sufficiently meet the requirement to demonstrate their contribution to potential GDP growth; calls on the Commission to effectively evaluate the impact of agreed investments and reforms on fiscal sustainability and growth;
Amendment 245 #
2024/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14 a. Regrets the fact that, out of the 17 draft budgetary plans presented, only eight are in line with fiscal recommendations stemming from the national medium-term fiscal-structural plan; notes with concern that seven plans fall short of full compliance, one is at risk of non-compliance, and one is outright non-compliant; is concerned that six Member States have presented draft budgetary plans with annual or cumulative expenditure growth above their prescribed ceilings;
Amendment 264 #
2024/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Notes that the implementation of the revised governance framework is expected to lead to a contractionary fiscal stance for the euro area as a whole in 2024 and 2025, which is appropriate in light of the macroeconomic outlook and the need to continue to enhance fiscal sustainability and support the ongoing disinflationary process; notes the Commission projection that the euro area fiscal stance is expected to be slightly contractionary at ½% of GDP in 2024 and ¼% of GDP in 2025; agrees with the contractionary fiscal stance due to i) the suspension of fiscal rules in the period 2020-2023 and the need to restore fiscal stability, ii) the need to create additional fiscal space for future challenges ,and iii) that the fiscal drag will be partly offset by a slight expansion in investment, both financed by national budgets and Recovery and Resilience Facility grants and other EU funds;
Amendment 268 #
2024/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16 a. Acknowledges the slower-than- expected flow of Recovery and Resilience Facility funds into the real economy1b ; expresses concern that expectations may be overly optimistic, given that by the end of 2023, less than one-third of recovery funds had been utilized by EU Member States, and only about half of the transferred funds had reached final beneficiaries; calls on the Member States to take action, through the implementation of their national Recover and Resilence Plans, to bolster competitiveness, and macroeconomic and financial stability; _________________ 1b Special Report 13/2024 from the European Court of Auditors
Amendment 273 #
2024/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Considers that the rigorous application of the fiscal rules, although absolutely necessary, are not by themselves is not a sufficient condition for achieving an optimal fiscal stance at all times; notes that the fiscal stance is still projected to be very heterogeneous across Member States in 2025; calls on the Commission and the Council to propose a mechanism that helps ensure that the cyclical fiscal position for the EU as a whole is at all times appropriate to the macroeconomic outlook;
Amendment 291 #
2024/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 5
Subheading 5
Amendment 303 #
2024/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18a. Calls for simplification and oversight of the governance of the European Semester with a view to ensuring greater demand and coordination with less bureaucracy;
Amendment 309 #
2024/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Recalls the Member States’ obligation to address the relevant CSRs under the European Semester in their national fiscal plans; regrets that the Commission has found unaddressed CSRs in the national fiscal plans;
Amendment 311 #
2024/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19a. Adds that the European Semester should address the long-term sustainability of some national pension systems, with reforms based on ensuring their sustainability;
Amendment 313 #
2024/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 b (new)
Paragraph 19 b (new)
19b. Applauds the fact that country- specific recommendations include an analysis of the quality of public spending, thereby facilitating the redirection of productive investments and eliminating inefficient expenditures;
Amendment 317 #
2024/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Highlights the fact that implementing CSRs on strengthening the fiscal sustainability of public pension systems and the cost-effectiveness of health and long-term care systems in the face of ageing populations should remain a key objective for the Member States; regrets that measures linked to pension reforms continue to show a lower implementation level1c; calls on the Commission to monitor the contribution of reforms linked to the pension system to potential growth and fiscal sustainability; _________________ 1c COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 2025 Report on the euro area accompanying the document Recommendation for a COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION on the economic policy of the euro area. P.49.
Amendment 322 #
2024/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 – point 2 (new)
Paragraph 20 – point 2 (new)
(2) Recalls that the European Semester of economic policy coordination is the EU-level framework to identify national reform priorities and monitor their implementation. reaffirms that under the Recovery and Resilience Facility the reforms included in national recovery plans and their subsequent addenda must be coherent and address the demands set out in the country- specific recommendations and the general guidelines of the European Semester;
Amendment 323 #
2024/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 – point 3 (new)
Paragraph 20 – point 3 (new)
(3) Calls for the milestones and targets included in national recovery plans, the Operational Agreements and subsequent addenda to undergo an impact assessment to ascertain whether these reforms have truly achieved the objectives for which they were designed and whether they have had the expected impact, as these reforms conditioned the receipt of European funds;
Amendment 324 #
2024/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 – point 4 (new)
Paragraph 20 – point 4 (new)
(4) Recalls that only through rapid, transparent and effective implementation of the funds by the governments of the Member States, compliance with the agreed reforms and the agreed deadlines will these funds have the promised impact on the GDP of the Union and of each of its Member States;
Amendment 325 #
2024/2112(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 – point 5 (new)
Paragraph 20 – point 5 (new)
(5) Recalls that the success of the Recovery and Resilience Facility will not depend on national recovery plans and the projects contained therein, nor on the number of transfers made by the Commission to the Member States, but rather on the rapid and effective deployment of funds to the real economy, productive sectors and businesses;
Amendment 40 #
2024/2055(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)
Recital F a (new)
F a. whereas deposit insured by national deposit guarantee schemes account for 37% of total deposits1a; _________________ 1a https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/ etudes/BRIE/2024/764175/IPOL_BRI(20 24)764175_EN.pdf
Amendment 56 #
2024/2055(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Notes the necessity to be prepared for episodes of banking stress that could potentially lead to bankruns as those witnessed in March 2023 in some jurisdictions outside the EU and the need to ensure the stability of deposits;
Amendment 63 #
2024/2055(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that a more integrated BU would help to make the EU banking sector more resilient; notes that better cross- border integration of banking business would increase the potential for private risk sharing and ensure diversification in the EU banking market; stresses that a fully developed BU would allow EU banks to grow and put them in a better position to compete in the international arena;
Amendment 75 #
2024/2055(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Regrets that EU banks’ ability to finance major investments is constrained by higher costs, smaller scale and lower profitability that is not sufficient to ensure their competitiveness; calls on the Commission to assess the effects of national tax levies on credit institutions on the competitiveness of the EU banking sector and the prospects for the completion of the BU;
Amendment 77 #
2024/2055(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Regrets that EU banks’ ability to finance major investments is constrained by higher costs, smaller scale and lower profitability that is not sufficient to ensure their competitiveness; calls on the Commission to cut red tape for the banking sector so that it is not hampering its competitiveness;
Amendment 94 #
2024/2055(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. NotAgrees that the creation of a separate jurisdiction for EU banks with substantial cross-border operations13 would help to complete the BU; _________________ 13 Draghi report, p. 61.
Amendment 120 #
2024/2055(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Welcomes the adoption by co- legislators of the new banking package implementing Basel III standards in the EU; stresses that the Commission should evaluate thoroughly whether a delay in implementation is necessary to maintain the competitiveness of EU banks; welcomnotes, in this regard, the delegated act postponing the date of application of the new market risk framework by one year to 1 January 2026; urges the need to fully commit to the complete implementation of the globally agreed standards;
Amendment 183 #
2024/2055(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Welcomes the objective of the proposal on crisis management and deposit insurance of ensuring a more consistent approach across all Member States to the application of resolution tools and deposit protection to enhance financial stability, taxpayer protection and depositor confidence; notes that small banks do not pose any risks to financial stabilitypotential risks to financial stability should be assessed not only based on the size of the institution but due to contagion effects among other relevant factors;
Amendment 188 #
2024/2055(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Highlights the importance of preserving shareholders’ and creditors’ primary responsibility for bearing losses in the event of a bank’s failure, which is still a key lesson learned from the global financial crisis; stresses that the bail-in of shareholders and creditors must remain the main source for resolution financing before any recourse is made to; stresses that, whenever possible to preserve financial stability, resorting to taxpayers money must be avoided - which is still a key lesson learned from the global financial crisis; stresses that all resolution tools should be considered for resolving a bank; welcomes the Commission proposal on CMDI to increase to availability of industry- fundeding sources for the resolvability of banks;
Amendment 193 #
2024/2055(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Recalls that a sufficient minimum requirement for own funds and eligible liabilities is crucial for a credible resolution framework and for ensuring that resolution authorities have sufficient flexibility to effectively apply the resolution strategies needed in a specific crisis situation; warns that reductions in this minimum requirement, resulting from specific resolution strategies inelcomes SRB recommendations of MREL requirements taking into account the specificities of each resolution tool; encourages the SRB to increase the presolution planning phase, could hamper the resolvability of banksparedness to operationalise the sale of business resolution strategy;
Amendment 201 #
2024/2055(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
Amendment 211 #
2024/2055(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16 a. Stresses the importance of tackling at EU level the issue of liquidity in resolution on the basis of the role of the ECB as liquidity provider, fully respecting its need for guarantees to perform its mandate;
Amendment 213 #
2024/2055(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 b (new)
Paragraph 16 b (new)
16 b. Notes that the role of ESM supporting liquidity during resolution processes could be further expanded;
Amendment 224 #
2024/2055(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Highlights the need for additional efforts to ensure full resolvability for all banks falling under the scope of resolution; recalls that achieving resolvability cannot be considered a ‘moving target’ and therefore calls for mwelcomes the SRB flexibility to address bank-specific, market ore standardisation and harmonisation of the resolvability assessystemic risk developments;
Amendment 232 #
2024/2055(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Underlines the fact that the Commission’s proposal to establish a European deposit insurance scheme was published back in 2015, and that the landscape has changed significantly since then; stresses that any European mechanism must bolster financial stability, boost depositor confidence and preserve incentives for prudent risk management by banks;
Amendment 233 #
2024/2055(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Underlines the fact that the Commission’s proposal to establish a European deposit insurance scheme was published back in 2015, and that the landscape has changed significantly since then; welcomes the fact that its Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs adopted its position in favour of a creation of a European deposit insurance scheme in April 2024; calls on the European Parliament to adopt its mandate to enter into interinstitutional negotiations; urges the Council to agree on its position on EDIS without any further delay;
Amendment 241 #
2024/2055(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Notes that national deposit guarantee schemes have been introduced successfully and have proved their functionality in a number of cases; underlines the need to take specific national characteristics into account and to preserve the well-functioning systems for smaller banks that are already in place in some Member Stateregrets that their fragmentation accross national lines limits their effectiveness to tackle systemic crises and adds barriers to expand cross border activity to pan- European banks; welcomes a common deposit insurance scheme (EDIS) to further diversify risks in a larger pool of resources, to reduce market fragmentation while increasing competitiveness of the European banking system thus providing more stable deposits;
Amendment 253 #
2024/2055(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Underlines the necessity to take the specifics of institutional protection schemes into account and preserve their functioning while ensuring a level playing field across the Banking Union;
Amendment 257 #
2024/2055(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Takes note of the Eurogroup statement of 16 June 2022 on the future of the BU; laments no further developments at Eurogroup level to push the completion of the BU, most notably the third pillar;
Amendment 263 #
2024/2055(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Recalls that breaking the link between bank and sovereign risk remains a challenge for the BU; emphasises that the risk on banks’ balance sheets can be reduced further through the regulatory treatment of sovereign exposures;
Amendment 56 #
2024/2054(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Highlights the importance of the ECB’s political independence, which should remain untouched; stresses that this independence requires the ECB to in turn refrain from taking political decisions outside its mandate;
Amendment 65 #
2024/2054(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Regrets thatTakes note of the disparities between Member States with regard to inflation levels remain aboveabove/below the ECB’'s 2 % target of 2 % in some Member States; emphasises that inflation diminishes the purchasing power of fixed incomes, savings and pensions and that it distorts the signalling function of prices that ensures an efficient allocation of resources;
Amendment 75 #
2024/2054(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Regretcalls that core inflation remains high, with only two euro area Member States reporting core inflation rates below 2 % in September 2024;
Amendment 85 #
2024/2054(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Warns the ECB against the temptation to lower interest rates too quickly, given the riskAcknowledges that the monetary policy decisions taken by the Governing Council of the ECB since thate inflation levels could start increasing again; stresses that the ECB itself expects a temporary increase in inflation levels in the last quarter of 2024 as previous sharp falls in energy prices drop out of the annual ratescrisis stemming from the rise in energy prices have put inflation on a path which is compatible with the achievement of the objective of price stability, while avoiding a serious deterioration in economic activity or employment;
Amendment 95 #
2024/2054(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Recalls that the Economic and Monetary Union requires solid fiscal policies in the Member States in order to be able to respond to external shocks; recalls the need for rigorous implementation of the new fiscal framework to ensure the credibility of fiscal policies at the level of the economic and monetary union ;
Amendment 116 #
2024/2054(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Expresses concern about the high levels of government debt and deficits within the Member States and the risks of potential fiscal dominance that this entails;
Amendment 125 #
2024/2054(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Welcomes the decrease in core inflation from its peak of 7.6 % in March 2023 to 2.7 % in September 2024, but expresses its unease at its historically and persistently high level;
Amendment 134 #
2024/2054(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. RegretsExpresses concern that it has taken the ECB more than three years to reachieve a level of inflation that is commensuratin line with its 2 % target level of 2 %, which is at the high end of the medium- term horizon for monetary policy;
Amendment 139 #
2024/2054(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
Amendment 147 #
2024/2054(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
Amendment 153 #
2024/2054(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Calls on the ECB, in the context of the next monetary policy strategy review, to incorporate mechanisms to better identify the level of transience of the effects of economic shocks in order to ensure a swift and determined monetary policy response to the latter;
Amendment 158 #
2024/2054(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Supports the ECB’s decision to scale back its asset purchase programmes, in view of the excess liquidity in the market and decreased levels of inflation; welcomes the fact that the asset portfolio under the ECB’s purchase programmes has been on a downward trend since 2023;
Amendment 165 #
2024/2054(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
Amendment 177 #
2024/2054(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. RegretWelcomes the establishment in July 2022 of the transmission protection instrument (TPI) in July 2022; calls on the ECB to respect not just the legal prohibition of monetary financing but also its economic meaning; stresses in this regard that selectively purchasing government debt amounts to monetarily financing an EU Member State, which makes it possible to ensure the proper transmission of monetary policy in each and every EMU country, thus avoiding additional risks of fragmentation in times of financial stress, which result in asset valuations moving away from their fundamental values; recalls the conditionality of the application of this instrument on strict compliance with fiscal rules, fiscal sustainability, the absence of macroeconomic imbalances and sustainable macroeconomic policies;
Amendment 187 #
2024/2054(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Stresses that diverging interest rates in the euro area are – in the absence of any serious financial disturbances – generally the result of different risk premia on government bonds; stresses that purchases under the TPI would merely conceal the symptoms of loose fiscal policy; calls on Member States to conduct responsible fiscal policies and ensure sustainable debt levels;
Amendment 200 #
2024/2054(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19a. Stresses the absence of an appropriate assessment of the potential impacts of the digital euro on financial stability, on monetary sovereignty in third countries, on the private digital payments ecosystem resulting from the pre- eminence of a public provider, on citizens’ privacy, as well as on the very high economic costs for taxpayers;
Amendment 201 #
2024/2054(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 b (new)
Paragraph 19 b (new)
19b. Urges the Commission to reassess the costs and benefits of this project through a new impact assessment before further developing it; calls for the Regulatory Scrutiny Board to carefully reassess this new impact analysis; points to the need to reassess its relevance and suitability for the needs of euro area savers and investors; considers it urgent for the Commission to explore alternative ways of promoting, at the level of private providers, a pan-European digital payments solution before moving forward with the digital euro project;
Amendment 206 #
2024/2054(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. WelcomNotes the ECB’s progress on the digital euro project and its ongoing dialogue with Parliament; highlights the expected benefits, such as enhanced strategic autonomy, improved financial inclusion and the availability of an offline back-up payment system;
Amendment 220 #
2024/2054(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Reiterates that the digital euro should serve as a complement to physical cash, that it should not replace cash entirely and that cash should remain available at all times;
Amendment 233 #
2024/2054(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)
Paragraph 23 a (new)
23a. Demands that any decision to launch the digital euro should not be taken exclusively by the Governing Council of the ECB; stresses that this should be a consensual decision by the Commission, the European Parliament and the Council, given the profound potential impact of this decision on financial policy, going beyond the strict scope of monetary policy;
Amendment 238 #
2024/2054(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 b (new)
Paragraph 23 b (new)
23b. Calls on the ECB to refocus its efforts on digital payments so that the EU can take a leading position internationally in the creation of a wholesale digital currency, as a way to incentivise the digitalisation of the economy, improve the efficiency and depth of capital markets and strengthen the international role of the euro;
Amendment 272 #
2024/2054(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Insists that the ECB must respect the market neutrality principle in all of its monetary operations; regrets that the ECB’s actions to decarbonise its corporate bond holdings have not followed a market neutral approach by its very definition;
Amendment 285 #
2024/2054(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Underlines that a strengthened international role of the euro would lead to lower interest rates in the euro area, increased status for the EU on the international stage and enhanced macroeconomic stability; recalls that strengthening the international role of the euro would contribute to enhancing the EU’s strategic autonomy;
Amendment 292 #
2024/2054(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 a (new)
Paragraph 30 a (new)
30a. Is of the opinion that efforts to create a macroeconomic stabilisation mechanism and an adequate supply of a European safe asset are relevant for strengthening the role of the euro as an international currency;
Amendment 303 #
2024/2054(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
32. Welcomes the finalisation of the Basel III framework, as it will strengthen the resilience of the banking sector; calls for its implementation not to be delayed;
Amendment 306 #
2024/2054(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 a (new)
Paragraph 32 a (new)
32a. Welcomes the ECB’s support for the completion of the Banking Union; encourages the ECB to take all necessary steps to enable cross-border bank mergers that, while ensuring financial stability, help the integration of the European banking market;
Amendment 29 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) Investments in the Union contribute to its growth by improving its competitiveness, creating jobs and economies of scale, stimulating entrepreneurial drive through incentives for innovation and development of industries, and bringing in capital, technologies, innovation and expertise.
Amendment 30 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1 a (new)
Recital 1 a (new)
(1a) Foreign investments in the Union are a vital source of capital that fosters new financial resources, new technologies, advanced business practices and access to international markets.
Amendment 31 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) Article 3(5) of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) specifies that the Union, in its relations with the wider world, is to uphold and promote its values and interests and contribute to the protection of its citizens. Moreover, the Union and Member States have an open investment environment, which is enshrined in the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), and embeddedthey must maintain a welcoming regime for foreign investments into the Union and its Member States’EU in line with their international commitments.
Amendment 32 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) However, under international commitments made in the World Trade Organization (WTO), the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), and the trade and investment agreements concluded with third countries, it is possible for the Union and Members States to restrict foreign direct investments (FDIs) on the grounds of security or public order, subject to certain requiremenwith a view to ensuring a regime that is flexible and strikes the appropriate balance between being open to investments and protecting the Union's legitimate interests.
Amendment 33 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) However, a new legislative instrument is needed to strengthen the efficiency and effectiveness of Regulation (EU) 2019/452 and ensure a higher degree of harmonisation across the Union. This should be underpinned by a proper and careful impact analysis by the Regulatory Scrutiny Board, which should also include an analysis of the increased administrative burden for businesses.
Amendment 36 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) A significant majority of Member States, but not all, have a legislative instrument in place that provides for a mechanism to screen FDIs. In many Member States, national laws also extend to screening intra-Union investments. Among the Member States, there are substantial differences as to the scope, thresholds and criteria used to assess whether an investment is likely to negatively affect security or public order. There are also differences in the screening processes. In certain Member States, the investment can be implemented before having received clearance with respect to the impact on security and public order. However, others require that the investment is only finalised after authorisation under the screening mechanism. Such divergences create a problem for the smooth functioning of the internal market. For example, they create an uneven playing field and increase compliance costs for investors seeking to notify transactions in more than one Member State. This Regulation helps in reducing divergences on key elements of the mechanisms implemented at national level. This is crucial to ensure predictability for investors on the applicable national regimes and their characteristics, thereby reducing the associated compliance costs. This is all the more relevant considering the level of integration of internal market, which may result in a single transaction impacting multiple Member States across the Union. It is for example possible that a transaction aimed to the acquisition of a target company in one Member State also affects security and public order in another Member State, due to the supply chain structure or other economic elements connecting the target with other companies based in a different Member States. In order to address these internal market problems and ensure greater consistency and predictability, it is appropriate that the criteria and elements to be used for the assessment of foreign investments are established through Union action. This Regulation should be based on the criterion that there is the probability of a genuine and sufficiently serious threat to a fundamental interest of society, and should be appropriate and necessary as set out in the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union.
Amendment 39 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9 a (new)
Recital 9 a (new)
(9a) In order to ensure more efficient management of the screening mechanisms at Union level, when an investor has already undergone a screening process or assessment in accordance with the legislation of a Member State, any additional request for information from the Commission or another Member State will have to be duly justified so as to avoid any unnecessary duplication of information.
Amendment 40 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) Investments in the Union contribute to its growth by improving its competitiveness, creating jobs and economies of scale, stimulating entrepreneurial drive through incentives for innovation and development of industries, and bringing in capital, technologies, innovation and expertise.
Amendment 41 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1 a (new)
Recital 1 a (new)
(1a) Foreign investments in the Union are a vital source of capital that fosters new financial resources, new technologies, advanced business practices and access to international markets.
Amendment 42 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) Article 3(5) of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) specifies that the Union, in its relations with the wider world, is to uphold and promote its values and interests and contribute to the protection of its citizens. Moreover, the Union and Member States have an open investment environment, which is enshrined in the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), and embeddedthey must maintain a welcoming regime for foreign investments into the Union and its Member States’EU in line with their international commitments.
Amendment 42 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) Regulation (EU) 2019/452 only covers FDIs made from third countries into the Union. However, it On that basis, also necessary to extend the scope of the cooperation mechanism to investments made between Member States, where the investor in one Member State is controlled, directly or indirectly, by a foreign entity regardless of whether distinction should be made between investments made within the EU where the EU entity is controlled by an ultimate owner located in a third country and those where the ultimate owner is not located in the Union or elsewhere. In particular, this extended scope is appropriate to ensure that any inva third country. It is particularly important for the risk assestsment creating a lasting link between the foreign investor and the Union target, whether it is carried out directly by a foreign investor or through an entity established in the Union and controlled by a foreign investor, is consito take into consideration whether the ultimate owner has decision-making power on the investmently captured and assessed. This should foster the consistency and predictability of screening rules across Member States, which in turn will reduce compliance costs for foreign investors and limit incentives to target an investment in Member States where such transactions are out of scope. The assessment should also maintain sufficient flexibility to make it possible to take into consideration the specific character and structure of investments within the EU carried out by foreign investors.
Amendment 43 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) However, under international commitments made in the World Trade Organization (WTO), the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), and the trade and investment agreements concluded with third countries, it is possible for the Union and Members States to restrict foreign direct investments (FDIs) on the grounds of security or public order, subject to certain requiremenwith a view to ensuring a regime that is flexible and strikes the appropriate balance between being open to investments and protecting the Union's legitimate interests.
Amendment 45 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) However, a new legislative instrument is needed to strengthen the efficiency and effectiveness of Regulation (EU) 2019/452 and ensure a higher degree of harmonisation across the Union. This should be underpinned by a proper and careful impact analysis by the Regulatory Scrutiny Board, which should also include an analysis of the increased administrative burden for businesses.
Amendment 46 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) Investments in Union targets carried out by foreign investors, including investments executed through a controlled entity in the Union, may present specific risks to security and public order in the Union and its Member States. Such investor-related risks should not be present and therefore do not need to be addressed in an investment that only involves entities where no ownership, control, connection to or influence from foreign investors is present, including when a foreign investor participates in the Union entity without a controlling stake. Avoiding any divergence in the rules applicable to the treatment of foreign investments, regardless of whether they are made from outside the Union directly or through an entity already established in the Union, is necessary to ensure a coherent investment screening framework and the Union control mechanism. This framework reflects the importance of protecting security and public order and is exclusively targeted at risks that may arise from investments involving foreign entities. Therefore, Member States should ensure at least the screening of those foreign investments, which relate to projects or programmes of Union interest or where the Union target is active in areas, where a foreign investment may affect security or public order in more than one Member State. Member States should also be able to screen other foreign investments. When they do so, such screening should also comply with the provisions of this Regulation. Transactions with no foreign investor involvement or in which the level of involvement does not lead to the direct or indirect control of the Union entity are not covered by this Regulation.
Amendment 48 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) Screening foreign investments should be carried out in accordance with this Regulation, taking into account all factual information available and adhering to the principle of proportionality and other principles enshrined in the Treaties. Moreover, the screening of foreign investments which are carried out through subsidiaries of the foreign investor established in the Union should in all cases comply with the requirements stemming from Union law, and in particular with the Treaty provisions on freedom of establishment and free movement of capital, as interpreted in the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, consistently with the objective of preserving an open and inclusive internal market. Any restrictions to the freedom of establishment and free movement of capital in the Union, including the screening and measures arising from screening, such as mitigating measures and prohibitions, should be based onduly justified on the basis of a genuine and sufficiently serious threat to a fundamental interest of society, and should be appropriate and necessary as set out in the case law of the Court of Justice. At the same time, when assessing the justification and proportionality of a restriction, the specificities of investments within the Union operated through a subsidiary of a foreign investor may be taken into account when assessing any restrictions on freedom of establishment or to the free movement of capital, including where appropriate in any Commission opinion adopted pursuant to this Regulation. This should be done taking into account the integration of Member State schemes into a Union-wide cooperation mechanism.
Amendment 50 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) A significant majority of Member States, but not all, have a legislative instrument in place that provides for a mechanism to screen FDIs. In many Member States, national laws also extend to screening intra-Union investments. Among the Member States, there are substantial differences as to the scope, thresholds and criteria used to assess whether an investment is likely to negatively affect security or public order. There are also differences in the screening processes. In certain Member States, the investment can be implemented before having received clearance with respect to the impact on security and public order. However, others require that the investment is only finalised after authorisation under the screening mechanism. Such divergences create a problem for the smooth functioning of the internal market. For example, they create an uneven playing field and increase compliance costs for investors seeking to notify transactions in more than one Member State. This Regulation helps in reducing divergences on key elements of the mechanisms implemented at national level. This is crucial to ensure predictability for investors on the applicable national regimes and their characteristics, thereby reducing the associated compliance costs. This is all the more relevant considering the level of integration of internal market, which may result in a single transaction impacting multiple Member States across the Union. It is for example possible that a transaction aimed to the acquisition of a target company in one Member State also affects security and public order in another Member State, due to the supply chain structure or other economic elements connecting the target with other companies based in a different Member States. In order to address these internal market problems and ensure greater consistency and predictability, it is appropriate that the criteria and elements to be used for the assessment of foreign investments are established through Union action. This Regulation should be based on the criterion that there is the probability of a genuine and sufficiently serious threat to a fundamental interest of society, and should be appropriate and necessary as set out in the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union.
Amendment 51 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9 a (new)
Recital 9 a (new)
(9a) In order to ensure more efficient management of the screening mechanisms at Union level, when an investor has already undergone a screening process or assessment in accordance with the legislation of a Member State, any additional request for information from the Commission or another Member State will have to be duly justified so as to avoid any unnecessary duplication of information.
Amendment 53 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) Regulation (EU) 2019/452 only covers FDIs made from third countries into the Union. However, it On that basis, also necessary to extend the scope of the cooperation mechanism to investments made between Member States, where the investor in one Member State is controlled, directly or indirectly, by a foreign entity regardless of whether distinction should be made between investments made within the EU where the EU entity is controlled by an ultimate owner located in a third country and those where the ultimate owner is not located in the Union or elsewhere. In particular, this extended scope is appropriate to ensure that any inva third country. It is particularly important for the risk assestsment creating a lasting link between the foreign investor and the Union target, whether it is carried out directly by a foreign investor or through an entity established in the Union and controlled by a foreign investor, is consito take into consideration whether the ultimate owner has decision-making power on the investmently captured and assessed. This should foster the consistency and predictability of screening rules across Member States, which in turn will reduce compliance costs for foreign investors and limit incentives to target an investment in Member States where such transactions are out of scope. The assessment should also maintain sufficient flexibility to make it possible to take into consideration the specific character and structure of investments within the EU carried out by foreign investors.
Amendment 55 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) Investments in Union targets carried out by foreign investors, including investments executed through a controlled entity in the Union, may present specific risks to security and public order in the Union and its Member States. Such investor-related risks should not be present and therefore do not need to be addressed in an investment that only involves entities where no ownership, control, connection to or influence from foreign investors is present, including when a foreign investor participates in the Union entity without a controlling stake. Avoiding any divergence in the rules applicable to the treatment of foreign investments, regardless of whether they are made from outside the Union directly or through an entity already established in the Union, is necessary to ensure a coherent investment screening framework and the Union control mechanism. This framework reflects the importance of protecting security and public order and is exclusively targeted at risks that may arise from investments involving foreign entities. Therefore, Member States should ensure at least the screening of those foreign investments, which relate to projects or programmes of Union interest or where the Union target is active in areas, where a foreign investment may affect security or public order in more than one Member State. Member States should also be able to screen other foreign investments. When they do so, such screening should also comply with the provisions of this Regulation. Transactions with no foreign investor involvement or in which the level of involvement does not lead to the direct or indirect control of the Union entity are not covered by this Regulation.
Amendment 55 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) To ensure that foreign investments likely to negatively affect security or public order in the Union are adequately identified, in accordance with the case- law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, Member States should screen foreign investments where the Union target is part of or participates in a project or programme of Union interest or where the Union target’s economic activity relates to a technology, asset, facility, equipment, network, system or service of particular importance for the security or public order interests of the Union. In addition to these criteria, screening mechanisms may apply to other sectors, Union targets or economic activities that the relevant Member State considers critical for its security or public order.
Amendment 57 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) Screening foreign investments should be carried out in accordance with this Regulation, taking into account all factual information available and adhering to the principle of proportionality and other principles enshrined in the Treaties. Moreover, the screening of foreign investments which are carried out through subsidiaries of the foreign investor established in the Union should in all cases comply with the requirements stemming from Union law, and in particular with the Treaty provisions on freedom of establishment and free movement of capital, as interpreted in the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, consistently with the objective of preserving an open and inclusive internal market. Any restrictions to the freedom of establishment and free movement of capital in the Union, including the screening and measures arising from screening, such as mitigating measures and prohibitions, should be based onduly justified on the basis of a genuine and sufficiently serious threat to a fundamental interest of society, and should be appropriate and necessary as set out in the case law of the Court of Justice. At the same time, when assessing the justification and proportionality of a restriction, the specificities of investments within the Union operated through a subsidiary of a foreign investor may be taken into account when assessing any restrictions on freedom of establishment or to the free movement of capital, including where appropriate in any Commission opinion adopted pursuant to this Regulation. This should be done taking into account the integration of Member State schemes into a Union-wide cooperation mechanism.
Amendment 57 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) To ensure that the cooperation mechanism focuses only on those foreign investments where the characteristics of the foreign investor or the Union target makhave an effect on security or public order likely, it is appropriate to establish, risk- based conditions for the notification of foreign investments undergoing screening in a Member State to the other Member States and the Commission should be established. Where a foreign investment does not meet any of the conditions, the Member State where the foreign investment is undergoing screening may notify the foreign investment to the other Member States and the Commission, including where the Union target has significant operations in other Member States, or belongs to a corporate group that has several companies in different Member States.
Amendment 66 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) To ensure that foreign investments likely to negatively affect security or public order in the Union are adequately identified, in accordance with the case- law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, Member States should screen foreign investments where the Union target is part of or participates in a project or programme of Union interest or where the Union target’s economic activity relates to a technology, asset, facility, equipment, network, system or service of particular importance for the security or public order interests of the Union. In addition to these criteria, screening mechanisms may apply to other sectors, Union targets or economic activities that the relevant Member State considers critical for its security or public order.
Amendment 67 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) To ensure that the cooperation mechanism focuses only on those foreign investments where the characteristics of the foreign investor or the Union target make an effect on security or public order likely, it is appropriateessential to establish risk-based conditions for the notification of foreign investments undergoing screening in a Member State to the other Member States and the Commission. Where a foreign investment does not meet any of the conditions, the Member State where the foreign investment is undergoing screening may notify the foreign investment to the other Member States and the Commission, including where the Union target has significant operations in other Member States, or belongs to a corporate group that has several companies in different Member States.
Amendment 67 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32
Recital 32
(32) Member States or the Commission, as appropriate, might consider relevant information received from economic operators, civil society organisations, social partners (such as trade unpublicly available informations) about a foreign investment likely to negatively affect security or public order according to the case-law of the Court of Justice of the EU.
Amendment 68 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 34
Recital 34
(34) To ensure the efficiency and effectiveness of the cooperation mechanism, it is necessary to align deadlines, documents required and procedures when several foreign investments linked to the same broader transaction are screened in several Member States. In such multi-country transactions, the applicant should file the different requests for authorisation in the Member States concerned simultaneously. In addition, those Member States should notify the requests simultaneously to the cooperation mechanism. To ensure an efficient handling of these multi-country transactions, the Member States concerned should coordinate and agree on whether the foreign investments are notifiable and when they should be notified. Furthermore, the Member States concerned should also coordinate on the final decision. If the Member States concerned intend to authorise the foreign investment with conditions, they should ensure that these conditions are compatible with one another and address cross-border risks adequately. Before prohibiting a foreign investment, the Member States concerned should consider whether a conditional authorisation with coordinated measures and their coordinated enforcement is not sufficient to address the likely effect on security or public order according to the case-law of the Court of Justice of the EU. The Commission should be able to participate in such coordination.
Amendment 70 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 35
Recital 35
(35) To ensure a consistent approach to the screening of investments across the Union, it is essential that the standards and criteria used to assess likely risks to security and public order are those set at Union level in this Regulation. Those should include the impact on the security, integrity and functioning of critical infrastructure, the availability of critical technologies (including key enabling technologies) and the continued supply of critical inputs for security or public order, the disruption, failure, loss or destruction of which would have a significant impact on security and public order in one or more Member States or on the Union as a whole. In that regard, Member States and the Commission should also take into account the context and circumstances of the foreign investment. This should include, in particular, whether an investor is controlled directly or indirectlyby an ultimate owner, for example through significant funding, bythat is the government of a third country or is involved in pursuing policy objectives of third countries to facilitate their military capabilities. In this context, if applicable, Member States and the Commission should also consider why the foreign investor, its beneficial owner or any of its subsidiaries or a person acting on behalf or at the direction of such a foreign investor is subject to any type of Union restrictive measures pursuant to Article 215 TFEU.
Amendment 71 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36
Recital 36
(36) Where the Member State where the foreign investment is planned or completed considers that a foreign investment is likely to negatively affect security or public order in the Union, according to the case-law of the Court of Justice of the EU, it is appropriate to require that Member State to take appropriate measures to mitigate the risks, where such measures are available, and it considers them adequate, taking into utmost consideration the comments issued by other Member States and the opinion issued by the Commission, if applicable. Foreign investments should be prohibited only on an exceptional basis, and where mitigating measures or measures available under Union or national law other than the screening mechanism are not sufficient to mitigate the effect on security or public order.
Amendment 73 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40
Recital 40
(40) Member States and the Commission should be encouraged to cooperate with the responsible authorities of like-minded third countries on issues related to the screening of foreign investments that could affect security or public order. Such administrative cooperation should aim to strengthen the effectiveness of the framework for screening foreign investments by Member States and the cooperation between Member States and the Commission pursuant to this Regulation. The Commission should be kept informed of such bilateral contacts to the extent that they relate to systemic issues related to investment screening. It should also be possible for the Commission to monitor developments with regard to screening mechanisms in third countries.
Amendment 79 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32
Recital 32
(32) Member States or the Commission, as appropriate, might consider relevant information received from economic operators, civil society organisations, social partners (such as trade unpublicly available informations) about a foreign investment likely to negatively affect security or public order according to the case-law of the Court of Justice of the EU.
Amendment 79 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 49
Recital 49
(49) In order to take into account developments relating to projects or programmes of Union interest and to adapt the list of technologies, assets, facilities, equipment, networks, systems, services and economic activities of particular importance for the security or public order interests of the Union, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 TFEU should be delegated to the Commission in respect of amendments to the Annexes to this RegulationUnion interest list set out in Annexes I and II to this Regulation should be regularly reviewed. The list of projects and programmes of Union interest set out in Annex I should cover projects or programmes covered by EU law which provide for the development, maintenance or acquisition of critical infrastructure, critical technologies or critical inputs which are essential for security or public order. The list of technologies, assets, facilities, equipment, networks, systems, services and economic activities of particular importance for the security or public order interests of the Union set out in Annex II should include areas where a foreign investment may affect security or public order in more than one Member State or in the Union as a whole through an Union target, which does not participate in or receive funds from a project or programme of Union interest. It is of particular importance that the Commission carries out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work for the legislative amendment of the annexes, including at expert level, and that those consultations be conducted in accordance with the principles laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement of 13 April 2016 on Better Law-Making16. In particular, to ensure equal participation in the preparation of delegated acts, the European Parliament and the Council receive all documents at the same time as Member States’ experts, and their experts systematically have access to meetings of Commission expert groups dealing with the preparation of delegated acts. _________________ 16 OJ L 123, 12.5.2016, p. 1.
Amendment 83 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 34
Recital 34
(34) To ensure the efficiency and effectiveness of the cooperation mechanism, it is necessary to align deadlines, documents required and procedures when several foreign investments linked to the same broader transaction are screened in several Member States. In such multi-country transactions, the applicant should file the different requests for authorisation in the Member States concerned simultaneously. In addition, those Member States should notify the requests simultaneously to the cooperation mechanism. To ensure an efficient handling of these multi-country transactions, the Member States concerned should coordinate and agree on whether the foreign investments are notifiable and when they should be notified. Furthermore, the Member States concerned should also coordinate on the final decision. If the Member States concerned intend to authorise the foreign investment with conditions, they should ensure that these conditions are compatible with one another and address cross-border risks adequately. Before prohibiting a foreign investment, the Member States concerned should consider whether a conditional authorisation with coordinated measures and their coordinated enforcement is not sufficient to address the likely effect on security or public order according to the case-law of the Court of Justice of the EU. The Commission should be able to participate in such coordination.
Amendment 85 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1
(1) ‘foreign investment’ means a foreign direct investment or an investment within the Union with foreign control, which enables effective participation in the management or control of a Union target, except those made by undertakings whose direct investment entities are European managers of qualified collective investment funds;
Amendment 86 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 35
Recital 35
(35) To ensure a consistent approach to the screening of investments across the Union, it is essential that the standards and criteria used to assess likely risks to security and public order are those set at Union level in this Regulation. Those should include the impact on the security, integrity and functioning of critical infrastructure, the availability of critical technologies (including key enabling technologies) and the continued supply of critical inputs for security or public order, the disruption, failure, loss or destruction of which would have a significant impact on security and public order in one or more Member States or on the Union as a whole. In that regard, Member States and the Commission should also take into account the context and circumstances of the foreign investment. This should include, in particular, whether an investor is controlled directly or indirectlyby an ultimate owner, for example through significant funding, bythat is the government of a third country or is involved in pursuing policy objectives of third countries to facilitate their military capabilities. In this context, if applicable, Member States and the Commission should also consider why the foreign investor, its beneficial owner or any of its subsidiaries or a person acting on behalf or at the direction of such a foreign investor is subject to any type of Union restrictive measures pursuant to Article 215 TFEU.
Amendment 90 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36
Recital 36
(36) Where the Member State where the foreign investment is planned or completed considers that a foreign investment is likely to negatively affect security or public order in the Union, according to the case-law of the Court of Justice of the EU, it is appropriate to require that Member State to take appropriate measures to mitigate the risks, where such measures are available, and it considers them adequate, taking into utmost consideration the comments issued by other Member States and the opinion issued by the Commission, if applicable. Foreign investments should be prohibited only on an exceptional basis, and where mitigating measures or measures available under Union or national law other than the screening mechanism are not sufficient to mitigate the effect on security or public order.
Amendment 90 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 7
(7) ‘foreign investor’s subsidiary in the Union’ means an economically active undertaking established under the laws of a Member State meeting the conditions set out in Article 22(1) of Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 201318, and directly or indirectly controlled by a foreign investorcontrolled by an ultimate owner located outside the EU; _________________ 18 Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on the annual financial statements, consolidated financial statements and related reports of certain types of undertakings, amending Directive 2006/43/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directives 78/660/EEC and 83/349/EEC (OJ L 182, 29.6.2013, p. 19–76, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2013/34/oj).
Amendment 92 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40
Recital 40
(40) Member States and the Commission should be encouraged to cooperate with the responsible authorities of like-minded third countries on issues related to the screening of foreign investments that could affect security or public order. Such administrative cooperation should aim to strengthen the effectiveness of the framework for screening foreign investments by Member States and the cooperation between Member States and the Commission pursuant to this Regulation. The Commission should be kept informed of such bilateral contacts to the extent that they relate to systemic issues related to investment screening. It should also be possible for the Commission to monitor developments with regard to screening mechanisms in third countries.
Amendment 93 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 8 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 8 a (new)
(8 a) ‘European managers of qualified collective investment funds’ are fund managers located in the EU whose objective is to pool capital from more than one investor, including foreign investors, to generate a joint return for these investors in the fund. In addition, they must be able to demonstrate at all times that none of the foreign investors has the capacity to influence business decisions, nor has direct access to confidential information, including intellectual property rights or technology transfers, of the companies in which the fund has invested;
Amendment 99 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 49
Recital 49
(49) In order to take into account developments relating to projects or programmes of Union interest and to adapt the list of technologies, assets, facilities, equipment, networks, systems, services and economic activities of particular importance for the security or public order interests of the Union, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 TFEU should be delegated to the Commission in respect of amendments to the Annexes to this RegulationUnion interest list set out in Annexes I and II to this Regulation should be regularly reviewed. The list of projects and programmes of Union interest set out in Annex I should cover projects or programmes covered by EU law which provide for the development, maintenance or acquisition of critical infrastructure, critical technologies or critical inputs which are essential for security or public order. The list of technologies, assets, facilities, equipment, networks, systems, services and economic activities of particular importance for the security or public order interests of the Union set out in Annex II should include areas where a foreign investment may affect security or public order in more than one Member State or in the Union as a whole through an Union target, which does not participate in or receive funds from a project or programme of Union interest. It is of particular importance that the Commission carries out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work for the legislative amendment of the annexes, including at expert level, and that those consultations be conducted in accordance with the principles laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement of 13 April 2016 on Better Law-Making16. In particular, to ensure equal participation in the preparation of delegated acts, the European Parliament and the Council receive all documents at the same time as Member States’ experts, and their experts systematically have access to meetings of Commission expert groups dealing with the preparation of delegated acts. _________________ 16 OJ L 123, 12.5.2016, p. 1.
Amendment 100 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) adequate procedures shall be provided for the screening authority to determine whether it has jurisdiction over a foreign investment filed for authorisation and to carry out an initial review followed by, where necessary, an in-depth investigation to determine whether that foreign investment is likely to negatively affect security or public order, according to the case-law of the Court of Justice of the EU. The purpose of the in-depth investigation shall be, in particular, to determine whether a screening decision as referred to in Article 14(1) is appropriate and to determine its content.
Amendment 103 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1
(1) ‘foreign investment’ means a foreign direct investment or an investment within the Union with foreign control, which enables effective participation in the management or control of a Union target, except those made by undertakings whose direct investment entities are European managers of qualified collective investment funds;
Amendment 104 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 7
(7) ‘foreign investor’s subsidiary in the Union’ means an economically active undertaking established under the laws of a Member State meeting the conditions set out in Article 22(1) of Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 201318, and directly or indirectly controlled by a foreign investorcontrolled by an ultimate owner located outside the EU; _________________ 18 Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on the annual financial statements, consolidated financial statements and related reports of certain types of undertakings, amending Directive 2006/43/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directives 78/660/EEC and 83/349/EEC (OJ L 182, 29.6.2013, p. 19–76, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2013/34/oj).
Amendment 105 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 8 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 8 a (new)
(8 a) ‘European managers of qualified collective investment funds’ are fund managers located in the EU whose objective is to pool capital from more than one investor, including foreign investors, to generate a joint return for these investors in the fund. In addition, they must be able to demonstrate at all times that none of the foreign investors has the capacity to influence business decisions, nor has direct access to confidential information, including intellectual property rights or technology transfers, of the companies in which the fund has invested;
Amendment 114 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) adequate procedures shall be provided for the screening authority to determine whether it has jurisdiction over a foreign investment filed for authorisation and to carry out an initial review followed by, where necessary, an in-depth investigation to determine whether that foreign investment is likely to negatively affect security or public order, based on the case-law of the Court of Justice of the EU. The purpose of the in-depth investigation shall be, in particular, to determine whether a screening decision as referred to in Article 14(1) is appropriate and to determine its content.
Amendment 117 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) the screening authority shall be empowered to start screening foreign investments by its own initiative for at least 15 months after the completion of a foreign investment that is not subject to an authorisation requirement where the screening authority has grounds to consider that the foreign investment may affect security or public order, based on the case- law of the Court of Justice of the EU;
Amendment 122 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) considers that a foreign investment is likely to negatively affect its security or public order, according to the case-law of the Court of Justice of the EU; or
Amendment 124 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) it considers that such a foreign investment is likely to negatively affect the security or public order of more than one Member State, according to the case-law of the Court of Justice of the EU;
Amendment 125 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b – paragraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b – paragraph 1
it considers that such a foreign investment is likely to negatively affect projects or programmes of Union interest on grounds of security or public order, according to the case-law of the Court of Justice of the EU;
Amendment 134 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. A Member State that considers that a foreign investment in the territory of another Member State which has not been notified to the cooperation mechanism is likely to negatively affect its security or public order, itaccording to the case-law of the Court of Justice of the EU, may open an own initiative procedure in relation to that foreign investment. Before opening the procedure, the Member State shall check that the Member State where the investment is planned or completed does not intend to notify the foreign investment to the cooperation mechanism.
Amendment 141 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) considers that a foreign investment is likely to negatively affect its security or public order, according to the case-law of the Court of Justice of the EU; or
Amendment 142 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) it considers that such a foreign investment is likely to negatively affect the security or public order of more than one Member State, in accordance with the case-law of the Court of Justice of the EU;
Amendment 145 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b – paragraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b – paragraph 1
it considers that such a foreign investment is likely to negatively affect projects or programmes of Union interest on grounds of security or public order, in accordance with the case-law of the Court of Justice of the EU;
Amendment 148 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3
Article 7 – paragraph 3
3. The Commission may issue a duly motivated opinion addressed to all Member States if it considers that several foreign investments or other similar investments if they were to be made, taken together, and having regard to their characteristics could affect the security or public order of the Union, in accordance with the case-law of the Court of Justice of the EU. After a Commission opinion is issued, the Commission may, as appropriate, discuss with Member States how to address the identified risks.
Amendment 148 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall determine, for the purposes of taking a screening decision pursuant to Article 14 or issuing a duly motivatjustified comment pursuant to Article 7(1) or Article 9(7), whether a foreign investment is likely to negatively affect security or public order.
Amendment 149 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 2
Article 13 – paragraph 2
2. The Commission shall determine, for the purpose of issuing a duly motivated opinion pursuant to Article 7(2) or (3) or Article 9(7), whether it considers a foreign investment to be likely to negatively affect security or public order, without undermining the need to maintain an open and welcoming regime for investment into the Union, fully compatible with Union law and international commitments.
Amendment 164 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
The screening decision shall comply with the principle of proportionality and take into consideration all circumstances of the foreign investment, as well as the need to maintain an open regime for investment into the Union.
Amendment 180 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19
Article 19
Amendment 183 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20
Article 20
Amendment 190 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. A Member State that considers that a foreign investment in the territory of another Member State which has not been notified to the cooperation mechanism is likely to negatively affect its security or public order, itn accordance with the case- law of the Court of Justice of the EU, may open an own initiative procedure in relation to that foreign investment. Before opening the procedure, the Member State shall check that the Member State where the investment is planned or completed does not intend to notify the foreign investment to the cooperation mechanism.
Amendment 205 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall determine, for the purposes of taking a screening decision pursuant to Article 14 or issuing a duly motivatjustified comment pursuant to Article 7(1) or Article 9(7), whether a foreign investment is likely to negatively affect security or public order, in accordance with the case-law of the Court of Justice of the EU.
Amendment 208 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 2
Article 13 – paragraph 2
2. The Commission shall determine, for the purpose of issuing a duly motivatjustified opinion pursuant to Article 7(2) or (3) or Article 9(7), whether it considers a foreign investment to be likely to negatively affect security or public order, in accordance with the case-law of the Court of Justice of the EU, without undermining the need to maintain an open and welcoming regime for investment into the Union, fully compatible with Union law and international commitments.
Amendment 209 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 13 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. When determining whether an investment is likely to negatively affect security or public order, the Member States or the Commission shall in particular considerconsider, based on the case-law of the Court of Justice of the EU, in particular, whether the investment concerned is likely to negatively affect:
Amendment 221 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. When determining whether an investment is likely to negatively affect security or public order, based on the case- law of the Court of Justice of the EU, the Member States or the Commission shall also take into account information related to the foreign investor, including:
Amendment 230 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
The screening decision shall comply with the principle of proportionality and take into consideration all circumstances of the foreign investment, as well as the need to maintain an open regime for investment into the Union.
Amendment 235 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19
Article 19
Amendment 240 #
2024/0017(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20
Article 20