79 Amendments of Kurt Joachim LAUK
Amendment 1 #
2008/2196(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Draws attention to the freedom of establishment that is guaranteed for companies under Article 48 of the EC Treaty and has been interpreted by the Court of Justice of the European Communities1;
Amendment 3 #
2008/2196(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that the transfer of a company’s seat goes hand in hand with the transfer of supervision, and that a 14th Directive must not lead to the undermining of the rights of shareholders, creditors and workerspreserve the existing balance in the management of the company (‘corporate governance’);
Amendment 4 #
2008/2196(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Proposes that reference be made to Regulation (EC) No 2157/2001 in conjunction with Directive No 2001/86/EC on the involvement ofCouncil Directive 94/45/EC on the establishment of a European Works Council or a procedure in Community- scale undertakings and Community-scale groups of undertakings for the purposes of informing and consulting employees 1and Directive 2005/56/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 October 2005 on cross- border mergers of limited liability companies2, in order to guarantee the coherence and substantive nature of employee participation procedures in the application of European company law directives; 1 2Or. de OJ L 254, 30.9.1994, p. 64. OJ L 310, 25.11.2005, p. 1.
Amendment 9 #
2008/2196(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Stresses that decisions on the transfer of a company seat may be taken for reasons related to national tax incentive schemes, rather than for economic reasons; calls on the Commission to submit a proposal for a common consolidated assessment basis for corporation tax; emphasises the positive effects of tax competition with regard to economic growth, against the background of the Lisbon Strategy;
Amendment 10 #
2008/2196(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Calls for transparency in the application of the new directive in the Member States and therefore proposes a reporting requirement for Member States vis-à-vis the Commission, whereby firms transferring their seat in application of the directive must be listed in a European companies register; points out that, in the interest of better law-making, excessive information (‘overkill’) must be avoided when transposing the reporting requirement into national law.
Amendment 152 #
2008/0217(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) Long -lasting relationships with the same rated entities or its related third parties could compromise the independence of senior analysts and persons approving credit ratings. Therefore those senior analysts and persons should be subject to a rotation mechanism.
Amendment 189 #
2008/0217(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25 a (new)
Recital 25 a (new)
(25a) Once the conclusions of the high- level group are available, or this Regulation needs to be amended in order to comply with new international agreements, the Commission should, without delay, submit the legislative proposals required to enable this Regulation to be updated.
Amendment 192 #
2008/0217(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25 b (new)
Recital 25 b (new)
(25b) Should the high-level group propose that future credit ratings be confined to issuers and no longer issued for products, that proposal should be addressed with a view to amending this Regulation and to determining whether and how it can become an international standard.
Amendment 261 #
2008/0217(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 a (new)
Article 4 a (new)
Article 4a Liability The future rules governing the liability of credit rating agencies shall be comparable with those applicable to auditors.
Amendment 275 #
2008/0217(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
4. A credit rating agency shall ensure that senior analysts and persons approving credit ratings shall not be involved in providing the credit rating services to the same rated entity or its related third parties for a period exceeding four years. For that purpose it shall establish a rotation mechanism with regard to those senior analysts and persons.
Amendment 308 #
2008/0217(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – point a
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – point a
(a) credit rating categories that may be attributed to structured finance instruments are clearly differentiated from rating categories that may be used to rate other types of rated entities or financial instruments. Separate rating categories shall be used for structured, complex instruments;
Amendment 313 #
2008/0217(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. A credit rating agency shall document and disclose all the steps, information and factors which have given rise to a rating.
Amendment 319 #
2008/0217(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 9 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. The reformed CESR or the centralised European agency shall consistently compile and publish statistics on credit rating agencies and their performance, inter alia as regards the reliability of their ratings.
Amendment 344 #
2008/0217(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 a (new)
Article 18 a (new)
Article 18a Reform of the CESR It would be appropriate to carry out a reform of the CESR, either by expanding the CESR itself into an independent European agency, or by establishing a centralised European agency which issues credit ratings. With that aim in view, within 12 months following the entry into force of this Regulation the CESR shall submit a business plan detailing how such an agency should be operated. The Commission shall then put forward a corresponding proposal, taking into account, inter alia, the fact that the start- up capital for a future European agency shall be provided, on a pro rata basis, from the EU budget, by the European finance industry and by entities. The agency shall receive additional, current revenue in the form of charges for issued ratings to be paid by the client or the applicant. The agency shall operate in such a way as to cover its own costs, without generating any profit.
Amendment 350 #
2008/0217(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 b (new)
Article 18 b (new)
Article 18b Non-profit-making organisation For the purposes of implementing this Regulation, a new, independent non- profit-making organisation shall be established which shall issue credit ratings. This organisation should have a start-up capital of EUR 200 million. Its start-up capital should be provided, on a pro rata basis, from the EU budget, by the European finance industry and by entities. The organisation shall receive additional, current revenue in the form of charges for issued ratings to be paid by the customer or the applicant. The organisation shall operate in such a way as to cover its costs, without generating any profit. The Commission shall put forward a corresponding proposal.
Amendment 354 #
2008/0217(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 3a (new)
Article 20 – paragraph 3a (new)
3a. The reformed CESR or the centralised European agency shall be granted, on a confidential basis and at its own request, access to information held by bank departments responsible for risk management.
Amendment 17 #
2007/2239(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas directives seem to be the appropriate legal instruments with which to address the different issues related to hedge funds and private equity fundsan analysis and assessment of legislation already in force in the Member States concerning hedge funds and private equity funds should precede a possible directive on the transparency thereof, and whereas such legislation should be the starting-point for harmonisation,
Amendment 19 #
2007/2239(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas it is recognised that one of the main issues is the need for transparency; whereas transparency has several facets, such as the transparency of hedge funds vis-à-vis the companies whose shares they acquire or own, as well as vis-à-visir prime brokers, institutional investors such as pension funds or banks, retail investors, and business partners, regulators and authorities; whereas one of the main; whereas the complaint made by some parties that there is a transparency deficits lies in the relationship between a hedge fund and the companies whose shares it acquires or owns is not valid,
Amendment 22 #
2007/2239(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Suggests that voluntary guidelines offer better scope for dealing with a wide range of complexities and circumstances, at least until they have been road-tested;
Amendment 28 #
2007/2239(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. In the interests of ensuring that there is a level playing field, considers it inappropriate to discriminate between different investors;
Amendment 29 #
2007/2239(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
Amendment 34 #
2007/2239(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas numerous different businesshedge funds and private equity initiatives have established their own codes of best practice which may serve as a model for EU legislation; whereas, in addition to complying with EU legislation, companies and business associations should be encouraged to establish their own codes of best practicshould be given the chance to prove their value,
Amendment 36 #
2007/2239(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
Recital I
I. whereas there seems to beis probably no need for product-related legislation,
Amendment 38 #
2007/2239(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Considers it impractical and counterproductive in terms of encouraging investment to make an artificial differentiation between categories of private investors in equities;
Amendment 39 #
2007/2239(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6b. Recommends that hedge funds which seek investment by retail investors should be required to commit themselves to a defined sector and to a formulaic risk profile and should be sold only through sales people who are specifically authorised as regards their technical qualifications, counselling ability and ethical probity;
Amendment 42 #
2007/2239(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Requests the Commission to submit to Parliament, on the basis of Articles 44, 47(2) or 95 of the EC Treaty, depending on the subject matter, a legislative proposal or proposals on the transparency ofensure, initially, compliance with the existing legislation in the Member States, so as then, if appropriate, to submit to Parliament a legislative proposal on harmonising existing legislation concerning hedge funds and private equity fundinvestments; calls for such a proposal(s) to be drawn up in the light of interinstitutional discussions and following the detailed recommendations below;
Amendment 53 #
2007/2239(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – on hedge funds and private equity funds – subparagraph 1
Annex – on hedge funds and private equity funds – subparagraph 1
The European Parliament asks the Commission to submit the appropriate legislative proposals by way of review the existing acquis communautaire affecting the various types of investors and counterparties, and to adapt or establish rulesto explore the possibility of differentiating between hedge funds, private equity and other investors and to adapt the rules of the Transparency Directive providing for the clear disclosure and timely communication of relevant and material information so as to facilitate high-quality decision-making and transparent communication between investors and the company management;
Amendment 55 #
2007/2239(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – on hedge funds and private equity funds – subparagraph 2
Annex – on hedge funds and private equity funds – subparagraph 2
The new legislation should require shareholders to notify issuers of the proportion of their voting rights resulting from an acquisition or disposal of shares where that proportion reaches, exceeds or falls below the specific thresholds starting with 3% instead of 5%, as mentioned in Directive 2004/109/EC; it should also oblige hedge funds and private equity funds, if those categories of investors can be differentiated from others, to disclose and explain – vis-à-vis the companies whose shares they acquire or own, retail and institutional investors, prime brokers and supervisors – their general investment policy and associated risks;
Amendment 59 #
2007/2239(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – on hedge funds specifically – subparagraph 1
Annex – on hedge funds specifically – subparagraph 1
The European Parliament asks the Commission to establish rules that enhance the transparency of voting policies of hedge funds, on the basis that the addressees of Community rules should be the managers of such funds; such rules could also include a system of EU-wide shareholder identification for registered shares;
Amendment 60 #
2007/2239(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – on hedge funds specifically – subparagraph 2 – indent 1
Annex – on hedge funds specifically – subparagraph 2 – indent 1
– investigate the possibility of mitigating the undesirable effects of securities lending; market practices in securities lending and voting on borrowed shares, having regard to better regulation principles and the positive effects of securities lending which, inter alia, allows delays in securities settlement to be avoided and thus enhances the efficiency of those markets;
Amendment 64 #
2007/2239(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – on private equity funds specifically – subparagraph 1
Annex – on private equity funds specifically – subparagraph 1
The European Parliament asks the Commission, to establish rules that forbid private equity funds to “plunder” companies (so called “asset stripping”) and thus misuse their financial power in a way that merelyaking into account national legislation, to examine, assess and if necessary to improve current Community legislation so as to prevent the 'plundering' of companies, which might disadvantages the company acquired in the long term, without having any positive impact on ithe company’s future and the situationinterests of its employees, creditors and business partners;
Amendment 66 #
2007/2239(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – on private equity funds specifically – subparagraph 2
Annex – on private equity funds specifically – subparagraph 2
With a view to the above-mentioned legislative proposal(s), the Commission should examine ways of addressing the issues arising whenthe role of banks as lend huge amounts of money to private equity funds and then disclaim any responsibility whatsoever as toers to private equity funds, keeping in mind that the purpose for which that money is used orand the provenance of the money used to repay the loan will remain the responsibility of the debtor.
Amendment 7 #
2007/2238(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
Amendment 16 #
2007/2238(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
Amendment 22 #
2007/2238(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
Amendment 31 #
2007/2238(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas such long-term investment requires well-functioning financial markets in the EU and globally, contributing to the real economy, which can be only achieved by ensuring the presence in the European Union of a competitive and innovative financial industry,
Amendment 34 #
2007/2238(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
Recital I
I. whereas hedge funds and private equity in many cases provide liquidity and demand for innovative productshelp to meet pension liabilities through their returns, provide aid price discovery, provide market diversification, market efficiency, cushion volatile markets, provide absolute returns and demand for innovative products and thereby contributes positively to meeting the objectives of the Lisbon Agenda,
Amendment 42 #
2007/2238(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K
Recital K
K. whereas enhanced appropriate levels of transparency towards the public, investors and supervisory authorities, including, in future, any new EU supervisory body, are crucial to ensure such well-functioning and stable financial markets as well as for promoting competition between market actors and products,
Amendment 49 #
2007/2238(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital L
Recital L
Amendment 59 #
2007/2238(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital M
Recital M
M. whereas the recent increase in private equity transactions has significantly increased the number of employees, whose jobs are ultimately controlled by equity funds, and Community employment law (in particular, Directive 2001/23/EC) was formulated when this was not so,
Amendment 63 #
2007/2238(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital N
Recital N
N. whereas in the event of extreme debt loads, private equity leveraged buy-outs affect the viability of the target companiescompanies present a higher risk profile,
Amendment 69 #
2007/2238(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital O
Recital O
Amendment 77 #
2007/2238(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital P
Recital P
Amendment 90 #
2007/2238(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital Q a (new)
Recital Q a (new)
Qa. whereas there has been a movement from a commercial bank centred, highly regulated financial system, to an enormously more complicated and highly engineered system,
Amendment 91 #
2007/2238(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital Q b (new)
Recital Q b (new)
Qb. whereas financial crisis typically emerge after a self-reinforcing process of market exuberance marked by too much lending and too much borrowing, which in turn develop in response to underlying economic imbalances,
Amendment 92 #
2007/2238(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital Q c (new)
Recital Q c (new)
Qc. whereas any return to heavily regulated, bank dominated, nationally insulated markets is not possible in this world of an international system with sophisticated financial techniques,
Amendment 93 #
2007/2238(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital Q d (new)
Recital Q d (new)
Qd. whereas due to international markets, business and individuals regulation and supervision must take into account practices elsewhere,
Amendment 94 #
2007/2238(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital Q e (new)
Recital Q e (new)
Qe. whereas the liquidity of active open markets also encouraged thin capital positions and high leverage,
Amendment 95 #
2007/2238(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital Q f (new)
Recital Q f (new)
Qf. whereas the rating agencies have a strong reputation to protect; however, it appears that their approach towards rating complex packages of mortgages and loans has suffered not only from the appearance of conflicts of interests, but also from the common difficulty of much financial engineering,
Amendment 96 #
2007/2238(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital Q g (new)
Recital Q g (new)
Amendment 97 #
2007/2238(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital Q h (new)
Recital Q h (new)
Qh. whereas the ECB, by reason of its mandate, its prestige, its perceived competence, and most importantly because it is called upon to lend to troubled banks, is advantageously placed to exercise strong and effective oversight of the financial system,
Amendment 98 #
2007/2238(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital Q i (new)
Recital Q i (new)
Qi. whereas a lack of information, asymmetric information and uncertainty are inherent in financial activities,
Amendment 108 #
2007/2238(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Requests the Commission to submit to Parliament by 30 November 2008, on the basis of Article 44, Article 47(2), or Article 95 of the EC Treaty, a legislative proposal or proposals oncovering all significant financial market participants and relevant actors including hedge funds, and private equity and other relevant actors,with regard to regulatory completeness, equity requirement across the entire financial system, continued participation of the originators of securitised loans, non-cyclical accounting rules, increase transparency of rating agencies including disclosure of the conflicts of interests, derivative trading on open exchange and the alignment of compensation of actors of the financial system in times of profit as in times of loss following the detailed recommendations below;
Amendment 113 #
2007/2238(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Considers that thpossible financial implications of the requested proposal or proposals should be covered by EU budgetary allocations for (i) the establishment of any EU supervisory authority, (ii) the EU public credit rating agency, and (iii) the EU public certification body for structured products;
Amendment 116 #
2007/2238(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – recommendation 1
Annex – recommendation 1
Amendment 152 #
2007/2238(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – recommendation 2
Annex – recommendation 2
Amendment 181 #
2007/2238(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – recommendation 3
Annex – recommendation 3
Amendment 200 #
2007/2238(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – recommendation 4
Annex – recommendation 4
Amendment 211 #
2007/2238(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – recommendation 4 a (new)
Annex – recommendation 4 a (new)
Amendment 17 #
2007/0297(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10 a (new)
Recital 10 a (new)
(10a) In its opinions on the Commission communications of 7 February 2007 the European Parliament pointed out that the development of new types of cars takes five to seven years and therefore now calls on the Commission not to set definitively binding CO2 emissions targets before 2015.
Amendment 23 #
2007/0297(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) In order to maintain the diversity of the car market and its ability to cater for different consumer needs, CO2 targets for passenger cars should be defined as a function of the utility of the cars on a linear basis. To describe this utility, mass is the most appropriate parameter because it provides a satisfactory correlation with present emissions and would therefore result in more realistic and competitively neutral targets and because data on mass is readily available. Data on the alternative utility parameter of footprint (track width times wheelbase) should, however, be collected in order to facilitate longer-term evaluations of the utility-based approach. In the establishment of the targets, the projected evolution of new cars' mass until 20125 should be taken into account, and potential incentives to increase vehicle mass just in order to benefit from a consequential increase of the CO2 reduction target should be avoided. Therefore, the possible future autonomous mass increase evolution of vehicles produced by the manufacturers and sold on the EU market should be taken into account when defining the targets for 20125. Finally, differentiation of targets should encourage emissions reductions to be made in all categories of cars while recognising that larger emission reductions can be made for heavier cars.
Amendment 45 #
2007/0297(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) Manufacturers' compliance with the targets under this Regulation should be assessed at the Community level. Manufacturers whose average specific emissions of CO2 exceed those permitted under this Regulation should pay an excess emissions premium in respect of each calendar year from 20125 onwards. The premium should be modulated as a function of the extent to which manufacturers fail to comply with their target. It should increase over time. In order to provide a sufficient incentive to take measures to reduce specific emissions of CO2 from passenger cars, the premium should reflect technological costs. The amounts of the excess emissions premium should be considered as revenue for the budget of the European Union.
Amendment 54 #
2007/0297(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10a (new)
Recital 10a (new)
(10a) In its resolution1 on the Commission communications of 7 February 2007, Parliament points out that the development of new types of passenger cars takes between five and seven years, and therefore requests the Commission not to set any final mandatory targets for CO2 emissions for any date before 2015. 1 European Parliament resolution of 15 January 2008 on CARS 21: A Competitive Automotive Regulatory Framework (P6_TA(2008)0007).
Amendment 57 #
2007/0297(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1
Article 1
1. This Regulation establishes CO2 emission performance requirements for new passenger cars in order to ensure proper functioning of the internal market and achieve the EU's overall objective that the average new car fleet should achieve CO2 emissions of 120 g CO2/km. 2. The target of 120 g/km must be achieved in 2012 by 25%, in 2013 by 50%, in 2014 by 75% and in 2015 by 100% of the new car fleet. 3. The Regulation sets the average CO2 emissions for new passenger cars at 130 g CO2/km by means of improvement in vehicle motor technology as measured in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 715/2007 and its implementing measures. T4. As part of the Community's integrated approach, this Regulation will be complemented by all additional measures corresponding to 10 g/km as part of the Community's integrated approachwhich can contribute to reducing CO2 emissions. These measures shall correspond to at least 10 g CO2/km.
Amendment 61 #
2007/0297(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) In order to maintain the diversity of the car market and its ability to cater for different consumer needs, CO2 targets for passenger cars should be defined as a function of the utility of the cars on a linear basis. To describe this utility, mass is the most appropriate parameter because it provides a satisfactory correlation with present emissions and would therefore result in more realistic and competitively neutral targets and because data on mass is readily available. Data on the alternative utility parameter of footprint (track width times wheelbase) should, however, be collected in order to facilitate longer-term evaluations of the utility-based approach. In the establishment of the targets, the projected evolution of new cars' mass until 20125 should be taken into account, and potential incentives to increase vehicle mass just in order to benefit from a consequential increase of the CO2 reduction target should be avoided. Therefore, the possible future autonomous mass increase evolution of vehicles produced by the manufacturers and sold on the EU market should be taken into account when defining the targets for 20125. Finally, differentiation of targets should encourage emissions reductions to be made in all categories of cars while recognising that larger emission reductions can be made for heavier cars.
Amendment 78 #
2007/0297(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) Manufacturers' compliance with the targets under this Regulation should be assessed at the Community level. Manufacturers whose average specific emissions of CO2 exceed those permitted under this Regulation should pay an excess emissions premium in respect of each calendar year from 20125 onwards. The premium should be modulated as a function of the extent to which manufacturers fail to comply with their target. It should increase over time. In order to provide a sufficient incentive to take measures to reduce specific emissions of CO2 from passenger cars, the premium should reflect technological costs. The amounts of the excess emissions premium should be considered as revenue for the budget of the European Union. .
Amendment 84 #
2007/0297(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1
Article 1
1. This Regulation establishes CO2 emission performance requirements for new passenger cars in order to ensure proper functioning of the internal market and achieve the EU's overall objective that the average new car fleet should achieve CO2 emissions of 120 g CO2/km. 2. The target figure of 120 g/km must be achieved in 2012 by 25%, in 2013 by 50%, in 2014 by 75% and in 2015 by 100% of the new car fleet. 3. The Regulation sets the average CO2 emissions for new passenger cars at 130 g CO2/km by means of improvement in vehicle motor technology as measured in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 715/2007 and its implementing measures. 4. This Regulation will be complemented, as part of the Community's integrated approach, by any additional measures corresponding to 10 g/km as part of the Community's integrated approach. which contribute to the reduction of CO2 emissions. Such measures shall correspond to at least 10 g CO2/km.
Amendment 110 #
2007/0297(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4
Article 4
For the calendar year commencing 1 January 20125 and each subsequent calendar year, each manufacturer of passenger cars shall ensure that its average specific emissions of CO2 do not exceed its specific emissions target determined in accordance with Annex I or, where a manufacturer is granted a derogation under Article 9, in accordance with that derogation.
Amendment 121 #
2007/0297(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4
Article 4
For the calendar year commencing 1 January 20125 and each subsequent calendar year, each manufacturer of passenger cars shall ensure that its average specific emissions of CO2 do not exceed its specific emissions target determined in accordance with Annex I or, where a manufacturer is granted a derogation under Article 9, in accordance with that derogation.
Amendment 141 #
2007/0297(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 1
1. In respect of each calendar year from 20125 onwards for which a manufacturer's average specific emissions of CO2 exceed its specific emissions target in that year, the Commission shall impose an excess emissions premium on the manufacturer or, in the case of a pool, the pool manager.
Amendment 152 #
2007/0297(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3
Article 7 – paragraph 3
3. The excess emissions premium shall be: (a) in relation to excess emissions in the calendar year 2012, 2the CO2 price as traded on the exchange, but not more than 10 euros; (b) in relation to excess emissions in the calendar year 2013, 35the CO2 price as traded on the exchange, but not more than 20 euros; (c) in relation to excess emissions in the calendar year 2014, 6the CO2 price as traded on the exchange, but not more than 30 euros; and (d) in relation to excess emissions in the calendar year 2015 and subsequent calendar years, 95the CO2 price as traded on the exchange, but not more than 40 euros.
Amendment 156 #
2007/0297(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7a (new)
Article 7a (new)
Article 7a Bonus system 1. If in 2012 the target is achieved by more than 25%, in 2013 by more than 50% and in 2014 by more than 75% of the whole fleet, the manufacturer shall receive bonus points. 2. Bonus points shall be calculated in the same way as the excess emissions premiums provided for in Article 7, in which connection one bonus point shall correspond to one euro. 3. Bonus points obtained as from 2012 shall be offset against possible future excess emissions premiums imposed pursuant to Article 7. 4. The Commission shall lay down the method for determining and offsetting bonus points.
Amendment 157 #
2007/0297(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 1
In respect of each calendar year from 20125 onwards for which a manufacturer's average specific emissions of CO2 exceed its specific emissions target in that year, the Commission shall impose an excess emissions premium on the manufacturer or, in the case of a pool, the pool manager.
Amendment 158 #
2007/0297(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2
Article 8 – paragraph 2
2. From the 31 October 20136, the list published under paragraph 1 shall also indicate whether or not the manufacturer has complied with the requirements of Article 4 in respect of the preceding calendar year.
Amendment 177 #
2007/0297(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3
Article 7 – paragraph 3
3. The excess emissions premium shall be: (a) in relation to excess emissions in the calendar year 2012, 2the CO2 price as traded on the exchange, but not more than 10 euros; (b) in relation to excess emissions in the calendar year 2013, 35the CO2 price as traded on the exchange, but not more than 20 euros; (c) in relation to excess emissions in the calendar year 2014, 6the CO2 price as traded on the exchange, but not more than 30 euros; and (d) in relation to excess emissions in the calendar year 2015 and subsequent calendar years, 95the CO2 price as traded on the exchange, but not more than 40 euros.
Amendment 183 #
2007/0297(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 a (new)
Article 7 a (new)
Article 7a Bonus system 1. If in 2012 the target is achieved by more than 25%, in 2013 by more than 50% and in 2014 by more than 75% of the whole fleet, the manufacturer shall receive bonus points. 2. Bonus points shall be calculated in the same way as the excess emissions premiums provided for in Article 7, in which connection one bonus point shall correspond to one euro. 3. Bonus points obtained as from 2012 shall be offset against possible future penalties imposed pursuant to Article 7. 4. The Commission shall lay down the method for determining and offsetting bonus points.
Amendment 187 #
2007/0297(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2
Article 8 – paragraph 2
2. From the 31 October 20136, the list published under paragraph 1 shall also indicate whether or not the manufacturer has complied with the requirements of Article 4 in respect of the preceding calendar year.
Amendment 187 #
2007/0297(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – paragraph 1
Annex I – paragraph 1
1. For each new passenger car, the permitted specific emissions of CO2, measured in grams per kilometre shall be determined in accordance with the following formula: Permitted specific emissions of CO2 = 130 + a × (M – M0) Where: : M = mass of the vehicle in kilograms (kg) M0 = 1289.0 × f f = (1 + AMI)6 Autonomous mass increase (AMI) = 0 % % a = 0.0457609
Amendment 245 #