7 Amendments of Joachim ZELLER related to 2013/0000(INI)
Amendment 30 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Highlights that the State aid rules, as well as the Cohesion Policy objectives, should lead to improving the situation of the less-developed regions, and that the SAM process must reflect the objectives of cohesion throughout the EU; believes that the modernisation of competition rules must be based on understanding the impact of these rules at sub-national level;
Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Takes the view that the geographical zoning of the new Guidelines on Regional State Aid 2014-2020 (RSAG) should not be reduced, and that decreasing the aid intensity should be reconsidered, taking into account the political, economic and social situation in the Member States; points out that, in the global context, the EU economy could be placed at a disadvantage relative to third countries benefitting from looser employment schemes or lower costs; is therefore of the opinion that the geographical zoning shoud not fall below 45.5% in order not to jeopardize the economic development of the regions;
Amendment 66 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Points out to the restrictive impact of new rules on investment and growth of regions as they move from the less developed to the more developed category; is aware that certain regions eligible for State aid under the current system will not meet the zoning criteria of the RSAG in the future period; believes that these regions should have a special safety regime, similar to that for transition regions under the Cohesion Policy, allowing them to cope with their new situation; highlights the need to prolong the transitional period for those regions until 2020;
Amendment 69 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Underlines the specific situation of border regions with highly differing aid rates and the potential of competition distortion which these differences can have; welcomes the Commission's ambition to limit the distorting effects of State aid for competition; stresses the damaging economic impact that differing aid rates between regions of the less developed and the more developed category can have; underlines therefore the need to limit the difference between the less developed and the more developed category to 10%;
Amendment 93 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Believes that the application of State aid rules within Cohesion Policy programmes could be better achieved by focussing on large-scale aid, simplifying rules, increasing the de minimis ceiling to EUR 500.000, and extending the horizontal categories in the Enabling Regulation and the scope of the block exemption rules in the General Block Exemption Regulation;
Amendment 122 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Is of the opinion that excluding large enterprises companies from State aid rules in areas covered by Article 107(3)(c) TFEU is not justified given their contribution to employment, the supply- chains that they create with SMEs, their common involvement in research and development, and the role they play in the economic crisis; takes the view that the presence of large undertakings is often key to the success of SMEs that benefit from clusters led by large companies and from their sub-contracting activities; underlines that such a decision may lead to job losses and reduced economic activity in the regions and to the relocation of companies to other regions either within and outside the EU; takes therefore the view that those companies need to remain eligible for State aid;
Amendment 132 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17 a. Welcomes the obligation for companies to leave investments and jobs throughout 10 years in the region where the State aid was granted in order to impede relocations to regions with higher aid rates;