22 Amendments of Bas EICKHOUT related to 2012/2040(INI)
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas self-regulation of the payment market dominated by the banking industry has led to a marginalisation of user interests in decision-making processes;
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas the Green Paper does not tackle the costs and societal benefits of cash payments in comparison with card, internet and mobile payments, thus preventing an analysis of the economic and welfare costs and societal benefits of payments by cash;
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas the current business model for card payments and the level of MIFs constitute a major barrier for market access and increased competition in the payments market;
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas cross-border acquiring is an option currently open only to a limited number of players, and whereas this arrangement could expand the choices the merchant can make and thus let the market freely evolve;increase competition and reduce costs for consumers
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)
Recital F a (new)
Fa. whereas payment providers often do not provide alternative payment methods to the ones with surcharges and therefore harm consumers;
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph -1 (new)
Paragraph -1 (new)
-1. Believes that a self-regulatory approach for the integrated European market for payments is not sufficient; calls on the Commission to take legislative action to ensure payment security, fair competition, financial inclusion, protection of personal data and transparency for consumers;
Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph -1 a (new)
Paragraph -1 a (new)
-1a. Calls on the Commission to reform the SEPA governance to ensure that decision-making process is democratic, transparent and serving the public interest. This requires a more active and leading role of the Commission and the ECB in the SEPA governance as well as balanced representation of all relevant stakeholders in all SEPA decision making and implementing bodies, guaranteeing sufficient involvement of end users;
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Recalls that each payment method has its costs; asks the Commission, therefore, also to consider in the future the cost and societal benefits of cash payments compared to other payment methods; believes that financial inclusion should be one of the key objectives of any regulation of the payment market.
Amendment 53 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Supports the involvement of all the parties concernedCalls for a more balanced representation of all stakeholders in the further development of common technical and security standards for payment schemes; notes that these parties may include – but are not necessarily restricted to – the European Payments Council (EPC), consumer organisations, the European Banking Authority, the Single Euro Payments Area (SEPA) Council, the Commission, experts in various fields, non- banking payment service providers and representatives of mobile, internet and card payment providers;
Amendment 57 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Stresses that any standardisation and interoperability requirements should be aimed at enhancing payment security and the competitiveness of the European payments market and should not impose unnecessary barriers in comparison with the global market;
Amendment 74 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Considers that MIFs can currently be justified as a means toNotes that the level of MIFs is in many cases higher than what the financeing of the four- party card payment systems; notes that the level of MIFs is sometimes higher than what the financing of the four-party payment system require requires; calls on the Commission to ensure that MIFs no longer constitute barriers to market access of new players on the payment market by proposing a level playing field for different business models;
Amendment 87 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
Amendment 92 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Considers that the transparency of MIFs should be regulated both in international and in national schemes, and that this could, together with easier access to cross-border acquiring, lead to lower MIFs as merchants could freelyat the European level, with the aim of with easier access of new market players to cross-border acquiring, providing merchants with a real choosice which payment schemes they wish to join;
Amendment 96 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
Amendment 102 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Considers that there are crucial differences between the three-party business model for the three-party schemes may raise competition issues similar to those of and four-party payment schemes and that each scheme should be treated according to its specificities, though ultimately in an equal manner;
Amendment 104 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Calls for more transparency on cardholder fees and costs and benefits of additional services; considers that practices where cardholder fees or bonuses are dependent on spending behaviour of customers should be discouraged since they can constitute a threat for vulnerable consumers or raise transparency issues for card use by companies and their employees to pay for work-related expenses;
Amendment 117 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. WBelieves that surcharges, rebates and other steering practices are often harmful for end users of payment services; welcomes the ban on surcharges for the use of card payments in some Member States; calls on other Member States to consider requiring more transparency on surcharges in order to ensure that the customer knows how much of the surcharge comes from, for example, the MIF and how much is further imposed by the merchant; calls on the Commission to ban surcharges in all cases where no alternative payment instruments are readily available;
Amendment 122 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
Amendment 127 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18a. Considers that rebates favouring direct debit are not in the interest of consumers who might prefer other payment methods in order to avoid payment errors, in particular in the case of online payments;
Amendment 135 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Considers that the security of face to face card payments is alreadgenerally high and the gradual change from magnetic cards to chip cards will improve the level of security even further; expresses its concern about security issues with other forms of card payments; calls on the Commission to collect independent data on fraud with online payments and integrate in its legislative proposal appropriate anti-fraud provisions;
Amendment 146 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Does not, therefore, support third-party access to a customer's bank account information before secure systems are developed, built and thoroughly tested; notes that in any future regulationregulation is needed with special attention should be paid to security, data protection and consumer rights; considers, in particular, that it should be clearly specified which parties can have access to which information and under which conditions the data can be stored;
Amendment 147 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)
Paragraph 23 a (new)
23a. Calls on the Commission to ensure protection of personal data by proposing, after the consultation of the European Data Protection Supervisor, clear regulation as to which role each actor plays in collecting data and for which purpose, and a clear definition of the actors responsible for collecting, processing and retaining data; believes that controllers should be enabled to ensure that obligations are complied with and actors are held accountable for violations and that it should be ensured that actors only access and process the data that are strictly necessary for the performance of their services; adds that card users should have the possibility to access and rectify their personal data, also in a complex cross border context; finds that data protection requirements should be implemented along the principle of "privacy by design/by default" and that businesses or consumers should not bear the responsibility to protect their data;